Council - 12 Jan 2021 - Agenda — North Frontenac News Media

Published January 12, 2021

Word Count 69138 words

Reading Time 325 min read

Body: Council Type: Agenda Meeting: Regular Date: January 12, 2021 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: South Frontenac

[View Document (PDF)](/docs/south-frontenac/Agendas/Council/2021/Council - 12 Jan 2021 - Agenda.pdf)

Document Text

Page 1 of 314

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA

Audio Broadcast to Township’s Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/SouthFrontenacTwp TIME: DATE: PLACE:

7:00 PM, Tuesday, January 12, 2021 Electronic Participation.

Call to Order/Roll Call

Resolution

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

Approval of Agenda

Resolution

Rise and Report from Special Committee of the Whole

Resolutions - LPAT Appeals (File #’s S-34-19-S and S-35-19-S) and WTC Broadband Support Opportunity

Scheduled Closed Session - not applicable

Recess - not applicable

Delegations - 2021 Budget

South Frontenac Museum Association - John McDougall & Bob Brown, re: 1)Budget allocation for preservation, landscaping & signage of publicly owned buildings of historical significance, 2) Save the Bellrock & Petworth Mill Projects

4 - 12

Mary Rae - 14 Island Lake Association

13 - 19

Julie Servant, Executive Director - Frontenac Arch Biosphere Network

20 - 21

Steve Lapp - Budget Allocation for Climate Change Adaptation & Mitigation

22 - 23

Donna Garland, Fermoy Hall Committee - 2021 Budget Submission

24 - 35

Public Meeting

Resolution & Public Meeting Statement

Road Closing Application - RC-20-01 - Concessions 9 & 10, Lot 20, Christel Lane, 2290998 Ontario Inc (Storrington)

36 - 51

Page 2 of 314

Road Closing Application RC-20-02 - Concessions 2 & 3, Lot 17, Beam (Bedford)

52 - 65

Rezoning Application - Z-20-14 - 1024 Hidden Valley Lane, Ruttan (Loughborough)

66 - 85

Rezoning Application - Z-20-15 - Davidson Road at Mowoods Lane, Brice (Storrington)

86 121

Resolution - Close Public Meeting

Approval of Minutes

November 17, 2020 Council Meeting

122 127

November 24, 2020 Special Council Meeting (6:45 pm)

128 130

November 24, 2020 Committee of the Whole

131 134

November 24, 2020 - Special Council Meeting (9:00 pm)

135 137

December 1, 2020 - Council Meeting

138 146

December 8, 2020 Committee of the Whole

147 150

December 15, 2020 Council Meeting

151 156

Business Arising from the Minutes - not applicable

Reports Requiring Action

Declare Land Surplus: Property at Craig and Mustard Roads Addendum to October 2020 Report

157 167

Application for Extension of Draft Plan Approval - Ouellette Plan of Subdivision - 10CD-2011/002

168 181

Application for Extension of Draft Plan Approval - Cranberry Cove Plan of Condominium - 10CD-2012/002

182 201

Application for Extension of Draft Plan Approval - Johnston Point Plan of Condominium - 10CD-2014/001

202 217

Vaccination roll out for Long Term Care Home Employees

218 220

Committee Meeting Minutes - none

Page 3 of 314

By-laws - none

Reports for Information

Growth Projections 2016 to 2046

Information Items

Closed Meeting Investigation Report

277 284

Rideau Valley Conservation Authority - 2021 Proposed Budget and Levy (Comments requested by February 17, 2021)

285 313

Notice of Motions

Announcements/Statements by Councillors

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

Closed Session

In accordance with Section 239(2)(b) of the Municipal Act, Council will move into closed session to discuss personal matters about identifiable individuals, including municipal or local board employees related to the Township’s organizational structure. (Verbal Report)

Confirmatory By-law

By-law 2021-01

Adjournment

Resolution

221 276

314

Page 4 of 314

Budget Request to South Frontenac Council from the SF Museum Society To be presented by Bob Brown and John McDougall The South Frontenac Museum Society would like to ask Council to consider setting aside a sum with the Recreation Committee as part of its Master Plan, to be reserved for preservation, landscaping and signage of publicly owned buildings of historical significance in the Township. Of primary importance is the Petworth Mill, a township-owned property which requires: • stabilization of the stonework (capping and pointing what remains of the walls), • clearance of unnecessary brush and trees, • safety fencing, • establishment of a small picnic area for the public. We would suggest the sum of $60,000 to accomplish this and retain a reserve for similar projects, as they are identified. The Museum Society would be prepared to coordinate such projects, in collaboration with Township staﬀ. This is in keeping with the overall goal of collaboration throughout the Township, and with the Mission Statements of the following: South Frontenac Township: “preserving and leveraging the community’s natural assets, history and rural lifestyle”. The Township Heritage Committee: “to initiate programs such as interpretive plaques showcasing heritage locations and features”. The Museum Foundation: “to collect, preserve, educate and inform”.

Page 5 of 314

Save the Bellrock & Petworth Mill Projects, Proposed by The South Frontenac Museum, to South Frontenac Council: 08/01/21

Phase #1 Business Plan Executive Summary: In 2019, the South Frontenac Museum adopted a new Strategic Plan. This plan included among other things; the searching out of historic buildings, battle sites, unique features, stories and anything else deemed to be of important historical interest to the citizens of the Township and beyond. The Plan also included describing, collecting, preserving, displaying and ultimately teaching our residents and visitors about our past. The Museum, given its mandate, became involved in trying to save both the Petworth and Bellrock mills after it became aware of their rapidly deteriorating states. Historical Importance of Mills: Our mills are of major historical importance, as they are the main reason our Township started to prosper and there are now so very few left and almost none with significant operating machinery left in place. When European settlers first came to this area, they began harvesting old growth trees and virtually simultaneously, built hydraulic saw mills to turn the lumber into building materials needed by the increasing number of settlers moving into the area. As the land was opened up, farmers gradually moved in and so the mills such as the ones in Bellrock and Petworth became multi purposed, both sawed lumber and ground flour for the local farmers while one also carded wool, while the other made shingles, butter and cheese boxes. The Petworth Mill: This mill, already owned by South Frontenac, requires: • stabilization of the stonework (capping and pointing what remains of two walls). • clearance of unnecessary brush and trees, • safety fencing, • establishment of a small picnic area for the public. Furthermore, we suggest that a plaque be created and installed giving the wonderful history of the Mill and of Petworth Village itself. The Bellrock Mill: This mill had previously been declared a historic site in the summer of 1978, owned by the Quinte Conservation Authority, and operated for a number of years as a working, living exhibit until it was sold to a private citizen. The new owner ultimately sold much of the sawing equipment in the mill. The grist machinery remains, as do the water power wheels, and they appear to be salvageable for demonstration purposes. Two of the three parts of the mill building are currently in reasonable shape, whereas the central structure is now dangerous

Page 6 of 314 and very likely beyond saving. During this last summer, more steel roofing blew off the roof leading to water infiltration, greatly accelerating the deterioration of the wooden structure. Given its current state of repair, time is of the essence if it is to be saved for future generations. Business Proposal: After initial discussions with CAO Neil Carbone, Treasurer Louise Fragnito and Mayor Ron Vandewal, it was suggested that the South Frontenac Museum Society continue to monitor the state of the Bellrock Mill site, its ownership and any arising financial implications. The Museum also engaged with the South Frontenac Heritage Committee to get its support for this proposal in the upcoming 2021 budget process. The Museum Society request to the Township’s Heritage Committee was “to support the South Frontenac Museum Society’s request that the Township establish a reserve to assist in the purchase and reclamation of the Bellrock Mill as part of a park which will include a mill pond and waterfall sections of the Napanee River.” The request was tabled and approved at the Heritage Committee meeting on November 19, 2020. (These minutes will not be available to the public until the Committee’s minutes have been formally approved.) We therefore propose the following steps: 1: Complete a purchase through the Township’s property purchase agreement process. Confirm the South Frontenac Museum Society as co-sponsor with the Save the Bellrock Mill Committee, to be responsible for directing the mill reclamation project. As a Committee of Council, the Museum Society will process all financial transactions, including tax receipts, through the Township Treasurer. The Society will confirm with Township Staff and Council a reporting process which includes the Township Heritage Committee and the Recreation Master Plan Process. Establish liaison with the Quinte Conservation Authority, which has jurisdiction over the waterway running beneath the mill, and would have to be a partner with the municipality in approving any redevelopment of this property. Cost: Society, Committee and Staff time Begin community fundraising. 2: Complete a rough closure of the Mill to protect the site from further damage and trespassing. Cost: Estimate: $3,000 Note: The Bellrock Mill Committee is committed to raising substantial funds from the public, other government sources, foundations and historical associations, to contribute toward the following steps.

Page 7 of 314

Phase #2 Business Plan: 1: Without any removal of the unstable sections, shore up the section closest to the road and render it watertight, to protect the grist machinery. Close in the eastern section where the roof has collapsed. Remove trees between the road and the milll to avoid further damage to the roof. Cost: Estimate: $20,000 2: Rough removal of the centre section which is most unstable. Truck away detritus except for the boiler and other valuable machinery. Cost: Estimate: $25,000 3: Research the machinery in the Mill and assess how it might be accessed by historians and the public. Cost: Volunteer time 4: Hire an architect to design the Mill and surroundings for public use. Cost: Estimate $15,000 Risk analysis indicates that without rapid action, there may not be much to save and/or that the reconstruction costs will be increased substantially. A historically important site will be lost forever. Should reclamation/restoration of the mill be considered non-viable for any reason, the value of the land is still there, and an attractive public park could still be developed, so the financial risk of purchasing the property is minimal. However, it is the hope of the Save the Bellrock Mill Committee and the South Frontenac Museum that over the years these mill sites will become a source of historical pride and delightful places for residents and visitors to learn some of our history, and to use as recreation destinations.

Respectfully submitted, John McDougall, President, South Frontenac Museum Society

John Angus, Robert Brown, Virginia Lavin, John McDougall, Wilma Kenny Save the Bellrock Mill Committee

Page 8 of 314

Page 9 of 314

Page 10 of 314

Page 11 of 314

Page 12 of 314

Fourteen Island Lake Dam Repairs Fourteen Island & Mink Lakes Watershed Association (FIMLA) January 12, 2021 Mary Rae, President FIMLA Page 13 of 314

Background ❑ Dam located on south side of 14 Island Lake, flows into Spring and Verona Lakes, crosses Hinchinbrooke Road ❑ Built in the 1800s, with major rehabilitation in the 1950s, and last documented repair in 1994, at which time the townships contributed 30% of costs ❑ 2019 Quinte Conservation – dam inspection said fair to poor condition; FIMLA ramped up fundraising activities ❑ 2020 D.M. Wills Associates (Wills) – retained to conduct detailed inspection and recommend repair solution at a cost of $8,500 Page 14 of 314

Current Status ❑ FIMLA has received report from Wills with recommendations for repair strategy and estimated costs ($140,000 + HST) ❑ The estimate includes an allowance of $10,000 for clearing, grubbing, construction of access road ❑ Fundraising efforts have been hampered by COVID-19, but the lake association executive plans to resume its efforts as soon as possible ❑ Once a sufficient level of funding has been achieved (60-70%) grant applications will be investigated Page 15 of 314

How can South Frontenac Township help? ❑ FIMLA appreciates Portland and Loughborough Townships’ participation in previous repairs to this critical infrastructure (30%) and is seeking assistance again ❑ FIMLA is asking for a $5,000 capital contribution to the necessary construction project, and $10,000 of in-kind services to provide access to the dam from Willy’s Lane

Page 16 of 314

Location

14 Island Lake F Dam

Hinchinbrooke F Road Crossing Page 17 of 314

Access Road Location (approx.)

Access Road

14 Island Lake F Dam

Willy’s Lane

Page 18 of 314

Questions? Thank you Mary Rae President, Fourteen Island & Mink Lakes Watershed Association

Page 19 of 314

Page 20 of 314

To the Council of South Frontenac, Please accept the following proposal for local municipal support for the Frontenac Arch Biosphere Network to continue and enhance its operations. The Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve was nominated in 2002 by local organizations and resides on the traditional territories of the Haudenosaunee and Anishinaabe people. It encompasses 2,700 square kilometers and includes the City of Brockville, the Town of Gananoque, South Frontenac, Leeds and the Thousand Islands, Rideau Lakes, Front of Yonge, Elizabethtown-Kitley, Athens and Westport. Our organization has been primarily a volunteer run “grass roots” not-for-profit that initiates community projects and programs to enhance people’s connection with nature. The programs we have implemented have been supported mainly through grants. While these programs are key to fulfilling our mandate, the grants received do not contribute to our core operating costs. Over the long term, this lack of core funding creates discontinuity within the organization and makes creating and managing programs to serve the community increasingly difficult. In Spring 2019 we visited the Brockville Council, and presented the benefits of being part of the World Network of Biosphere Regions. After letters and presentations were delivered to municipalities, we secured $7,283 from the City of Brockville, the Town of Gananoque and Front of Yonge. We are grateful to those municipalities who contributed to supporting our organization, especially through 2020, a hard year for businesses, organizations and individuals. In 2020, FABN canceled all spring programs during the height of the pandemic, including a Youth Climate Summit and Nature Programs. Under Ministry of Health guidelines, our Nature Camps continued through the summer, but with significantly reduced registration and revenue for FABN. Despite these challenges, with the funds provided by the municipalities, FABN has been able to provide tangible benefits through programs and services and intangible benefits such as partnership development and community engagement. In particular, we are exploring the local food system through a series of virtual workshops, and we highlighted two South Frontenac hiking trails in our annual FAB Trails Festival this past summer, which attracted 37 participants and generated 15 hours of community member volunteer time.

Page 21 of 314

With your input, we will continue to develop programs that are considered priority to your strategic plan within the subject matter of environmental action and education. We have continued to apply for grant funding for 2021 which will support our Nature Program expansion and some shorter term projects including a shoreline cleanup initiative. In addition, the FABN will provide an opportunity for youth engagement and empowerment through the Youth Climate Action Summit, which will be held virtually in May 2021. Based on our new budget, we foresee a shortfall of approximately $22,500 and would like to request the Township of South Frontenac’s ongoing support in the amount of $5,200 through 2021 to continue community relationship building, program development and new project initiation. This amount is based on a per-capita contribution to the total requirement. Funding support from local municipalities demonstrates that they endorse and partner with the biosphere, which helps us to secure funding from other sources such as grants. The FABN strives to highlight local communities and serve nature in it’s programs and projects, including Local Flavours, Amazing Places, Nature Program, the Youth Climate Action Program and our FAB Trails Festival. Thank you for taking the time to review our request. We look forward to hearing from you

Julie Servant, B.Sc. Frontenac Arch Biosphere Network, Executive Director

Helen Anne Hudson, PhD

Frontenac Arch Biosphere , Co-Chair

Erik Wang, MScF

Frontenac Arch Biosphere Network, Co-Chair

Page 22 of 314

January 11, 2021 To: South Frontenac Council From: Steve Lapp (32 years in the township and counting!) Re: Budget allocation for Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation

Dear Mayor and Councillors: It is exciting and encouraging to see the provision for Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in the 2021 draft budget. It is a necessary start to practically addressing climate change at the local level. Let me provide a very brief introduction to my background so that my comments have some context. My 35-year career in engineering has focused on the implementation of low carbon energy solutions, primarily in building energy efficiency and electric vehicle design. Up until my retirement 2 years ago, the last 15 years of my career were at St. Lawrence College where I developed the courses and taught in a three-year technologist program where our graduates learn to design energy efficient buildings and solar photovoltaic electricity systems. These graduates get good jobs across Canada in the development of a more environmentally sustainable energy future. As a starter, based on my 35 years of working in the energy field I offer these straightforward recommendations to utilize the $100k budget allotment:

1/ Air-Source Heat Pumps are the main way to reduce building heating costs: Oil, propane and resistance electric heating of municipal buildings is expensive and in the case of oil and propane fuels is also greenhouse gas intensive. Modern “cold climate” air-source heat pumps are being deployed rapidly across Canada and offer greatly reduced annual heating costs. Typically, a modern airsource heat pump will cost ½ to 1/3 the annual cost of heating with oil, propane or pure electric resistance heating. When building any new building or retrofitting any existing heating equipment, the Township should obtain quotes on modern cold climate air-source heat pump equipment. As a taxpayer, I want to see council encourage the selection of the lowest life-cycle heating system costs, not the lowest capital cost and highest operating cost systems. Oil and propane system will never be the lowest life cycle heating cost options. I suggest a portion of the $100k be allocated to ensuring the next few building heating systems choices, either new or retrofits are air-source heat pump based. The operating costs will be ½ to 1/3 that of oil or propane and the greenhouse gas emissions from these systems are much lower. Note that a building using $5,000/year in propane will cost $1000 to $1500/year on an air source heat pump and the GHG emissions will drop from about 11 tonnes GHG/year to about 1.0 tonne GHG/year. A 90% reduction in GHG emissions. On existing buildings, the building should have an energy audit by a professional commercial/institutional building energy auditor and a combination of energy efficiency retrofits and properly sized air-source heat pump retrofits be implemented for the lowest life cycle cost solution. Some of the $100k can be used for the energy audit and retrofit capital cost.

2/ Electric Vehicles There are now about 10 million electric cars, trucks and buses in the world. Although the initial market force for these vehicles was the low-carbon life-cycle footprint they have, there are also compelling economic reasons to purchase electric vehicles. A midsize car that requires about $2,000/year of gasoline, replaced with an EV will cost abut $500 a year to charge, an annual savings of $1500, or

Page 23 of 314

$15,000 over the life of the vehicle. There are also NO scheduled maintenance requirements on most EVs, so no downtime or costs for such maintenance. The GHG reduction of switching from gas to electric in Ontario is huge. A typical sedan or pickup that emit respectively 2 to 6 tonnes of GHG a year, as an EV will emit about 0.1 to 0.3 tonnes GHG/year. The range of most sedan and SUV EVs is now 400 km in the summer and 250 km in the winter, plenty for municipal operations. The township should use available “Smart Fleet” tools to review and determine what fleet vehicles can be replaced by EVs now. A portion of the $100k should be used to support the slightly higher capital of some EVs. I have significant involvement with EVs in Ontario and I can show you dealer invoices for EVs that are now just over $40k including all taxes and fees. Electric pickup trucks will be arriving in the marketplace in later 2021, although we do not know the exact MSRPs of these trucks yet, a portion of the $100k could be held until later in the year and used to support the cost difference to purchase an electric versus gasoline pickup. Any EVs purchased should be prioritized such that they receive the maximum usage, as each km of travel will save taxpayer money that would otherwise be spent of gasoline. Keep in mind too that money spent on electricity stays in our province. I look forward to seeing South Frontenac be a leader in deploying energy efficient low-carbon solutions that are taxpayer friendly. Thank you for the opportunity to present this information. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely Steve Lapp, P.Eng. 613 888 282 www.carbontakedown.com lappstve@kos.net

HISTORIC FERMOY HALL TOWNSHIP ASSET OPPORTUNITY TO HOST COMMUNITY BROADBAND SERVICE IN UNDERSERVICED BEDFORD DISTRICT IMPERATIVE FOR CHANGE

• • •

BROADBAND SERVICE IS NOW A NEED NOT A NICE TO HAVE CURRENT AVERAGE INTERNET SPEED – 3-5 MB PER SECOND

CURRENT STATUS DATA TRANSFERS OVER AGED DSL – COPPER LINES

Page 24 of 314

REALISTIC & FEASIBLE SOLUTION TO ADDRESS THE COMMUNITY NEEDS UNTIL RURAL BROADBAND INVESTMENT AND DELIVERY IS ACHIEVED

OPPORTUNITY STEP 1 - 2021 – QUICK HIT, LOW COST, HIGH VALUE ESTABLISH A BROADBAND/INTERNET SERVICE HUB IN THE FERMOY HALL

• • •

COMMUNITY AVAILABLE WIFI USER ACCESS CONTROL OFFSITE MONITORING – SERVICE PROVIDER

STEP 2 – 2022 – GROW THE OPPORTUNITY

• •

COMPLETE HALL RENOVATIONS FOR SEASONAL OCCUPANCY OPEN DOORS FOR INTERNET ACCESS & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OPERATED WITH TECHNOLOGY LITERATE SUMMER STUDENTS

STEP 3 2022-2023 – DELIVER MORE VALUE FOR THE INVESTMENT OPEN DOORS FOR ITS HISTORIC VALUE – TOURIST STOP COMMUNITY USE – MEETINGS, GATHERINGS, EDUCATION, EVENTS

Page 25 of 314

• •

Page 26 of 314

January 9, 2021 South Frontenac Township 4432 George Street, Sydenham, Ontario Attention Clerks Office – admin@southfrontenac.net

Response to South Frontenac Councils Invite for input into 2021 Budget Written Submission Request for $150,000 - $200,000 to be set aside/earmarked to create a Historic Fermoy Hall Internet Café. If approved, budget and business case would be developed for review and approval. Complete the restoration of the Fermoy Hall in readiness for ROMA (Rural Ontario Municipal Association) broadband funding opportunity. NOTE, the federal government’s Universal Broadband Fund opened in November 2020. Why? Recognize the changing needs in South Frontenac driving the demand for Broadband which should be and could be a mainstream service available for all. To address an immediate need, an Internet Café is a quick hit until future Broadband services are available for all Residents and Business that are affordable, reliable and operate at industry standard broadband levels. This Capability is necessary for, but not limited to, the following: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Work from home or cottage Education online learning Online Medical Support Realtime Service capability for on the ground response teams e.g. paramedics, firefighters, road crews, emergency services and situational awareness (maps, directions) 5. Eliminate communication service gaps & dead zones 6. Streaming 7. Significantly improve bandwidth speed for existing & new connections 8. Security and safety tools 9. Training and development opportunities 10. Remote meetings 11. Threat Smart/ Threat Ready – e.g. Pandemics and Environmental, Foreseen and Unforeseen threats 1|Page

Page 27 of 314

Community health and safety
Community Inclusivity Resident and business migration from cities to rural areas is occurring across the province but limited by lack of connectivity capability in our Township. Is there enough Community Support? Absolutely. An Internet Café is the first step in establishing a platform from which to move forward at a time where there is Provincial momentum, funding and community change needed that has been exposed and elevated the need by the COVID 19 Pandemic. A list of advocates or a petition can be provided. Enclosed is a list of community activities from 2016 – 2020 in support of bringing the Historic Fermoy Hall an existing Township Asset into service. It should also be noted that the Historic Fermoy Hall could also serve as Tourist Stop point of interest which drives community interest, brings dollars into the community businesses, and maximizes the Townships investment. I Respectfully, request your approval for this initiative. I have experience in successfully delivering hardware and software initiatives, inclusive of Internet Connectivity. I have 25+ years of working experience as a Professional Project Manager (now retired) working in both the private and public sectors. I would be willing to take the lead to deliver this initiative for South Frontenac Township. Yours truly, Donna Garland 9 Garland Lane, Godfrey Ontario 613 273-7632 – donnagarland@rogers.com Enclosures - 2 Cc: Councilors, Pat Barr and Ross Sutherland Dave Pugh, Margaret Brand – Fermoy Hall Committee Member

2|Page

Page 28 of 314

Enclosure 1

Historic Fermoy Hall Community (Bedford District) Activity and Interest Completed:

•

Jul 9, 2016 – Community Interest Meeting

•

Jul 17, 2016, Fermoy Hall committee was established

•

Jul 27, 2016 – Letter to Council

•

Aug 18, 2016 Workshops Conducted for best use of the hall – options and recommendations

•

Sep 19, 2016 – Presentation to South Frontenac Recreation Committee – Unanimous agreement by The Committee to support this initiative

•

Oct 11, 2016 – Presentation to SFTWP - ATTACHED o Imperative for change – current state, opportunity, risks o Approach –MVP - Minimum Investment for Value Testing a Product o Request support and funding

•

2017 Budget - $75,000 earmarked but not approved funding

•

2017 – Fermoy Hall Open House Combined with Canada 150 Event

•

July 12, 2017 – Letter to Council – Building Assessment Complete – request funding to remove contaminants

•

Oct 25, 2017 Trillium Grant Application Submitted for financial assistance to renovate the Historic Fermoy. (Attached 2 documents) Unsuccessful

•

2018 – Removal of hall contaminants - asbestos and lead paint

•

Feb 18, 2020 – Preparation of Grant Submission Community Foundation for Kingston and Area completed and request to submit to Council for approval. Denied by SFTWP Recreation Dept. ATTACHED

•

2020/21 Fermoy Hall Committee Chair joins new Recreation Facility Committee

3|Page

Page 29 of 314

Enclosure 2

FRONTENAC NEWS Triple-win available through

broadband investment: Researcher January 6, 2021 – Full version available at this link: https://www.frontenacnews.ca/frontenac-county-news/item/14516-triple-win-available-throughbroadband-investment-researcher

Key Excerpts “Life and livelihoods are changing.” FOC Dr. Helen Hambly “The needs of youth and seniors,” have changed significantly almost overnight, she explained. “Their need to access education and healthcare professionals online,” resulting from sweeping public shutdowns makes the demand for change imperative.

“Faster internet would also facilitate greater ongoing adoption of telecommuting practices among employers, which can help green the economy, Hambly added.” “Not only is there a money in your pocket benefit from someone working from home, there is also an environmental benefit,” said Hambly. “European studies show a 32 to 33 per cent rise in GDP when broadband becomes available,” the minister told the largely rural crowd of online participants. “It varies by location, but in Halton County property values went up an average of $16,000,” she said. “In Durham County it was more like $18,000.” The dollars she was referring to are related to Ottawa’s $1.75 billion Universal Broadband Fund, which has been designated by the feds to enable infrastructure projects that will bring high-speed internet of 50 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload (50/10) rates to most rural and remote Canadians. On Nov. 4, Ontario’s provincial government also raised the ante on its own level of IT investment, more than doubling down on its previously announced $315-million commitment to support “Up to Speed: Ontario’s Broadband and Cellular Action Plan,” with what it termed an “historic investment” of an additional $680 million. Ontario’s total plan now includes nearly $1 billion over six years to improve and expand broadband and cellular access across the province.

4|Page

2016-10-06 Page 30 of 314

Historic Fermoy Hall Presentation to Township of South Frontenac

Oct 11, 2016

Imperative for Change

Idle Historic Township Asset Located in Fermoy At The Intersection of Westport Road and Lee Road

2016-10-06 Page 31 of 314

Imperative for Change  What is it?  Who does it belong to?  Why is it vacant?  Is it usable and is it available?  Contradictory Appearance  Exterior finished / Interior unfinished

We Learned  Its Name - Fermoy Town Hall  Existed prior to Confederation  Interest In Its preservation and historical value

 Community Interest – inquisitive activity, usage inquires  Owned by South Frontenac through Amalgamation (1998)  Councillors Pat Barr and Alan Revill  South Frontenac Recreation Committee  Pat Barr, Donna Brown, Wolfe Erlichman

 Disposition of building was undetermined  Previous year(s) budget was carried forward pending future decision(s)  Operating costs $500 - $1000/year  Mostly vacant since 1971, exception being, one short term rental

2016-10-06 Page 32 of 314

Quick Pause For A Bit Of History Source, Council Minutes Record • Building Completed in1866 • On 21 January, 1867 - newly elected members of the United Townships of Bedford and Palmerston met in the Fermoy Town Hall • Orange Lodge Meeting Place – Fermoy Names On Record Joseph Rogers, 1888, Wm Bresee 1909, Peter Botting, 1912 • Community Hall Dances, Occasional Township Use Herb Stovel Associate Professor and Coordinator of the Heritage Conservation Programme Carleton University to June Quinn, Chair Bedford District Historical Society The Fermoy Old Town Hall is a fairly rare survivor of a utilitarian but important approach to establish order in the more remote reaches of Upper Canada in the mid 19th Century.”

• • • • • •

Anglican Church Blacksmith Canada Hotel Post Office 2 Stores Sawmill

Community Grass Root Movement  Notice Of Meeting  Email, Neighbours, Posters At Hall  Community Meeting Jul 9 2016 Well attended in spite of short notice and being mid summer

 Historic Fermoy Hall Committee Formed Jul 17, 2016  Letter to Council Jul 27, 2016  Presentation South Frontenac Recreation Committee Sep19, 2016

Unanimous agreement by the Committee to support this initiative

2016-10-06 Page 33 of 314

Our Approach  Guiding Principle –

Minimum investment for Value testing a Product

 Conservative test drive approach to achieve and measure results

 Embrace What Already Exists  Unique facility due to its age and historical past  Situated at a busy intersection with high visibility  Location suitable to attracting local & seasonal residents and tourists  Footprint delivers small hall experience  Open space for multi purpose use  Unique and rare barrel ceiling – great acoustics  Built in stage/platform  There Is Value In Trying  Location closer to home makes it more likely to attract active volunteer resources  Improve our local community

Current State  New roof, siding, windows with screens and doors and handicap accessible – Renovations completed December 2009 - $48,500.  Building size 35 X 40 plus ample space for parking (current and future)  Lots of Natural Light  Upgraded electrical and outdoor lighting on two sides of the building  Solid unfinished wood floor  No rot, mildew or rodents  No water or plumbing  Unheated and no known insulation  Drilled Well 1971 – not usable in its current state  Metal Tower On A Cement Pad – highest point of land suitable for technology fit

2016-10-06 Page 34 of 314

Possibilities Three Season Building Historical Story Board Meeting space Classroom Marketplace for local produce and crafts Social networking Internet hotspot Promote health & wellness Exhibitions

What’s The Value Proposition  Preserves our Heritage  Recognition of the contributions to Canada from this area  Increase awareness and pride

 Brings neighbours together for a better and safer community  Local venue within a high traffic area for local talent and growers  Fit with Festival of Small Halls Ontario program which is about sharing a love of music and beloved place  Perfect stop for outdoor enthusiasts  Technology enablement in an underserviced area is the game changer  Provides greater service access and learning opportunities to the community  Touches so many people for so little $80/month  Changes demographic from specific to all inclusive

2016-10-06 Page 35 of 314

Our Ask – Preserve Funding for 2017  Required changes to make hall presentable and usable Electrical – safe and working lights Patch holes in ceiling and walls Paint interior Finish bare wood floor Install and service two accessible porta potties Internet and Wi-Fi Tables and chairs Facility sign

Investment Versus Risk  High Level Estimates for Budget Purposes  One time costs $15-20K*  On-going costs $5-7K annually

Work could happen in 2016 if funding was approved – i.e. electrical  Risk Mitigation  Does not compete with other facilities

 Any improvements/investment made to this building will increase the attractiveness for future rental revenue from alternative sources - Private or Public

Page 36 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA DATE:

January 12, 2021

REPORT DATE:

January 5, 2021

SUBJECT:

Road Closing Application – RC-20-01 2290998 Ontario Inc. Portion of an Unopened Road Allowance between Concession 9 & 10, Lot 20, known as a portion of Christel Lane, District of Storrington, Dog Lake, Township of South Frontenac

RECOMMENDATION Council hear public comments on a proposal to consider the closing and transfer of ownership of a portion of unopened road allowance between Concession 9 & 10, Lot 20, known as a portion of Christel Lane, District of Storrington, Dog Lake.

PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to bring forward an application for a road closure and to hold a public meeting on the application as required under the Municipal Act.

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL An application has been submitted by the applicants to stop up close and transfer a portion of unopened road allowance between Concession 9 & 10, Lot 20. At the July 14, 2020 Council meeting, Council deferred making a decision on an original proposal made by the applicant to acquire a 66 foot x 66 foot portion of the unopened road allowance that intersects with Christel Lane, between Concession 9 & 10, Part Lot 20, District of Storrington (Attachment 1). Council chose to defer the request from 2290998 Ontario Inc. due to the concern that this transfer may result in the creation of stranded portions of Township road allowance. Council recommended that adjacent property owners be contacted about purchasing a portion of the road allowance to explore whether the transfer of the road allowance can be addressed in a joint fashion and a rational division of the road allowance be achieved.

REVISED PROPOSAL Following the July 14th, 2020 Council Meeting, the applicants, 2290998 Ontario Inc., put forward a revised proposal that shows a more rational and comprehensive approach to the division of the remaining portions of the unopened road allowance. The proposal addresses how the entire unopened road allowance could be transferred to address multiple interests of the property owners located adjacent to the unopened road allowance. Staff have had discussions with land owners interested in acquiring the most westerly and easterly portions of this unopened road allowance. It is anticipated that adjacent landowners will be submitting their own Applications once they have prepared their paperwork with their respective legal counsel as these portions run directly through the respective lands.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 37 of 314

From west to east (left to right) on Attachment 2, the applicants have proposed the unopened road allowance could be disposed of in the following manner:

Part 1:

This portion of road allowance could be purchased by Badura to enlarge their property, as this section of the road allowance splits their property into two pieces;

Part 2:

This portion of road allowance was recently (2017) stopped up, closed and transferred to the property owned by McPhie & Bruce (shown as Part 1 on Attachment 2);

Part 3:

This portion of the road allowance could possibly be acquired by McPhie & Bruce to further enlarge their property following the completion of the lot enlargement severance from 2290998 Ontario Inc.;

Part 4:

This portion of road allowance (shown in orange) would be purchased to enlarge the lands owned by 2290998 Ontario Inc. located to the south of the unopened road allowance currently subject to severance application S-02-20-S to facilitate the continuation of Christel Lane;

Part 5:

This portion of road allowance would be purchased by 2290998 Ontario Inc. to enlarge their property located north of the unopened road allowance;

Part 6:

This portion could be purchased by the Keefe/Volpe family. The cottage and septic system was constructed on the most easterly portion of this unopened road allowance unknowingly in the late 1940s.

NOTICE Consistent with the requirements of the Municipal Act, a Notice of Road Closing was posted on the Township website on November 25, 2020 and advertised in the Frontenac News for 4 weeks beginning November 25, 2020. Notice was also sent by mail to all other land owners abutting the relevant portion of the road allowance. At the time of writing of this report, no inquiries or comments had been received by any members of the public. Of note, adjacent property owners have continued to be in contact with Planning Staff and are preparing their applications to formally submit.

CONCLUSION Council should hear anyone who wishes to speak at this public meeting on the closing of the road allowance. If Council is still favourable to the proposal, a road closing by-law will be considered at such time as the reference plan is deposited and submitted to the Township.

ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1 – Location Map Attachment #2 – Sketch Showing Possible Enlargements for Remaining Portions of the Unopened Road Allowance Attachment #3 – Survey Sketch by Ron Clancy – Road Allowance Apportionment Attachment #4 – Sketch – Severance Application S-02-20-S Prepared by:

Michelle Hannah, Planning Assistant

Submitted by:

Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services

Approved by:

Neil Carbone, CAO “Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Public Meeting RC-20-01 Applicant: Property:

2290998 Ontario Inc. Road Allowance between Concession 9 & 10, Lot 20, Dog Lake, District of Storrington Tuesday, January 12, 2021 7:00 p.m. Virtual Public Meeting Page 38 of 314

South Frontenac Council

Public Meeting Statement

The purpose of this public meeting is to hear public comments and concerns related to the Request for Unopened Road Allowance Closure and Purchase application RC-20-01.

Public Meeting RC-20-01

Page 39 of 314

2021-01-12

Agenda for Public Meeting • Director of Development Services delivers report • Comments/Questions from Council • Comments from Applicant/Agent • Comments from the Public • Comments/Questions from Council

2021-01-12

Public Meeting RC-20-01

Page 40 of 314

• Close Public Meeting

Location

Public Meeting RC-20-01

Page 41 of 314

2021-01-12

Proposed Allocation of the Road Allowance

Public Meeting RC-20-01

Page 42 of 314

2021-01-12

Subject Property

2020-01-12

Public Meeting RC-20-01

Page 43 of 314

The easterly portion of the road allowance that leads to the Keefe / Volpe property beyond the trees

Subject Property

2020-01-12

Public Meeting RC-20-01

Page 44 of 314

Westerly portion of the road allowance near the Badura property

Agency and Public Comments • Planning staff and Public Services staff visited the site and have no concerns with the application as proposed. • Comments from the public have been received in relation to abutting neighbours submitting their own applications.

Public Meeting RC-20-01

Page 45 of 314

2020-01-12

Recommendation and Next Steps • It is recommended that South Frontenac Council receive comments from the public and pending comments received, direct staff to prepare a by-law to stop up close and transfer the subject lands. • Planning staff will bring forward a report providing a further recommendation and by-law to an upcoming Council meeting for consideration.

Public Meeting RC-20-01

Page 46 of 314

2020-01-12

Questions and Comments • Comments/Questions from Council • Comments from Applicant and Agent • Comments from the Public • Any Further Comments/Questions from Council

Public Meeting RC-20-01

Page 47 of 314

2020-01-12

Road Closing Application - Portion of Christel Lane, off Burnt Hills Road

Legend Assessment Parcels Citations

0.5

0.23

0.5 Kilometers

This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION

Notes

Page 48 of 314

1: 9,028

Part 3 Part 1

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 2

Page 49 of 314

Page 50 of 314

Page 51 of 314

Page 52 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA DATE:

January 12, 2021

REPORT DATE:

January 5, 2021

SUBJECT:

Road Closing Application – RC-20-02 Beam, Lisa and Greg Closure and transfer of a portion of an Unopened Road Allowance between Concession 2 & 3, Lot 17, District of Bedford, Bobs Lake, Buck Bay, Township of South Frontenac

RECOMMENDATION Council hear public comments on a proposal to consider the closing and transfer of ownership of a portion of unopened road allowance that abuts the property addressed as 52 Sneddon Lane.

PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to bring forward an application for a road closure and to hold a public meeting on the application as required under the Municipal Act.

BACKGROUND The road allowance is aligned from north to south, running across a large peninsula in Bobs Lake, Buck Bay. The land is mostly scrub/brush land, with two private lanes, Sneddon Lane and Devine Lane running through it. Attachment #1 illustrates the parcel fabric of the surrounding parcels of land. Also illustrated in the middle section of the road allowance is Devine Lane crossing over the unopened road allowance and Sneddon Lane branching out from Devine lane and crisscrossing over the southerly two thirds of the unopened road allowance. Sneddon Lane turns to the east approximately 117 metres (382.8 feet) before the water’s edge to provide access to the applicant’s lands and lands to the east of the applicant’s lands. The owners of the lands municipally known as 52 Sneddon Lane, Greg and Lisa Beam, have filed a road closing application requesting Council stop up, close and transfer an approximately 10 metre (33 foot) x 117 metre (382.8 foot) portion being approximately 1,170 square metres (12,632.4 sq. ft.) of the unopened road allowance between Concessions 2 & 3, Lots 17 in the District of Bedford. 52 Sneddon Lane is a waterfront parcel of land located east of the unopened road allowance. The lands are developed with a cottage, out buildings and a dock. The parcel to be enlarged is approximately 1.09 acres in size, being an undersized, legal non-complying parcel. By adding the road allowance the parcel would be closer to conforming to the current Comprehensive Zoning By-Law 2003-75. Although the southerly portion of the road allowance that remains under the ownership of the Township does provide access to the water, portions of this road allowance have been previously stopped up, closed and transferred to parcels abutting the road allowance. The remaining approximately 10 metres (33 feet) are accessed only by a privately owned lane. Planning staff and Public Services staff visited the site on September 9, 2020. Public Services staff advised that they have no issues with selling the road allowance as there is no public

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 53 of 314 access by vehicle or boat, and there is very little chance that a public road or boat launch will ever be feasible at this location.

ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1 – Location Map Attachment #2 – Sketch – applicant submitted sketch for RC-20-02 Prepared by:

Michelle Hannah, Planning Assistant

Submitted by:

Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services

Approved by:

Neil Carbone, CAO

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Public Meeting RC-20-02 Applicant: Property:

Greg & Lisa Beam Road Allowance between Concession 2 & 3, Lot 17, District of Bedford, Bobs Lake Tuesday, January 12, 2021 7:00 p.m. Virtual Public Meeting Page 54 of 314

South Frontenac Council

Public Meeting Statement

The purpose of this public meeting is to hear public comments and concerns related to the Request for Unopened Road Allowance Closure and Purchase application RC-20-02.

Public Meeting RC-20-02

Page 55 of 314

2021-01-12

Agenda for Public Meeting • Director of Development Services delivers report • Comments/Questions from Council • Comments from Applicant • Comments from the Public • Comments/Questions from Council

2021-01-12

Public Meeting RC-20-0

Page 56 of 314

• Close Public Meeting

Location The unopened Road Allowance runs from north to south across the peninsula. Sneddon Lane and Devine Lane both run over the road allowance as shown. The property outlined in red is proposed to be enlarged by purchasing a portion of the road allowance.

2021-01-12

Public Meeting RC-20-02

Page 57 of 314

The northerly portion of the road allowance and some of the southerly portions have already been stopped up, closed and transferred to abutting properties.

Draft Survey

2021-01-12

Public Meeting RC-20-02

Page 58 of 314

The portion of the road allowance shown in orange (Part 1 & 2) is proposed to be stopped up and closed and transferred to the applicant to enlarge their property.

Subject Property

2020-01-12

View from the end of the road allowance showing the drop to the water / Bobs Lake. Public Meeting RC-20-02

Page 59 of 314

Wooded / scrub brush area of the unopened road allowance between properties

Subject Property View from the top of hill leading to the water of the cottage developed on the benefitting property. To the left of the picture is the wooded area/unopened road allowance.

Public Meeting RC-20-02

Page 60 of 314

2020-01-12

Agency and Public Comments • Planning staff and Public Services staff visited the site and have no concerns with the application as proposed. • To date, no comments from the public have been received.

Public Meeting RC-20-02

Page 61 of 314

2020-01-12

Public Meeting RC-20-02

Page 62 of 314

2020-01-12

Questions and Comments • Comments/Questions from Council • Comments from Applicant and Agent • Comments from the Public • Any further Comments/Questions from Council

Public Meeting RC-20-02

Page 63 of 314

2020-01-12

Attachment #1

Page 64 of 314

102901002021200

102901002021100

Bobs Lake

102901002020900

Unopened Road Allowance Closure (BEAM)

Legend

De vin

Hi ck ey

102901002021000

Subject Property Road Allowance

0 36242 PIN #

Road Allownace ?? Parcel Fabric

566

Waterbody

Sn ed d

Produced by the Township of South Frontenac under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2015.

102901004018010

While the Township makes every effort to insure that the information presented is accurate for the intended uses of this map, there is an inherent error in all mapping products, and accuracy of the mapping cannot be guaranteed for all possible uses. This map displays basic topographic features only.

102902004021800 102901004017910

Scale 1:2,300

PIN #: 362420430

n Field L

102901004017800

0 12.5 25

Bobs Lake

1:2,300

50 Meters

UTM Projection NAD 83

100

Attachment #2

Page 65 of 314

Page 66 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

Public Meeting Report – Zoning By-law Amendment Report Date:

January 7, 2021

Application No: Owner: Location of Property: Purpose of Application:

Z-20-14 Randy Ruttan 1024 Hidden Valley Lane, Buck Lake, Loughborough District Rezone from Rural (RU) to Rural – Special Provision (RUXX) Date of Public Meeting: January 12, 2021 (Virtual Public Meeting)

Recommendation It is recommended that South Frontenac Council receive comments from the public and pending comments received, direct staff to prepare a by-law to rezone the subject lands from Rural (RU) to Rural – Special Provision (RU-XX) in order to recognize two existing dwellings on the property.

Proposal An application was submitted to amend the Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2003-75 to rezone a portion of the subject property from Rural (RU) to Rural – Special Provision (RU-XX).

Background The subject property is 29 hectares (72 acres) in area. It is has frontage on Hidden Valley Road and on Buck Lake. Hidden Valley Lane runs through the property providing access to the uses on the property as well as to approximately thirty waterfront properties. Attachment 1 to this report shows the location of the property subject to this rezoning. The lands consist of swamp interspersed with forested rocky knolls. The property has frontage on Buck Lake in four locations. Three of the locations are swamps. The fourth location is connected with Hidden Valley Park, which is a tourist establishment consisting of ten trailer sites. The lands associated with the tourist establishment are zoned Recreational Resort Commercial – Special Provision (RRC-57). In addition to the tourist establishment, the property contains two dwellings and two accessory detached garages. The dwellings and accessory detached garages are located at the south end of the property, on the east (non-waterfront) side of Hidden Valley Lane and opposite the tourist establishment. These buildings are located on lands that are zoned Rural (RU). According to the application, the dwellings were constructed in 1962. The dwellings are described as one house and one winterized cottage. The house is leased to tenants. The house is setback approximately 55 metres from the high water mark of Buck Lake. It is serviced by a septic system that is approximately 50 metres “Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 1

Page 67 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

from the high water mark. The cottage is currently vacant. The cottage is setback approximately 90 metres from the high water mark. It is serviced by a holding tank that is also approximately 90 metres from the high water mark. The dwellings have a shared well. The dwellings currently share a driveway entrance off Hidden Valley Lane. The applicant proposes to construct a separate driveway entrance off the lane for the cottage in order to provide separation and privacy for the tenants of each dwelling. The Owner has requested a zoning by-law amendment to change the Rural (RU) zone on the subject lands to Rural – Special Provision (RU-XX). The special provision is requested to permit two dwellings on the property. The two dwellings meet the required yard and setbacks of the Rural zone. Attachment 2 to this report is a draft bylaw that specifies zoning provisions.

Department, Agency and Public Comments The application was not circulated to Township Departments and Commenting Agencies due to the nature of the application. Public Comments Scott Meskis (1071 Shadow Lane) indicated that he has no objection to recognizing the two existing houses on the property. However, he does not want more development on the property as the neighbourhood and Buck Lake are overdeveloped. He suggested that the zoning include wording that would not allow more development on the property, and to not allow replacement houses in different locations on the property. Under the Planning Act, a public meeting is required to be held to receive comments from citizens on the proposed rezoning. The province has provided direction that public meetings are able to be held virtually using technology such as Zoom to obtain public input on planning applications. The public meeting for application Z-20-14 will be a virtual public meeting. Further public comments may be provided through the virtual public meeting.

Page 68 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

other things, that we should build on the rural character of the Township and leverage rural amenities and assets, and encourage the conservation and redevelopment of existing rural housing stock on rural lands. The PPS also encourages municipalities to accommodate an appropriate affordable and market-based range and mix of housing (section 1.1.1 b). This can be achieved through the redevelopment of existing housing stock as well as by permitting second residential units in houses or in ancillary buildings. The application is consistent with this direction of the PPS. County of Frontenac Official Plan, 2016 The County of Frontenac Official Plan sets out the general direction for planning and development by defining strategic goals, broad objectives and policies. Section 3 – Growth Management sets outs policies intended to help guide new development across the County as well as manage change at a regional level. The Rural Lands policies are meant to recognize the importance of rural areas for future growth and create guidelines for development that is sensitive to the surroundings. The proposed development is consistent with these directions of the County Official Plan. Township of South Frontenac Official Plan, 2003 The subject lands are designated ‘Rural’ in the Official Plan on Schedule A. The type and amount of development on ‘Rural’ lands must maintain the rural character, natural heritage, and cultural landscape in the Township. The Official Plan permits limited service residential development in the form of single detached dwellings and seasonal dwellings adjacent to waterbodies where the primary means of access is from a private road or a navigable waterway (section 5.7.7). The Official Plan does not permit the creation of new lots without waterfrontage on a private road which services primarily waterfront residential developments (section 5.7.7(ii)(c)). As indicated above, the existing dwellings are located close together on the nonwaterfront side of a private lane that services approximately thirty waterfront properties. Therefore, consent applications to sever land containing one or both of the dwellings could not be supported. The Official Plan does not provide specific direction on how many dwellings or dwelling units may be permitted on a property. In this situation, one must look to the PPS for direction. As indicated above, the PPS encourages the conservation and redevelopment of existing rural housing stock on rural lands (section 1.1.4.1(d)). The subject lands contain two dwellings, whereas the Zoning By-law permits one single detached dwelling per property in the Rural zone. Therefore, the cottage is a legal nonconforming use. Currently, the owner would need to request the permission of the Committee of Adjustment under section 45(2) of the Planning Act to enlarge a legal non-conforming use in order to facilitate any and all enlargements of the cottage (i.e. an addition or a larger replacement building).

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 3

Page 69 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

A zoning by-law amendment to recognize the second dwelling provides an opportunity to look at the property comprehensively, thereby removing layers of future planning approvals. It is appropriate to legally recognize the two existing dwellings to allow the buildings to be improved over time. This would also encourage replacement of the existing holding tank with a septic system. This amendment would help the Township to achieve its goal to encourage residential development which is affordable, of high quality and capable of meeting the changing and diverse needs of the rural community. It is also consistent with direction provided from the PPS to conserve and redevelop existing rural housing stock. As indicated above, the two dwellings meet the required yard and setbacks of the Rural zone. Typically, it is preferred that the multiple dwellings or dwelling units on a property be serviced by one well and septic system and be accessed from the one driveway. In this situation, it is acknowledged that the topography and the location of the existing buildings and structures preclude the dwellings sharing a septic system. Staff support the proposal to construct a separate driveway farther to the north off the private lane for the cottage given the intensity of activity at this location. This location includes the driveway for the house and cottage, the entrance to the tourist establishment, and a secondary private lane. The wording of the proposed by-law would require the dwellings to share a well, septic system or driveway, in order to maintain the intent of the amendment to legally recognize the two existing dwellings and to not facilitate redevelopment of one or both of the dwellings in other locations on the property.

Conclusion It is the author’s opinion that this application is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020, the County of Frontenac Official Plan and the South Frontenac Official Plan, and that it represents appropriate planning for the subject lands. Consistent with Council’s procedural by-law, it is recommended that South Frontenac Council receive comments from the public and pending comments received direct staff to prepare a by-law to rezone the subject lands from Rural (RU) to Rural – Special Provision (RU-XX).

Prepared by: Christine Woods, MCIP, RPP, Senior Planner Submitted/approved: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services Approved by: Neil Carbone, CAO

Date of Site Visit: December 14, 2020 Attachments:

Location Map of 1024 Hidden Valley Lane
Draft By-law 2020-XX

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 4

Public Meeting Z-20-14 Applicant: Property:

Randy Ruttan 1024 Hidden Valley Lane Loughborough District Tuesday, January 12, 2021 7:00 p.m. Virtual Public Meeting Page 70 of 314

South Frontenac Council

Public Meeting Statement • The purpose of this public meeting is to hear comments on Zoning By-Law Amendment application Z-20-14. • If a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions at a public meeting, or make written submissions to South Frontenac Township before the by-law is passed, the person or public body may not be added to the hearing of an appeal before the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal unless, in the opinion of the Tribunal, there are reasonable grounds to do so. • If you wish to be notified of the decision of Council in respect to the application, you must submit a written request to the Clerk via email at amaddocks@southfrontenac.net. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. • Anyone may appeal the decision to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal by filing with the Clerk within 20 days of the notice of decision.

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 71 of 314

• An appeal to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal may be filed with the Clerk of the Township not later than 20 days after the day that the notice of decision was given. The notice of appeal must set out the objection to the by-law and the reasons in support of the objection, accompanied by the required fee.

Agenda for Public Meeting • Planner reviews proposal and delivers report • Comments/Questions from Council • Comments from Applicant/Owner and Agent • Comments from the Public • Comments/Questions from Council

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 72 of 314

• Close Public Meeting

Location Buck Lake

Hidden Valley Road Opinicon Road

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 73 of 314

2021-01-12

Location

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 74 of 314

2021-01-12

Proposal • Rezone from Rural (RU) to Rural – Special Exception (RU-XX) • Permit two dwellings on the property

Buck Lake

Tourist Establishment 2

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 75 of 314

2021-01-12

Subject Property

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 76 of 314

Looking north – cottage in foreground, house in background, lake to the right

Subject Property

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 77 of 314

Lane to left, cottage to right

Agency and Public Comments • Township Departments and Agencies were not circulated • Scott Meskis (1071 Shadow Lane) •

No objection to recognizing two existing houses on property

•

No more development on property

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 78 of 314

2021-01-12

Policy Framework • Provincial Policy Statement • Encourages conservation and redevelopment of existing rural housing stock

• County of Frontenac Official Plan • Township of South Frontenac Official Plan • Allows waterfront limited service residential development on private lanes • Does not allow non-waterfront lot creation on private lanes that service waterfront properties

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 79 of 314

• Encourages affordable, high quality housing

Policy Framework • Township Zoning By-law • The dwellings meet the Rural zone setback provisions • Rural zone allows one single detached dwelling per property • The cottage is legal non-conforming use • Multiple permissions from Committee of Adjustment required for enlargement or replacement • Rezoning would set the rules for development

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 80 of 314

2021-01-12

Recommendation and Next Steps • It is recommended that South Frontenac Council receive comments from the public and pending comments received, direct staff to prepare a by-law to rezone the subject lands from Rural (RU) to Rural – Special Provision (RU-XX) in order to recognize two existing dwellings on the property. • Planning staff will bring forward a report providing a further recommendation and by-law to an upcoming Council meeting for consideration.

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 81 of 314

2021-01-12

Questions and Comments • Comments/Questions from Council • Comments from Applicant/Owner and Agent • Comments from the Public • Comments/Questions from Council

Public Meeting Z-20-14

Page 82 of 314

2021-01-12

Attachment 1. Location Map - 1024 Hidden Valley Lane

Legend Road Highway Major Road Secondary Road Ferry Route

Assessment Parcels Settlement Area Citations

1.8

0.92

1.8 Kilometers

Notes Z-20-14

Page 83 of 314

1: 36,112

Page 84 of 314

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW 2021 - XX Being a by-law to amend By-Law 2003-75, as amended, to rezone land from Rural (RU) to Rural – Special Provision (RU-XX) on lands described as 1024 Hidden Valley Lane, Part of Lot 22, Concession 11, District of Loughborough: Ruttan WHEREAS pursuant to the provisions of 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, 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 Rural (RU) to Rural – Special Provision (RU-XX) for the lands shown on Schedule “1”.

THAT Zoning By-law number 2003-75 as amended is hereby further amended by adding a new section RU-XX (1024 Hidden Valley Lane, Part of Lot 22, Concession 11, District of Loughborough – Ruttan) immediately after Section RU-60 (Part of Lot 4, Concession 2, District of Loughborough – Southall) to read as follows: RU-XX (1024 Hidden Valley Lane, Part of Lot 22, Concession 11, District of Loughborough – Ruttan) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 7 or any other provision of this By-law to the contrary, on the lands zoned Special Rural (RU-XX), the following provisions apply: • •

Two single detached dwellings are permitted. The dwellings shall be located in close proximity to each other and shall share one or more of the following services: a driveway, a septic system, or a well.

All other provisions of this by-law shall apply. 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 __th day of MONTH, 2021. Read a first and second time this __th day of MONTH, 2021. Read a third time and finally passed this __th day of MONTH, 2021. THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 85 of 314

Schedule 1 This is Schedule “1” to By-law No. 2021- __

Passed this ___ DAY OF MONTH, 2021

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 86 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

Public Meeting Report – Zoning By-law Amendment Report Date:

January 7, 2021

Application No: Owner: Agent: Location of Property:

Z-20-15 Joseph Brice Forefront Engineering Inc. Davidson Road at Mowoods Lane, Loughborough Lake, Storrington District Purpose of Application: Rezone from Open Space – Private – Special Provision (OSP-5) to Limited Service Residential – Waterfront – Special Provision (RLSW-XX) Date of Public Meeting: January 12, 2021 (Virtual Public Meeting)

Recommendation It is recommended that South Frontenac Council defer making a decision on application Z-20-15 to receive and consider peer review, agency and public comments on the application.

Proposal An application was submitted to amend the Township of South Frontenac Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2003-75 to rezone the subject property from Open Space – Private – Special Provision (OSP-5) to Limited Service Residential – Waterfront – Special Provision (RLSW-XX).

Background The subject property is 10 hectares (24.64 acres) in area. It has frontage on Davidson Road but is accessed by Mowoods Lane. The property also has frontage on the West Basin of Loughborough Lake. Attachment 1 to this report shows the location of the property subject to this rezoning. Approximately half the property consists of an old farm field that slopes gently from Davidson Road towards the northwest. The other half of the property consists of a predominately cedar forest. The lands within approximately 45 metres of the shoreline consist of a high, steep slope. The shoreline consists of an approximately 2 metre high vertical limestone cliff. There has been extensive site alteration and tree clearing on the property within 100 metres of the shoreline, in anticipation of development. A portion of the shoreline is developed with a boat slip. The boat slip was permitted by Cataraqui Conservation under Ontario Regulation 148/06. The proposed dwelling is proposed to be located 45 metres from the high water mark, at the top of the high, steep slope.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 1

Page 87 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

The subject property is part of a block in the Loughborough Shores Plan of Subdivision. At the time the subdivision was developed, an Open Space zone with special provisions was established on the block in order to prohibit development until such time as a source of potable water was identified to the satisfaction of the municipality.This requirement relates to the findings of the hydrogeological assessments for the subdivision. The hydrogeological assessments identified non-potable water on the subject lands. The block is also subject to a drainage easement in favour of the Municipality. The easement and an associated agreement are registered on title. The Owner has requested a zoning by-law amendment to change the Open Space – Private – Special Provision (OSP-5) zone on the subject lands to Limited Service Residential – Waterfront – Special Provision (RLSW-XX) to facilitate the construction of a single detached dwelling on the property. The RLSW zone is applicable to residential properties that have frontage on a private lane, or are accessed via a private lane, and have frontage on a navigable waterway. While the subject property has frontage on Davidson Road, the applicant intends to use Mowoods Lane for access. The special provision is requested to require a dwelling to be located at least 45 metres from the highwater mark of Loughborough Lake, and a sewage system to be located at least 90 metres from the highwater mark. The setbacks, which are greater than the minimum 30 metre setback required in the Zoning By-law, are proposed to minimize the impact of a dwelling and septic system on the water quality of the lake. The West Basin of Loughborough Lake is an at-capacity lake trout lake. A planning justification report, hydrogeological study and terrain analysis, an environmental site evaluation, as well as a drainage brief were submitted in support of the application.

Supporting Studies Planning Justification Report A Planning Justification Report (Fotenn, December 9, 2020) was submitted in support of the rezoning application. The report assessed the appropriateness of the proposed zoning by-law amendment in the context of the surrounding area as well as its conformity with the applicable policy and regulatory framework. It took into account the studies listed below. It also applied municipal site evaluation guidelines for waterfront development to support the proposed development setback from the high water mark (Assessment of Municipal Site Evaluation Guidelines for Waterfront Development in Eastern Ontario’s Lake Country, Hutchinson Environmental Sciences Ltd., April 10, 2014). Limited Hydrogeological Study and Terrain Analysis A Limited Hydrogeological Study and Terrain Analysis (Pinchin Ltd., November 20, 2020) was submitted in support of the rezoning application. The Hydrogeological Study concluded that the drilled well on the property is capable of providing an adequate “Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 2

Page 88 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

quantity of potable water for the proposed residential development. Also, that water quality meets the Ontario Drinking Water Standards, Objectives and Guidelines, with the exception of hardness. The recorded sodium levels in the well did not exceed the aesthetic objective but does require the local Medical Officer of Health to be notified. The Medical Officer of Health may communicate this information to local medical practitioners for their use with patients on sodium restricted diets. The Terrain Analysis concluded that there is adequate space for a sewage system in areas located more than 90 metres from the lakeshore. The Limited Hydrogeological Study and Terrain Analysis has been forwarded to the Municipality’s peer review consultants (Malroz Engineering and Groundworks Engineering). The results of the peer review will be shared with Council prior to considering a by-law for this application. Environmental Site Evaluation An Environmental Site Evaluation (Ecological Services, September 9, 2020) was submitted in support of the rezoning application. The report concluded that the proposed residential development would not have a negative impact on natural heritage features and their ecological functions, and that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the Provincial Policy Statement. The report included several recommendations for mitigation, as well as monitoring. The recommendations, in summary, are:

Locate the dwelling more than 30 metres from the highwater mark and beyond the top of the high, steep slope (i.e. at least 45 metres from the highwater mark as shown on the concept plan).
Install and maintain appropriate sediment control until construction is complete and shoreline and slope stabilization through native plantings has been established.
Native landscaping restoration is required along the shoreline and slope. The restoration work should be monitored by a certified arborist for planting survival. Plantings that do not survive should be replaced. The plantings should be monitored until vegetation cover is firmly established.
Any removal of woody vegetation (trees and shrubs) should occur outside the bird breeding season (April 1 to August 31). The Environmental Site Evaluation has been forwarded to Cataraqui Conservation for review and comment. The results of the review will be shared with Council prior to considering a by-law for this application. Drainage Brief A Drainage Brief (Forefront Engineering Inc., November 20, 2020) was submitted in support of the proposed development. The subject lands, as well as Lot 37 of the subdivision (also owned by the applicant), are subject to a drainage easement in favour of the Municipality. The purpose of the drainage easement is to convey runoff from

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 3

Page 89 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

Four Seasons Drive via a swale to a stormwater management pond and then via another swale to Loughborough Lake. The boat slip was constructed on the easement at the outlet of the swale at the lake. While a permit was obtained from Cataraqui Conservation for the work done to the shoreline to create the boat slip, permission was not sought from the Township to locate the boat slip at the outlet of the swale. When Township staff became aware of the construction, the Owner was advised that they needed to undertake the work to obtain an adequate alternate outlet on the subject property. The owner proposes to realign approximately 50 metres of the swale so that it outlets to the lake west (upstream) of the boat slip. The Drainage Brief provides design details for the realigned swale. Realignment of the swale would require realignment of the drainage easement. The Township, as the consent granting authority, can approve a realigned drainage easement subject to conditions including agreements registered on title (e.g. for use and maintenance). The Drainage Brief was peer reviewed by Ainley Group on behalf of the Municipality (December 24, 2020). Ainley Group recommended that a more detailed plan for construction and maintenance purposes be prepared, and that the plan include additional permanent erosion control measures. Also, that “as-built” plans be required following municipal review and acceptance of the works.

Department, Agency and Public Comments Public Services - The Director of Public Services provided verbal confirmation on December 15, 2020, that the department is generally satisfied with the proposal to realign the drainage easement. Building Department (Sewage System Review) staff will review the application following receipt of the peer review of the Limited Hydrogeological Study and Terrain Analysis. Comment will be shared with Council prior to considering a by-law for this application. Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks was not circulated the application as the property is a lot of record and the proposed setbacks from the high water mark exceed those required by the Township Official Plan. Cataraqui Conservation staff are reviewing the application and will provide comments for consideration prior to consideration of a by-law. Public Comments At the time of writing, no formal comments were received from the public. The intent of the public meeting is to receive comments from the public.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 4

Page 90 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

Under the Planning Act, a public meeting is required to be held to receive comments from citizens on the proposed rezoning. The province has provided direction that public meetings are able to be held virtually using technology such as Zoom to obtain public input on planning applications. The public meeting for application Z-20-15 will be a virtual public meeting.

Planning Analysis Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 The Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that Council decisions be “consistent with” the PPS. The PPS allows growth and development to be directed to rural lands, including residential development that is compatible with the rural landscape (section 1.1.5). Individual on-site sewage services and individual on-site water services (i.e. septic system and well) may be used provided that site conditions are suitable for the longterm provision of such services with no negative impacts (section 1.6.6.4). The Limited Hydrogeological Study and Terrain Analysis will be peer reviewed by consultants retained by the Municipality to determine whether the proposal is consistent with this direction of the PPS. In addition, section 2.2.2 of the PPS restricts development and site alteration near sensitive surface water features such that these features and their related hydrologic functions will be protected, improved or restored. At-capacity lake trout lakes, which includes the West Basin of Loughborough Lake, are sensitive surface water features. The Limited Hydrogeological Study and Terrain Analysis will be peer reviewed by consultants retained by the Municipality to determine whether the proposal is consistent with this direction of the PPS. The Township will also consult with Cataraqui Conservation on the applicable findings of the Environmental Site Evaluation. Section 3 of the PPS requires development and site alteration to generally be directed to areas that are not impacted by flooding and erosion hazards. The Township consults with Cataraqui Conservation on matters of natural hazards. Cataraqui Conservation will consider any natural hazards on the subject property and the impact to proposed development in their comments. County of Frontenac Official Plan, 2016 The County of Frontenac Official Plan sets out the general direction for planning and development by defining strategic goals, broad objectives and policies. Section 3 – Growth Management sets outs policies intended to help guide new development across the County as well as manage change at a regional level. The Rural Lands policies are meant to recognize the importance of rural areas for future growth and create guidelines for development that is sensitive to the surroundings.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 5

Page 91 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

Section 7 of the Official Plan speaks to the need to maintain the County’s environmental health which in turn benefits the economy and society. The Environmental Site Evaluation demonstrated that the proposed development would have no negative impacts on the identified natural heritage features nor on their ecological functions subject to mitigation measures. The proposed development is consistent with these directions of the County Official Plan. In accordance with the PPS, the County requires development and site alteration to generally be directed to areas that are not impacted by flooding and erosion hazards. The Township consults with Cataraqui Conservation on matters of natural hazards. Cataraqui Conservation. Cataraqui Conservation will address this topic in their comments on this application. Township of South Frontenac Official Plan, 2003 Limited Service Residential The subject lands are designated ‘Rural’ in the Official Plan on Schedule A. The type and amount of development on ‘Rural’ lands must maintain the rural character, natural heritage, and cultural landscape in the Township. The limited service residential policies allow the development of properties with frontage on a private road and frontage on a navigable waterway, or on a navigable waterway only, for single detached dwellings and seasonal dwellings that are serviced by private water and sewage systems. As indicated above, the Limited Hydrogeological Study and Terrain Analysis will be peer reviewed by consultants retained by the Municipality to determine if the zoning by-law amendment would be consistent with the Official Plan policies on limited service residential development. Lake Trout Lakes and Environmentally Sensitive Areas Section 5.2.8 of the Official Plan indicates that a lot of record on a highly sensitive (atcapacity) lake trout lake may be developed in accordance with the Official Plan policies on environmentally sensitive areas. These policies require a minimum setback of 30 metres from the highwater mark but suggest that a greater setback may be required depending on site specific conditions. These conditions include lands with steep slopes, minimal woody vegetation cover, thin soils and/or soils with poor phosphorus retention capability (section 5.2.7(b)). The Planning Justification Report applied municipal site evaluation guidelines for waterfront development to the subject property (Assessment of Municipal Site Evaluation Guidelines for Waterfront Development in Eastern Ontario’s Lake Country, Hutchinson Environmental Sciences Ltd., April 10, 2014). These site evaluation guidelines updated the “Rideau Lakes Carrying Capacities and Proposed Shoreland Development Policies” that are referenced in the Official Plan. The site evaluation “Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 6

Page 92 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

guideline calculation suggested that a minimum 40 metre setback from the highwater mark should be applied to the subject property. A 45 metre setback is proposed based on the recommendation of the Environmental Site Evaluation. The proposed setbacks comply with the policies of the Township Official Plan. Erosion Hazards The proposed dwelling would be located at the top of a high, steep slope based on the submitted concept sketch. It is unclear if this slope may be subject to shoreline erosion hazards, and should therefore be subjected to the minimum 15 metre setback from a top of bank required by section 5.8.2 of the Zoning By-law. Section 5.2.4 of the Official Plan specifies that development and site alteration will be directed away from lands which may be subject to shoreline erosion hazards, and that the Conservation Authority should be consulted. Cataraqui Conservation comments will consider the impact of any natural hazards on the subject property. Site Plan Control Township of South Frontenac Site Plan Control By-law No. 2003-25 applies to lands within 300 meters of a Sensitive Lake Trout Lake. Therefore, the development of this property would be subject to site plan control. The site plan agreement could address details for re-establishing the drainage outlet, the placement and maintenance of the septic system, as well as native landscaping restoration required along the shoreline and slope.

Conclusion There are several items that require further review and consideration before Council should consider a by-law to change the zone on the subject property from OSP-5 to RLSW-XX. It is recommended that South Frontenac Council defer making a decision on application Z-20-15 to receive and consider peer review, agency and public comments on the application.

Prepared by: Christine Woods, MCIP, RPP, Senior Planner Submitted/approved: Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP, Director of Development Services Approved by: Neil Carbone, CAO

Date of Site Visits: December 8 and 15, 2020 Attachments:

Location Map of Davidson Road at Mowoods Lane
Z-20-15 Zoning Amendment Sketch “Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 7

Attachment 1. Location Map

Legend Road Highway Major Road Secondary Road Ferry Route

Assessment Parcels Citations

1.8

0.92

1.8 Kilometers

Notes Z-20-15

Page 93 of 314

1: 36,112

Public Meeting Z-20-15 Applicant: Agent: Property:

Joseph Brice Forefront Engineering Inc. Part Block 39 on Plan 13M3 and Parts 7 to 9 on Reference Plan 13R18283 Davidson Road at Mowoods Lane Storrington District Tuesday, January 12, 2021 7:00 p.m. Virtual Public Meeting Page 94 of 314

South Frontenac Council

Public Meeting Statement • The purpose of this public meeting is to hear comments on Zoning By-Law Amendment application Z-20-15. • If a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions at a public meeting, or make written submissions to South Frontenac Township before the by-law is passed, the person or public body may not be added to the hearing of an appeal before the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal unless, in the opinion of the Tribunal, there are reasonable grounds to do so. • If you wish to be notified of the decision of Council in respect to the application, you must submit a written request to the Clerk via email at amaddocks@southfrontenac.net. This will also entitle you to be advised of a possible Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. • Anyone may appeal the decision to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal by filing with the Clerk within 20 days of the notice of decision.

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 95 of 314

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 96 of 314

• Close Public Meeting

Location

Davidson Road

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 97 of 314

2021-01-12

Location

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 98 of 314

2021-01-12

Location

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 99 of 314

2021-01-12

Proposal Boat slip

• Rezone from Open Space – Private Special Provision (OSP-5) to Limited Service Residential - Waterfront – Special Provision (RLSW-XX) • Enable residential development • Increased setbacks

Loughborough Lake

Mowoods Lane

2021-01-12

Site Plan Forefront Engineering

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 100 of 314

• Front yard • Highwater mark

Subject Property

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 101 of 314

Proposed building location

Subject Property

2021-01-12

Steep slope below building location Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 102 of 314

Lake and boat slip

Supporting Studies • Planning Justification Report • Site evaluation guidelines for waterfront development

• Limited Hydrogeological Study and Terrain Analysis • Adequate water quantity • Water quality meets Provincial standards

• Environmental Site Evaluation • Locate building beyond top of steep slope • Install erosion and sediment control • Native landscaping restoration required • Realign drainage swale and easement 2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 103 of 314

• Drainage Brief

Peer Review, Agency and Public Comments • Review and comments forthcoming •

Peer review consultants

•

Building Department

•

Cataraqui Conservation

• Public Services generally satisfied with proposal to realign drainage easement

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 104 of 314

• No public comments received to date

Policy Framework • Provincial Policy Statement • County of Frontenac Official Plan • Township of South Frontenac Official Plan • Servicing Limited Service Residential Development • Lake Trout Lake • Environmentally Sensitive Areas

2021-01-12

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 105 of 314

• Erosion Hazards

Site Plan Control • Address environmental policies • Details for re-establishing drainage swale and outlet • Placement and maintenance of septic system • Required native landscaping restoration

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 106 of 314

2021-01-12

Recommendation and Next Steps • It is recommended that South Frontenac Council defer making a decision on application Z-20-15 to receive and consider peer review, agency and public comments on the application. • Planning staff will bring forward a report providing a further recommendation and by-law to an upcoming Council meeting for consideration.

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 107 of 314

2021-01-12

Questions and Comments • Comments/Questions from Council • Comments from Applicant/Owner and Agent • Comments from the Public • Comments/Questions from Council

Public Meeting Z-20-15

Page 108 of 314

2021-01-12

N LI

R E T

.0 127 .0

128

EXISTING RESIDENTIAL

14 0. 0

.0 5 4

LOUGHBOROUGH LAKE

T A BO LIP S

SUBJECT SITE

#133

EXISTING WELL D SE PO SE O U R P HO

#3531

7.0

.0 148

5.0

13 3.

151 .0

13 2. 0

TOWNSHIP DRAINAGE EASEMENT INSTRUMENT NO. LT8889

KEY PLAN NTS

ANE) L E T A V I R P ( NE MOWOODS LA

13 7

13 8.

13 6. 0

0 4. 13

#4710

SEPTIC

0 1.

D AN

N LA

#3534

.0 149 .0 150

R PE

UR FO

E IN

L EE TR

NS O S EA

#95

0 3. 14

6 14

#4684

VE RI

NG TI IS EX

#113

2 10

#4648

BLOCK 39 REGISTERED PLAN 13M-3 TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

14 2.0

EXISTING OUTLET SWALE

#4622

LOUGHBOROUGH LAKE

LOUGHBOROUGH SHORES DRY STORMWATER DETENTION POND

LA MOWOODS

PROPOSED OUTLET SWALE REALIGNMENT AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SOUTH FRONTENAC TOWNSHIP

A W X. CK O A R B P T AP SE

ON RO A

.0 25

DA VID S

EXISTING EASEMENT TO BE ABANDONED AND RELEASED

.0 40

5.0m

Benchmark

NG I T S

141.0

#4648

0 7.

#3531

EXI

2.0

LI REE

D) OA

15 0.0

EXISTING RESIDENTIAL

U O F

Client

JOSEPH BRICE

VID

#3517

E V I

#3534

O S A

1329 Gardiners Road, Suite 210 Kingston, ON, Canada K7P 0L8 613.634.9009 tel. 1.888.884.9392 fax.

#4684

NR OA

D( PU BL

152.0

1.0

TR AV E

EASEMENT RELEASED INST. NO. LT47503

LOUGHBOROUGH SHORES SUBDIVISION

Date

Revision/Issue

No.

14 9.

PART OF BLOCK 39 PLAN 13M-3

Project

PLAN 13M3 PT BLOCK 39 AND RP;13R18283 ZONING STATISTICS Drawing

ZONING - OPEN SPACE (OSP 5)

#4710

101,020m2 199m 404m 45m 10m 0.76% 6m 45m 90m

Drawn by:

Checked by:

DJP

KMN

Approved by:

KMN

Date:

NOVEMBER 2020 Scale:

1:1000 ANSI D

Project No.

Drawing No.

Page 109 of 314

LOT AREA WATER FRONTAGE FRONT YARD REAR YARD INTERIOR SIDE YARD LOT COVERAGE BUILDING HEIGHT HIGHWATER MARK SETBACK MIN. SEPTIC SETBACK

ZONING AMENDMENT SKETCH

Davidson Road Application for: Zoning By-law Amendment, Z-20-15 Applicant: Joe Brice Page 110 of 314

January 12, 2021

Context ∕ Located on the south shoreline of Loughborough Lake, approx. 3.5 km southwest of Inverary Waterfront residential, estate residential, rural and agricultural area

∕

Dwelling types typically single detached dwellings 2

Page 111 of 314

∕

Subject Site ∕ The property is undeveloped, except for a dock and access to the water Topography of the site slopes downward toward the water

∕

Lot area of 10.1 hectares (25 acres)

∕

98 metres of discontinuous frontage on Davidson Road

∕

199 metres of water frontage on Loughborough Lake 3

Page 112 of 314

∕

County Official Plan ∕ Designated Rural Lands ∕

Intended to accommodate residential development on a limited scale

∕

Intended to preserve the open space, rural character, topography, landscape of the rural area, and promote rural living in a manner which is sensitive to the ecological balance

Page 113 of 314

Township Official Plan ∕ Designated Rural ∕

Intended to accommodate limited non-agricultural residential development, in the form of single detached dwellings, serviced by private water and sanitary sewage disposal

∕

Existing lot located on a highly sensitive Lake Trout Lake

Page 114 of 314

Current Zoning Open Space Private – Special Provision (OSP-5) Zone ∕ Permitted uses include those which currently exist on the subject site ∕

Does not permit the proposed single detached dwelling

Page 115 of 314

Intent of the Application ∕ Permit a one-storey single detached dwelling in the northern portion of the subject site ∕ Provide a 30-metre landscaped buffer along the shoreline with restored native landscaping ∕ Extensive landscaping and open space among the remainder of the site

Page 116 of 314

Proposed Zoning Limited Service Residential – Waterfront Special Provision (RLSW-X) Zone Per recommendations of the Hutchinson Calculation and the Environmental Site Evaluation: ∕ Increase the minimum highwater mark setback for the dwelling to 45 metres Increase the minimum highwater mark setback for the septic system to 90 metres

∕

All other parent provisions of the RLSW zone to apply 8

Page 117 of 314

∕

Summary – Good Land Use Planning •

Consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement; • Compatible rural development • Environmentally considerate development

•

Conforms to the County Official Plan and Township Official Plan as a compatible rural form of residential development.

•

Represents good land use planning. Page 118 of 314

Questions & Comments

Page 119 of 314

Concept Plan

Page 120 of 314 11

Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (RLSW-X) Provision Flooding and Shoreline Erosion Hazards (s. 5.8)

Requirement (RLSW) 2. no building or structure, other than a marine facility as defined in the by-law, or septic tank installation including the weeping tile field shall be located: (a) within 30 m horizontal of highwater mark. Additional setbacks up to 90 m may be required through a rezoning process;

Proposed (RLSW-X) (a) The proposed dwelling is setback 45 metres from the waterline and the proposed septic bed is located approx. 100 m from the waterline. A minimum setback of 45-metres is proposed.

Page 121 of 314

Page 122 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 17, 2020 Time: 7:00 PM Location: Electronic Participation

Meeting # 29 Present in Council Chambers: Mayor Ron Vandewal, Ray Leonard, Doug Morey, Alan Revill, Norm Roberts, Randy Ruttan, Ron Sleeth, Ross Sutherland Present via Electronic Participation: Pat Barr Staff Present in Council Chambers: Neil Carbone - Chief Administrative Officer, Claire Dodds - Director of Development Services, Louise Fragnito - Director of Corporate Services & Treasurer, Mark Segsworth - Director of Public Services, Angela Maddocks - Clerk 1.

Call to Order and Roll Call

The Clerk conducted the roll call as noted in the attendance listed above.

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-29-01 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Barr That the Council meeting of November 17, 2020 be called to order at 7:00 pm. Carried

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

Councillor Ruttan declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Agenda Item 9 a), support for the Tri-Board School Bus Operators.

Mayor Vandewal declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Agenda Item 9 a), support for the Tri-Board Bus Operators.

Councillor Leonard declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Agenda Item 13 a), the Accounts Payable and Payroll Listing.

Approval of Agenda

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-29-02 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That the agenda for the November 17, 2020 Council meeting be approved as presented. Carried

Scheduled Closed Session - not applicable (end of meeting)

Recess - not applicable

Delegations - not applicable

Page 123 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 17, 2020 7.

Public Meeting - not applicable

Approval of Minutes

November 3, 2020 Council Meeting Resolution No. 2020-29-03 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Roberts That the minutes of the November 3, 2020 Council meeting be approved. Carried

Business Arising from the Minutes

Notice of Motion - Support for Tri-Board School Bus Operators Association Mayor Vandewal turned the chair over to Deputy Mayor Sutherland as he had declared a pecuniary interest on this mater. Councillor Ruttan and Mayor Vandewal left the Council Chamber during this discussion. After the discussion, Mayor Vandewal resumed the meeting as chair. Resolution No. 2020-29-04 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That the Council of the Township of South Frontenac support the Tri-Board School Bus Operators Association in their efforts to convince Tri-Board Transportation of an alternative to the RFP procurement process with regard to continuing the high quality service with a diverse and experienced operator base without forcing small and medium sized local companies out of business and to recognize the importance of maintaining stability for school transportation in Frontenac County. Carried

Reports Requiring Action

Zoning By-law Amendment - Z-20-07 - Carl & Joan Sortberg - New Morin Road See By-law 2020-63

Zoning By-law Amendment -Z-20-11 - Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation & Erik Bermel - Pine Point Lane See By-law 2020-64

Community Safety Zones See By-law 2020-65

Update to Building By-law to include new fees for Part 8, Ontario Building Code See By-law 2020-66

2021 Budget - Garbage Collection User Pay System A recorded vote was requested by Councillor Roberts. Council unanimously voted against the resolution. Resolution No. 2020-29-05

Page 2 of 6

Page 124 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 17, 2020 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That Council support the transition to a user pay system for garbage collection in the Township as outlined in this report; and, That Council direct staff to incorporate the proposed user pay system in the 2021 budget, for implementation in the first quarter of 2021. Defeated f)

Deputy Mayor Appointment Change Resolution No. 2020-29-06 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Revill That for the purposes of appointing the next Deputy Mayor, that Council supports Option 2 and appoints Ray Leonard as the Deputy Mayor the term of December 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021; and That Council will review the appointment schedule in early May of 2021. Carried

Committee Meeting Minutes

Heritage Committee meeting held March 5, 2020 Resolution No. 2020-29-07 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Leonard That Council receives for information the minutes of the Heritage Committee meeting held March 5, 2020. Carried

By-laws

By-law 2020-63 - Rezone land from RU to RU-19, Concession 8 Part of Lots 1 and 2 Portland District (Sortberg) Resolution No. 2020-29-08 Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That the following by-laws be given first and second reading: • By-law 2020-63 • By-law 2020-64 • By-law 2020-65 • By-law 2020-66 Carried Resolution No. 2020-29-09 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Deputy Mayor Sutherland That By-law 2020-63, being a by-law to amend By-law 2003-75, as amended to rezone land from Rural (RU) to Rural-Special Provision (RU-59) on lands described as New Morin Road, Part of Lots 1 and 2, Concession 8, District of Portland be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried

By-law 2020-64 - Rezone land from RU to RLSW, Concessions 8 and 9, Lots 18 and 19 - Pine Point Lane Resolution No. 2020-29-10

Page 3 of 6

Page 125 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 17, 2020 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Barr That By-law 2020-64, being a by-law amend By-law 2003-75 as amended, to rezone land from Rural (RU) to Limited Service Residential - Waterfront (RLSW) on lands described as Part of Lots 18 and 19 Concessions 8 and 9, Storrington District, be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried c)

By-law 2020-65 - Community Safety Zones Mayor Vandewal was not supportive of this by-law as there were no statistics included in the report that merit having “community safety zones”. Deputy Mayor Sutherland felt the area for community safety zones should be broadened and the areas identified are not the only areas of concern. Resolution No. 2020-29-11 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Morey That By-law 2020-65, being a by-law to amend By-law 2000-01 as amended, to regulate the use of traffic, parking and stopping on highways and bridges in the Township of South Frontenac, to establish Community Safety zones and regulate speeds, be given third reading, signed and sealed.

Resolution No. 2020-29-12 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Roberts That this motion (2020-29-11) be deferred. Carried d)

By-law 2020-66 - Amend Building By-law 2014-26 to include fees for Part 8 On-Site Septic Systems Resolution No. 2020-29-13 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Barr That By-law 2020-66, being a by-law to amend By-law 2014-26, a by-law to regulate construction, demolition and charge of use permits for buildings, structures and other other related services within the Township of South Frontenac, be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried

Reports for Information

Accounts Payable and Payroll Listing

Information Items

City of Brantford, re: Bill 218 - Changes to the Municipal Elections Act

Notice of Motions - not applicable

Announcements/Statements by Councillors

Councillor Sleeth wished to acknowledge that Marjorie Shannon, a long time resident of Storrington District turns 100 tomorrow (November 18) and indicated he had been able to present her a certificate to recognize this milestone.

Mayor Vandewal thanked the outside workers at Public Services for cleaning

Page 4 of 6

Page 126 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 17, 2020 up the bale wrap pile at the Household Hazardous Depot. He also suggested that Council use some of their remaining budget to purchase masks with “South Frontenac” printed on them for staff this year. Council was supportive of this idea. 17.

Question of Clarity (from the public on outcome of agenda items) - none

Closed Session

Resolution: Council will move into a “Closed Session” as permitted by the Municipal Act, Section 239.2 (b) to discuss personal matters about identifiable individuals, including municipal or local board employees, and (d) labour relations or employee negotiations by receiving a verbal report from the CAO regarding potential organizational restructuring and succession planning. (This was the same matter scheduled for November, 10, 2020 however there was not enough time at that meeting to discuss this topic.) Resolution No. 2020-29-14 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council move into Closed Session as permitted by the Municipal Act, Section 239.2. (b) to discuss personal matters about identifiable individuals, including municipal or local board employees, and d) to discuss labour relations or employee negotiations by receiving a report form the CAO regarding potential organizational restructuring and succession planning. Carried

Potential Organizational Restructuring and Succession Planning

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-29-15 Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Roberts That Council move out of closed session. Carried

Confirmatory By-law

By-law 2020-67 Resolution No. 2020-29-16 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That By-law 2020-67, being a by-law to confirm generally previous actions of the Council of the Township of South Frontenac, be given first and second reading this 17 day of November 2020. Carried Resolution No. 2020-29-17 Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Deputy Mayor Sutherland That By-law 2020-67, being the confirmatory by-law, be given third reading, signed and sealed this 17 day of November 2020. Carried

Page 5 of 6

Page 127 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 17, 2020 20.

Adjournment

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-29-18 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Roberts That the Council meeting of November 17, 2020 be adjourned at 8:56 p.m. Carried

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 6 of 6

Page 128 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 24, 2020 Time: 6:45 PM Location: Electronic Participation/Council Chambers

Meeting # 30 Council Present in Council Chambers: Mayor Ron Vandewal, Ray Leonard, Doug Morey, Alan Revill, Norm Roberts, Randy Ruttan, Ron Sleeth, Ross Sutherland Council Present via Electronic Participation: Pat Barr Staff Present in Council Chambers: Neil Carbone - 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.

Call to Order /Roll Call

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-32-01 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Leonard That the Special Council meeting of November 24, 2020 be called to order at 6:45 p.m. Carried

Amend Procedural By-law

Resolution - Suspend the rules of the Procedural By-law to allow for a Special Council meeting. Resolution No. 2020-32-02 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Barr That Council suspend the rules of the Procedural By-law 2017-76 to permit a Special Council meeting on the fourth Tuesday of the month. Carried

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

There were no declarations.

Approval of Agenda

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-32-03 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That the agenda for the Special Council meeting of November 24, 2020 be approved. Carried

Page 129 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 24, 2020 5

Reports Requiring Action

Amendment to By-law 2020-54 Besides the red highlighted amendments in the By-law, Council had questions about the hours of burning and that this by-law has created a lot of confusion in the community. There was also concerns expressed about prohibiting the burning of brush piles in the winter. Mayor Vandewal requested a recorded vote on the motion to reconsider which requires 2/3 majority of Council to do so. All members of Council voted in favour of brining the by-law back for reconsideration. See Resolution #202033-06. Resolution No. 2020-32-04 Moved by Deputy Mayor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council approve the amendments to By-law 2020-54, being a by-law to regular burning in the Township, as indicated in the attachment to the report.

Resolution No. 2020-32-05 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That this motion be deferred (Resolution # 2020-33-04). (This motion was temporarily withdrawn so that further discussion could take place. Both Councilor Revill and Councillor Ruttan agreed to wtihdraw their motion to defer entirely) Withdrawn Resolution No. 2020-32-06 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Deputy Mayor Sutherland That By-law 2020-54 be brought back to Council to reconsider. Carried 6

By-laws - not applicable

Confirmatory By-law

By-law 2020-68 Resolution No. 2020-32-07 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That By-law 2020-68, being a by-law to confirm generally previous actions of the Council of the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac, be given first and second reading this 24 day of November, 2020. Carried Resolution No. 2020-32-08 Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Roberts That By-law 2020-68, being the confirmatory by-law, be given third reading, signed and sealed this 24 day of November 2020. Carried

Adjournment:

Resolution

Page 2 of 3

Page 130 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 24, 2020 Resolution No. 2020-32-09 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That the Special Council meeting of November 24, 2020 be adjourned at 7:09 p.m. Carried

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 3 of 3

Page 131 of 314

Minutes of Committee of the Whole November 24, 2020

Meeting # 31 Time: 7:13 pm Location: Council Chambers Council Present in Council Chambers: Mayor Ron Vandewal, Ray Leonard, Doug Morey, Alan Revill, Norm Roberts, Randy Ruttan, Ron Sleeth, Ross Sutherland Council Present via Electronic Participation: Pat Barr Staff Present in Council Chambers: Neil Carbone - Chief Administrative Officer, Angela Maddocks - Clerk, Louise Fragnito - Director of Corporate Services and Treasurer, Claire Dodds - Director of Development Services, Mark Segsworth - Director of Public Services

Call to Order and Roll Call

Motion The Clerk conducted the roll call and the attendance is noted above. Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That the Committee of the Whole meeting be called to order at 7:13 p.m. Carried

Approval of Agenda

Motion Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That the agenda for the November 24, 2020 Committee of the Whole meeting be approved as presented. Carried

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

There were no declarations.

Scheduled Closed Session ( at the end of the agenda)

Public Meeting - not applicable

Delegations - not applicable

Reports Requiring Direction

Non-Public Services - Capital Presentation

Page 132 of 314 Committee of the Whole November 24, 2020 Neil Carbone explained that for 2021 there are individual capital detail sheets included for each of the capital projects being proposed for every department. These sheets will provide valuable information about a project’s scope, rationale, duration, total cost, current cost and past expenses. All projects have been considered in terms of their relationship to Council’s Strategic Plan and whether they are associated with the township’s Growth, Asset Renewal or a Service Level Change. Staff provided clarity on questions related to the new detail sheets with respect to carryovers and funding sources. Council requested clarity on why a “Servicing Options Study’ was included. Mr. Carbone explained that private and communal servicing may not always be the most cost effective or flexible servicing approach for desired forms of development. Recent changes in the Provincial Policy Statement requires consideration of servicing options beyond private and communal. This study will assist with the Official Plan and growth studies. Council questioned the $100,000 amount associated with this study. Concerns were expressed about the 2500 gallon tanker with a pump when there is already difficult for these vehicles to get down most private lanes. Further rationale for the mechanical support vehicle and the rapid response vehicles was requested by Council. They questioned the selling/disposal of existing equipment and the proceeds of $75,000 as they felt this was not realistic. There were concerns expressed about the purchase of 100 suits for Wildland Firefighting when not all volunteers would not be attending a wildfire at any given time. It was confirmed that currently firefighters are wearing coveralls and bunker gear that is too restrictive and hot to wear for these types of fires. There was discussion about what some of the equipment actually was used for such as the accountability equipment and the blowers. b)

2021 Budget Support for Community COVID Impacts Council was concerned about the qualifications of this program. They felt it should be a targeted approach and not administered with “broad strokes”. Council felt the financial support should be distributed to people who have not received other funding and wanted more clarity on where/who this funding would go to. Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That the Committee of the Whole support the inclusion of $250,000 in the 2021 operating budget funded from the Township’s working reserve, to be directed to residents and businesses which have been negatively impacted by the COVID19 pandemic, via local social services and business support agencies, through programs to be determined at a later date. Carried

Reports for Information - not applicable

Rise & Report from Committees of Council

Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority Councillor Revill spoke to the challenges that all conservation authorities are facing now about changes to the Conservation Authorities Act as outlined in 10 a) on this agenda.

Quinte Conservation Authority

Page 2 of 4

Page 133 of 314 Committee of the Whole November 24, 2020 Councillor Roberts reported that Quinte is also challenged with these changes. c)

Rideau Valley Conservation Authority Councillor Barr reported that RVCA is also dealing with how to address these changes. They are currently focused on their 2021 budget.

Information Items

Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and Planning Act which affect Conservation Authorities

Notice of Motions

Councillor Revill served a “Notice of Motion” to support local conservation authorities and the removal of Section 6 of the Bill. It was clarified that there would need to be a Procedural By-law change to address this issue in a Special Council meeting to deal with this matter prior to December 1.

Announcements/Statements by Councillors

There were no announcements or statements from Councillors.

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

There were no questions of clarity.

Closed Session

Motion - Move into Closed Session in accordance with Section 239(2)(d) labour relations or employee negotiations; to receive a report regarding in-house winter control options. Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Roberts That Committee of the Whole move into Closed Session in accordance with Section 239.2 (d) labour relations or employee negotiations; to receive a report regarding in-house winter control options. Carried

Motion - Move out of Closed Session Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Deputy Mayor Sutherland That Committee of the Whole move out of closed session. Carried

Adjournment

Motion Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That the Committee of the Whole meeting be adjourned at 9:00 pm. Carried

Page 3 of 4

Page 134 of 314 Committee of the Whole November 24, 2020

Page 4 of 4

Page 135 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 24, 2020 Time: 9:00 PM Location: Council Chambers

Meeting # 32 Present in Council Chambers: Mayor Ron Vandewal, Ray Leonard, Doug Morey, Alan Revill, Norm Roberts, Randy Ruttan, Ron Sleeth, Ross Sutherland Present via Electronic Participation: Pat Barr Staff Present in Council Chambers: Neil Carbone - Chief Administrative Officer, Angela Maddocks- Clerk, Louise Fragnito - Director of Corporate Services and Treasurer 1.

Call to Order

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-32-01 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That a Special Council meeting on November 24, 2020 be called to order at 9:00 pm. Carried

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

There were no declarations.

Amend Procedural By-law

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-32-02 Moved by Councillor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Roberts That the rules of the Procedural By-law 2017-76 be suspended to allow for an unadvertised Special Council Meeting that deals with a time sensitive “Notice of Motion” raised at the previous Committee of the Whole meeting regarding amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act as outlined in Bill 229. Carried

Notice of Motions

Bill 229 - Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act Resolution No. 2020-32-03 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Revill “WHEREAS the Province has introduced Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID 19 Act - Schedule 6 – Conservation Authorities Act; and

Page 136 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 24, 2020 WHEREAS municipalities believe that the appointment of municipal representatives on CA Boards should be a municipal decision; and the Chair and Vice Chair of the CA Board should be duly elected; and WHEREAS changes to the legislation will create more red tape and costs for the conservation authorities, and their municipal partners, and potentially result in delays in the development approval process; and WHEREAS municipalities require a longer transition time to put in place agreements with conservation authorities for non-mandatory programs; and WHEREAS the municipalities in our three watersheds value and rely on the natural habitats and water resources within our jurisdiction for the economic health and well-being of residents and our communities; and WHEREAS we rely on the watershed expertise provided by local conservation authorities to protect residents, property and local natural resources on a watershed basis by regulating development, undertaking watershed scale studies and planning, and engaging in reviews of applications submitted under the Planning Act. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:

THAT the Province of Ontario delay enactment of clauses affecting municipal concerns
THAT the Province of Ontario provides a longer transition period up to December 2022 for non-mandatory programs to enable coordination of CAmunicipal budget processes
THAT the Province respects the current conservation authority/municipal relationships
AND THAT the Province of Ontario work with conservation authorities to address concerns by repealing and/or amending changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and the Planning Act. Carried

Confirmatory By-law

By-law 2020-69 Resolution No. 2020-32-04 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That By-law 2020-69, being a by-law to confirm generally previous actions of the Council of the Township of South Frontenac, be given first and second reading this 24 day of November, 2020. Carried Resolution No. 2020-32-05 Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Deputy Mayor Sutherland That By-law 2020-69, 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 24 day of November, 2020. Carried

Adjournment

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-32-06 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That the Special Council meeting of November 24, 2020 be adjourned at 9:03 pm. Carried

Page 2 of 3

Page 137 of 314 Minutes of Council November, 24, 2020

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks. Clerk

Page 3 of 3

Page 138 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 1, 2020 Time: 7:00 PM Location: Electronic Participation

Meeting # 33 Council Members Present in Council Chambers: Mayor Ron Vandewal, Ray Leonard, Alan Revill, Norm Roberts, Randy Ruttan, Ron Sleeth, Ross Sutherland Present Via Electronic Participation: Pat Barr, Doug Morey Staff Present in Council Chambers: Claire Dodds - Director of Development Services/Acting CAO, Angela Maddocks - Clerk, Louise Fragnito - Director of Corporate Services & Treasurer, Darcy Knott - Director of Fire and Emergency Services, Mark Segsworth - Director of Public Services , Christie Woods - Senior Planner, Anna Geladi

Planner

Call to Order and Roll Call

Resolution The Clerk conducted the roll call as outlined in the attendance below. Resolution No. 2020-33-01 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That the Council meeting of December 1, 2020 be called to order at 7:00 p.m. Carried

Declaration of Office - Deputy Mayor

Councillor Leonard took the “Declaration of Office” to commence his term as Deputy Mayor from December 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021.

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

There were no declarations reported.

Approval of Agenda

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-33-02 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Barr That the agenda for the December 1, 2020 Council meeting be approved. Carried

Scheduled Closed Session - not applicable

Recess - not applicable

Delegations - not applicable

Page 139 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 1, 2020 8.

Public Meeting

Resolution - Open Public Meeting and Statement Resolution No. 2020-33-03 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Deputy Mayor Leonard That a public meeting be held to allow for input into applications for Zoning Bylaw Amendments, file #’s Z-20-09, Z-20-10 and Z-20-12. Carried

Z-20-09 - Con 11, Part Lot 7, Portland District - Rezone from (RU) Rural to (RLSW) Limited Services Residential - Waterfront - Silver Rock Lane Anna Geladi presented the report regarding this application noting that this a condition of consent application S-29-20-P to create a waterfront residential lot on Silver Rock Lane, with provisional approval granted subject to conditions on November 6, 2020. One of these conditions included the requirement for the severed parcel be rezoned from Rural (RU) zone to Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) zone to recognize this new waterfront lot is accessed via a private lane. The intent of the Limited Service Residential Waterfront Zone is to recognize residential development on private lanes. In a Limited Service Residential Waterfront Zone, the RLSW zoning states that there is no commitment or requirement by the municipality to assume responsibility for ownership or maintenance of any private lane. Due to road condition of privately maintained roads, there is no commitment or requirement by the municipality to ensure that emergency vehicles are able to access privately owned roads. Quinte Conservation and KFL&A Public Health confirmed that they did not need to be circulated the rezoning application as they were circulated on the consent application. These agencies had no objections to the approval of the consent application that resulted in the creation of the subject property. At the time of writing, no formal comments have been received from the public. The intent of the public meeting is to receive comments from the public. Ms. Geladi noted that this proposal is consistent with this direction of the Provincial Policy Statement, the direction of the County Official Plan. With respect to the Township Official Plan, it was noted that little Mud Lake contains a large, unevaluated wetland. A preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment (section 5.2.11) was not required by Township Staff, in consultation with Quinte Conservation Staff, since there is a building envelope on the severed parcel beyond the required minimum 30 metre setback from the high water mark of Little Mud Lake and the wetland. The provisional approval of the consent application requires a development agreement to be registered on title. The development agreement will include provisions about maintaining a vegetative buffer from the wetland and implementing best management practices during construction. Ontario Regulation 319/09, Quinte Conservation’s regulation on development, interference with wetlands, and alterations to shorelines and watercourses, also includes requirements that can ensure that the lands within 30 metres of the wetland are conserved. She further noted that upon review of this re-zoning application, it was noted by staff that the retained parcel is also zoned Rural and relies on access via a private lane (Silver Rock Lane) as it is separated by an unopened road allowance from the travelled portion of Hinchinbrooke Road North. The retained parcel is currently developed with a single detached dwelling and associated septic system. This development occurred prior to the passing of our current Township Zoning By-law. For the same reasons that Staff recommend the severed parcel be re-zoned, it is recommended that Council

Page 2 of 9

Page 140 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 1, 2020 use their authority under section 34(17) of the Planning Act to extend the RLSW zoning to the retained parcel without need for further public circulation. There were no comments from Council or the public. c)

Z-20-10 - Con 2 Part of Lot 4, Loughborough District - Rezone from (RU) Rural to (RU-60) Rural - Special Provision - 3708 Stage Coach Rd. Anna Geladi provided an overview of this application noting that the subject property (municipally known as 3708 Stage Coach Road) is subject to consent application S-28-20-L to create one new residential parcel. Provisional approval of this application was granted subject to conditions on October 30, 2020 and a condition of the provisional approval requires the subject lands (severed parcel) to be rezoned to a site-specific zone that will require a dwelling to be set back a minimum 112 metres (367 feet) from the barn at 3654 Stage Coach Road. The subject lands (severed parcel) is bordered by the proposed retained lot (municipally known as 3708 Stage Coach Road) to the north and east, a neighbouring lot to the south, and Stage Coach Road to the west. As part of the consent review, staff calculated Minimum Distance Separation (MDS I) setbacks for neighbouring livestock barns. There are two barns located at 3654 Stage Coach Road. Staff calculated MDS I Setbacks using the closest location of the barns and a total capacity of both barns to house 12 horses. The required separation distance is 112 metres (367 feet) between the proposed residential lot and the closest barn at 3654 Stage Coach Road. The actual separation distance is only 92 metres (302 feet). Staff reviewed the size of the severed parcel and determined that there is a 0.5 hectare building envelope that can be accommodated outside of the required 112 metre (367 feet) separation distance which complies with the MDS guidelines. A site-specific Rural zone is required to ensure that any dwelling will be set back a minimum of 112 metres (367 feet) from the closest barn at 3654 Stage Coach Road. KFL&A Public Health had no objection to the approval of Consent Application S-28-20-L. The rezoning application was not circulated to Public Health given its scope. She noted that a public comment was received on the consent application with respect to MDS I calculations. The owners of 3654 Stage Coach Road had concerns about how MDS would be calculated for their property and the impact it would have on their ability to expand. The comment was resolved prior to the provisional approval of the consent, and through the condition requiring the severed parcel (subject lands) to be rezoned to ensure a new dwelling on the severed lot would be constructed at a minimum setback of 112 metres (367 feet) from the closest barn on 3654 Stage Coach Road. At the time of writing, no comments on the rezoning application have been received from the public. KFL&A Public Health had no objection to the approval of Consent Application S-28-20-L. The rezoning application was not circulated to Public Health given its scope. The proposed development is consistent with these directions of the PPS. The proposed development is consistent with the direction of the County Official Plan and is consistent with policies that apply to new lot creation and non-farm development near livestock facilities under the Townships Official Plan. Councillor Sutherland sought clarity on the MDS calculations, specifically constraints on the farm expansion. Anna Geladi explained that MDS 1 applies when new lots are created. Currently the existing farm houses 6 horses the capacity of the barn allows for 12, any expansion would be subject to MDS 2 that would be considered at the time of expansion of existing barns.

Page 3 of 9

Page 141 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 1, 2020 Mayor Vandewal asked if MDS for horses is different that for cows. Anna Geladi explained that the calculation is based on nutrient units which is calculated differently for each type of animal. Councillor Revill noted that the calculation is different for horses, cows and pigs. Deputy Mayor Leonard asked for clarity, if the current horse farmer were to sell the farm to a dairy or a beef farmer they would the be limited. Ms. Geladi explained that the calculation would be based on MDS 2 guidelines as the lot has already been created. There were no comments from the public. d)

Z-20-12 - Rezone from (RW) Waterfront Residential to (RLSW-127) Limited Service Residential - Waterfront - 1012 Hill Lane (Loughborough District) Christine Woods provided an overview of this application. The subject property is a 5156 square metre (1.3 acre) lot of record that is part of a 1968 plan of subdivision. The property has frontage on Eel Bay of Sydenham Lake. This portion of the bay is a provincially significant wetland. The property abuts an unopened road allowance. This road allowance contains Hill Lane, which is a private lane. The property does not appear to have legal access over the road allowance to the lane. The subject property is located on a peninsula that consists of a high, steep bedrock outcrop. The peninsula is 65 metres wide at the widest spot. The perimeter of the peninsula is tree covered. A cleared plateau at the top of the outcrop is approximately 5 metres above Sydenham Lake. There is little to no soil on the plateau. There is an existing gazebo and deck at the southwest end of the property, at the top of bank, approximately 10.5 metres from the highwater mark. The Owner proposes to construct a 187.6 square metre (2019 square foot) dwelling with a loft and an attached garage. A sewage system with Level IV treatment would be installed south of the dwelling. Ms Woods further explained that the Owner has requested a zoning by-law amendment to change the zoning on the subject property to Limited Service Residential – Waterfront (RLSW) which is a zone that is applicable to properties that have frontage on a private lane and/or a navigable waterway (e.g. water access only). The special provision (RLSW127) is required to permit the proposed development with variations from the standard RLSW zone provisions as well as general provisions. The proposed development requires variations from the front yard depth and setbacks from the high water mark and floodline provisions of the RLSW zone, and from the setback from the top of bank. The application also requested that the amendment recognize the existing undersized lot area and reduced frontage of the property, as well as recognize the location and setbacks of the existing gazebo and deck. An Environmental Impact Assessment (Ecological Services, July 27, 2020) was submitted in support of the rezoning application and it identified that the subject lands contain significant wildlife habitat and are within the 120 metre adjacent lands to a provincially significant wetland and to fish habitat. The report demonstrated that the proposed development would have no negative impacts on the features nor on their ecological functions subject to several mitigation measures. Comments from the Cataraqui Conservation Authority have not been received to date. KFL&A Public Health indicated on November 16, 2020, that it has no objections to the proposed zoning by-law amendment following receipt of additional information on the sewage system design. With respect to the Provincial Policy Statement, the EIA demonstrated that the proposed development would have no negative impacts on the features nor on their

Page 4 of 9

Page 142 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 1, 2020 ecological functions subject to mitigation measures. The proposed development is consistent with these directions of the PPS The proposed development is consistent with these directions of the County Official Plan which requires development and site alteration to generally be directed to areas that are not impacted by flooding and erosion hazards. The Township consults with Cataraqui Conservation on matters of natural hazards. Cataraqui Conservation has yet to provide comment on this application. This zoning by-law amendment as it relates to the dwelling and sewage system would be consistent with the Township’s Official Plan policies on environmentally sensitive areas. The existing gazebo and deck are located at the top of bank of a high, steep slope (i.e. zero metre setback from top of bank), and therefore may be on lands that are subject to shoreline erosion hazards. The request to recognize the location and setbacks of the existing gazebo and deck should be revisited following receipt of comments from Cataraqui Conservation. A site plan agreement is required to ensure that the environmental policies of the Township are addressed to the satisfaction of Council, as the Planning Act does not permit conditions to be attached to a decision on a zoning by-law amendment application. This agreement is also required to implement the recommendations of the EIA. Ms. Woods noted that there is a property access issue , the property abuts an unopened road allowance. It does not have frontage on a private lane or assumed public road. With the proper zoning in place, the Owner would still need to address the Zoning By-law provisions regarding access to a property before a building permit could be issued (section 5.25.3). The Zoning By-law suggests that this should be accomplished by the Owner entering into a license agreement with the Township for use of the unopened road allowance. Another option that could be considered to provide more permanent access is for Council to consider selling a portion of the road allowance to the Owner to provide clear access and frontage on Hill Lane. This arrangement would be a more permanent solution to access than a license agreement as a license agreement is not transferrable to a new purchaser. A challenge that would need to be considered and addressed if Council considered transferring the road allowance is that there are existing buildings on neighbouring properties which appear to be encroaching on the road allowance. There are several items that require further review and consideration before Council is asked to pass a by-law to change the zone on the subject property from RW to RLSW-127. Councillor Sutherland understood the recommendation for deferral, but with the relocation of the road allowance he asked if there was actual road allowance on the bay. Public access to Eel Bay should be considered. He questioned the lot coverage calculation. He questioned the turtle exclusion fencing and if there were permits issued for the gazebo and deck as they both lie within 10 metres of a provincially significant wetland and suggested that they should be removed as a condition. Ms. Woods indicated that the exact location of the road allowance would need to be determined through a survey. The lot coverage calculation was completed and she confirmed that it is less than 5%. The turtle nesting occurs on the slope and on the plateau and the purpose of the fencing is to keep the turtles from nesting during the construction period and could be removed afterwards. There is no evidence of a building permit being obtained for the existing structures on the property.

Page 5 of 9

Page 143 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 1, 2020 Mayor Vandewal was not in support of issuing a licensing agreement for access. He felt it should be dealt with by closing the road allowance. Tess Gilchrist, agent for the owner from IBI Group indicated that they are happy to work with Council and staff to resolve the concerns raised. With respect to access, at the time these parcels were created through the plan of subdivision, the parcel that is now owned by the township (in the centre) provides access to Hill Lane was always intended to provide access to this parcel it was simply that this property was not developed at that time and therefore was not extended to this parcel. She noted that they will be interested in discussing and addressing the mitigation measures raised in the EIA and await the comments from the Conservation Authority. Councillor Morey noted there is not very much soil on the top of this property and it appears like there has been tree removal and he questioned how the tertiary septic system would be placed at the top of this hill along with a leaching bed in such a small area. Ms. Woods indicated that the sewage system would be located to the south where there is room and that the system will be designed by an engineer who specializes in sewage systems. The system will have a Level 4 system that ensures water quality is being met. Joanne Saunders (attending virtually) had no objection to the property being developed but as an adjacent property owner she agreed that the lane was always intended to be there. The mapping would need to be changed to more accurately reflect her lot line. e)

Resolution - Close Public Meeting Resolution No. 2020-33-04 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Sutherland That having provided an opportunity for public input, the public meeting be closed. Carried

Approval of Minutes - not applicable

Business Arising from the Minutes - not applicable

Reports Requiring Action

2020 Private Lane Upgrading Assistance Resolution No. 2020-33-05 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Revill That Council approve payments totaling $100,083.53 as outlined in the Director of Public Services report dated December 1, 2020 for the 2020 Private Lane Upgrading Assistance Program; and That the balance of available funds in the amount of $7181.14 be carried over to the 2021 Private Lane Upgrading Assistance Program. Carried

Capital Budget Re-Allocation Mayor Vandewal requested a recorded vote on this resolution. (Councillor Barr was not connected via electronic participation at the time the vote was taken).

Page 6 of 9

Page 144 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 1, 2020 Councillor Revill, Councillor Ruttan, Councillor Sleeth and Councillor Sutherland voted in favour of the resolution. Deputy Mayor Leonard, Councillor Morey, Councillor Roberts and Mayor Vandewal voted against the resolution. The tie vote resulted in the resolution being lost.

Resolution No. 2020-33-06 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council re-allocate $536,000 of unexpended funds from the Sunbury Village Project ($140,000), 2020 Hard Surface Preservation ($116,000), Petworth Culvert Project ($36,000) and 2019 Contingency funds ($244,000), to fund 2020 cost overruns for the Green Bay Causeway and North Shore Road projects. Lost c)

SP-04-20-S - 1809505 Ontario Limited - Application for Site Plan Control 3832 Davidson Road See By-law 2020-70

Committee Meeting Minutes

Bellrock Community Hall Committee meeting held October 15, 2020

Police Services Board meeting held October 22, 2020 Councillor Sutherland requested more information on the “e-ticketing” system. Resolution No. 2020-33-07 Moved by Deputy Mayor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That Council receives for information the minutes of the following committee meetings: • Police Services Board meeting held October 22, 2020 • Bellrock Community Hall Committee meeting held October 15, 2020. Carried

By-laws

By-law 2020-70 - Site Plan Control Agreement - 3832 Davidson Road Resolution No. 2020-33-08 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That By-law 2020-70 be given first and second reading. Carried Resolution No. 2020-33-09 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Roberts That By-law 2020-70, 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 1809505 Ontario Limited, be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried

Reports for Information

Fire Department Capital Budget 1:07:34 on recording.

Page 7 of 9

Page 145 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 1, 2020 Darcy Knott responded to questions that Council had with regard to vehicle replacement , volunteer recruitment, 1500 vs. 2500 gallon tanker and his rationale for some of the budget items. b)

Fleet Capital Asset Management Plan

Information Items

Dr. Stefan Pehringer, Austrian Ambassador to Canada, re: Support for Stocksport in South Frontenac

Notice of Motions - not applicable

Announcements/Statements by Councillors

Councillor Sutherland asked the Acting CAO about the availability of mapping that would indicate the existing levels of broadband service. He had recently participated in a webinar offered by ROMA regarding resource for broadband connectivity that he felt was very informative. Claire Dodds indicated that she would ensure that Mr. Carbone about an update on this increasingly important initiative. Councillor Ruttan asked about clarity in the difference between 4G technology and 5G.

Councillor Sleeth asked the Director of Public Services about the start time for the Public Services Committee tour on Friday.

Mayor Vandewal noted the upcoming Santa Claus Parade in Battersea (not publicly advertised as it’s meant mainly for village residents due to pandemic restrictions) and the Parade of Lights drive through at Centennial Park on December 12 starting at 5:30 pm

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

Wilma Kenny sought clarity from Darcy Knott about the difference between the 1500 gal and 2500 gal tanker trucks and how many lanes could this tanker access. Mr. Knott noted that larger apparatuses cannot currently access private lanes whether it be a 1500 gallon or 2500 gallon.

Closed Session - not applicable

Confirmatory By-law

By-law 2020-71 Resolution No. 2020-33-10 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Deputy Mayor Leonard That By-law 2020-71, being a by-law to confirm generally previous actions of the Council of the Township of South Frontenac be given first and second reading this 1 day of December, 2020. Carried Resolution No. 2020-33-11 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Sutherland

Page 8 of 9

Page 146 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 1, 2020 That By-law 2020-71, being the confirmatory by-law, be given third reading, signed and sealed this 1 day of December, 2020. Carried 21.

Adjournment

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-33-12 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Morey That the December 1, 2020 Council meeting be adjourned at 8:25 pm. Carried

Ron Vandewal , Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 9 of 9

Page 147 of 314

Minutes of Committee of the Whole December 8, 2020

Time: 7:00 PM Location: Council Chambers/Electronic Participation Meeting # 34 Council Present in Council Chambers: Mayor Ron Vandewal, Ray Leonard, Doug Morey, Alan Revill, Norm Roberts, Randy Ruttan, Ron Sleeth, Ross Sutherland Council Present via Electronic Participation: Pat Barr Staff Present in Council Chambers: Neil Carbone - Chief Administrative Officer, Angela Maddocks - Clerk, Jamie Brash - Facilities and Solid Waste Supervisor, Claire Dodds - Director of Development Services, Louise Fragnito - Director of Corporate Services & Treasurer, Brian Kirk - Operations Supervisor, Darcy Knott - Director of Fire and Emergency Services, Tim Laprade - Arena and Recreation Supervisor, Mark Segsworth - Director of Public Services 1.

Call to Order/Roll Call

Motion Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Deputy Mayor Leonard That the Committee of the Whole meeting be called to order at 7:00 p.m. Carried

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

There were no declarations reported.

Approval of Agenda

Motion Moved by Councillor Barr Seconded by Councillor Sutherland That the agenda for the December 8, 2020 Committee of the Whole meeting be approved as presented. Carried

Scheduled Closed Session - not applicable

Recess - not applicable

Public Meeting - not applicable

Delegations

Asset Management Presentation Louise Fragnito, Director of Corporate Services & Treasurer provided an overview of “Asset Management” that indicated how long-term financial planning, budgeting processes and strategic planning are all inter-related and a part of the asset management process.

Page 148 of 314 Committee of the Whole December 8, 2020 8.

Reports Requiring Direction

Public Services - Capital Budget Line 38 - Communication Tower/Relocation - This amount seemed high, what else is incorporated in this amount. Mark Segsworth indicated that it would more accurately reflected as Keeley Road Renovations - Phase 2. Line 61 - Tractors - Mowers X 2 - should an industrial style snow blower be incorporated into this price at the same time? Staff are talking to local suppliers about purchase and delivery time lines. We need to ensure that the equipment is heavy enough and capable enough of the work it will be required to do. Line 39 - Accessible Entrance Ramp and Front Step at Town Hall - Are there other options, is this going to be overbuilt? ( like the guiderail system at Bedford Hall) Line 44 - Bedford Sand Dome - fabric structure does not seem to be adequate or be standing up. Some of them have been covered under warranty, steel roof would be ideal. Line 47 - Administration Office Location Expansion Feasibility Study - Is this still necessary since Keeley site has been renovated to provide additional space. Recreation Projects - Should some or all of these items be put on hold until the Recreation Master Plan is completed. The $698,000 is no longer out of the Parkland Reserve. Line 54 - Battersea Park Court - this number should be revised to $38,000 to address fencing requirements. The $350,000 for Storrington Centre is a carry over from previous years and is not accurately reflected in the $698,000.00. Line 40 - New Firehall (replacing Station 8) - is it feasible to have built in 2021? Using the same drawings as the Perth Road Hall except for extending the bay. The drawings are owned by the architect and this needs to be considered if they are used again. Council recalled that these drawings were the “model/template” to move forward with for future new constructions. Linear Asset Construction Schedule Bedford Road - why has it been moved to 2023? The portion from Desert Lake Road to Lady Bush Lane doesn’t hold patching anymore - what is considered “failure”? Hinchinbrooke Road - Can this project be done in 2021? It was acknowledged that the approach taken (to pulverize beforehand) was wrong. The list is not exhaustive, each year there are unknowns with respect to hard surface preservation, whether it be micro-surfacing or single surface treatment.

Reports for Information

2021-2025 Capital Forecast Items included are only those that have already been identified and require a placeholder in the capital forecast. Stars Corners - Engineering Study - A Class Environment Assessment will be required. It is hoped to have everything finalized in 2022. If replacing like for

Page 2 of 4

Page 149 of 314 Committee of the Whole December 8, 2020 like, a Class EA is required. It should not be presumed that it will be a traffic circle and that alternatives are considered. b)

2020 Capital Projects Status Electric Charging Station - Why has this gone into the Facilities Study? There may be a requirement for more, different configurations etc. This will be considered in the Climate Action and Mitigation plan. Verona Medical Centre - Has the pavement of the parking lot been considered in 2021? There is additional property behind the building that needs to be looked at for additional parking.

Rise & Report from Committees of Council

Frontenac County Council Councillor Revill reported that Mayor Vandewal will assume the role of Warden for the upcoming year at the County, albeit in a rather low key change due to COVID restrictions.

Frontenac Community Arena Board Tim Laprade provided an update on the arena is about to undergo a significant project, the replacement of the entire floor slab and cooling lines. It is hoped that the tender for this project will go out next week and demolition could begin at the end of January with the entire project being completed by the end of June. This will allow a bit of a buffer before next season. There are a couple of groups using the dry floor. An adult fitness offered by Southern Frontenac Community Services has also utilized the space. Councillor Sleeth assumed that there are not any staff there now since the shutdown. Mr. Laprade noted that there is one staff member currently working on “Standard Operating Procedures” and other jobs like painting and the removal of old/outdated equipment.

South Frontenac Police Services Board The regular and annual meeting was held on November 26, 2020. Staff Sergeant Sharron Brown has indicated she will be retiring at the end of June. Councillor Ruttan questioned the request for a report on speeding and how the township is going to proceed with this issue. This was a request to staff from Council and some details are available, this will come forward in 2021.

South Frontenac Museum Committee Despite COVID the museum was able to open for awhile. A total of 134 volunteer hours were involved. successful with some grant applications, A policy is being developed on succession planning with regard to a rationale for donations, what to keep, what to hold on to etc.

Information Items

Thank you from L & A Ridge Runners - K & P Trail

Page 3 of 4

Page 150 of 314 Committee of the Whole December 8, 2020

Notice of Complete Application & Open House - Draft Plan of Subdivision (Willowbrook Estates)

Notice of Motions - not applicable

Announcements/Statements by Councillors

Councillor Revill reported that the Bellrock Mill has caught the interest of the museum group and they are encouraging the township to acquire and they wish to establish a long term plan to restore this. Mayor Vandewal asked that staff provide an update on the costs that would be associated to clean up the property, remove fallen rock and clean the top of the wall off to secure and to create a beautiful park bench setting at the Petworth Mill site. Neil Carbone indicated that the museum group were encouraged to bring forward a concept plan to present to Council for consideration at the January 12 meeting where delegations for the 2021 budget will be heard.

Question of Clarity (from the public on outcome of agenda items) - none

Closed Session - not applicable.

Adjournment

Motion Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That the Committee of the Whole meeting of December 8, 2020 be adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Carried

Page 4 of 4

Page 151 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 15, 2020 Time: 7:00 PM Location: Electronic Participation/Council Chambers

Meeting # 35 Present in Council Chambers: Mayor Ron Vandewal, Ray Leonard, Doug Morey. Alan Revill, Norm Roberts, Randy Ruttan, Ron Sleeth, Ross Sutherland Staff Present in Council Chambers: Neil Carbone - Chief Administrative Officer, Angela Maddocks - Clerk. Claire Dodds - Director of Development Services, Louise Fragnito - Director of Corporate Services & Treasurer, Darcy Knott - Director of Fire and Emergency Services, Mark Segsworth - Director of Public Services

Call to Order/Roll Call

Resolution The Clerk conducted the roll call as outlined in the attendance noted above. Resolution No. 2020-35-01 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sutherland That the Council meeting of December 15, 2020 be called to order at 7:00 pm. Carried

Declaration of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof

Councillor Roberts declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Agenda Item 11 h).

Approval of Agenda

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-35-02 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Deputy Mayor Leonard That Council suspend the rules of the Procedural By-law 2017-76 and allow for a change in agenda items, to move the Announcements/Statements by Council members to the beginning of the meeting, and that the agenda be approved as amended. Carried

Announcements/Statements by Councillors - Christmas Greetings

On behalf of Council, Mayor Vandewal thanked all residents, staff and fellow Councillors for their cooperation throughout a very trying year and wished everyone a very Merry Christmas.

Scheduled Closed Session (at the end of the meeting)

Recess - not applicable

Delegations - not applicable

Page 152 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 15, 2020 8.

Public Meeting - not applicable

Approval of Minutes

November 10, 2020 Committee of the Whole Meeting (5:00 pm) Resolution No. 2020-35-03 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That the minutes of the November 10, 2020 Committee of the Whole meeting held at 5:00 pm be approved. Carried

November 10, 2020 Special Committee of the Whole Meeting (7:00 pm) Resolution No. 2020-35-04 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That the minutes of the November 10, 2020 Special Committee of the Whole meeting held at 7:00 pm be approved. Carried

Business Arising from the Minutes

By-law 2020-54 - Open Air Burning By-law - Reconsideration Resolution No. 2020-35-05 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Deputy Mayor Leonard That Council repeal By-law 2020-54 being a by-law to regulate open air burning in the Township; And that staff be directed to bring forward the proposed Open Air Burning By-law for further discussion in early 2021 with the intent of making amendments and conducting additional public consultation. Carried

Reports Requiring Action

2020 Frontenac Community Arena Levy Resolution No. 2020-35-06 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That Council approve the use of Working Funds in the amount of $160,613.62 to cover the supplemental funding required for phase 1 of the arena major renovations Carried

Frontenac Community Arena - Loan Extension Resolution No. 2020-35-07 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That Council support the extension of the loan repayment date from the Arena Board to December st, 2021. Carried

Agreement between the Frontenac Townships for the Delivery of Part 8 (OnSite Sewage System) Services

Page 2 of 6

Page 153 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 15, 2020 Resolution No. 2020-35-08 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Revill That Council approve the agreement for South Frontenac’s delivery of services under Part 8 (On-Site Sewage Systems) of the Ontario Building Code (OBC) on behalf of the other Frontenac lower tier municipalities, substantially in the form as attached as Schedule A to this report, subject to the approval of the agreement by each of the other Townships; and, That Council approves the creation of a Part 8 Specialist position and a Permit Intake Coordinator position within the Development Services Department to accommodate the assumption of Part 8 (On-Site Sewage Systems) services, subject to approval of the agreement. Carried d)

Zoning By-law Amendment - Z-20-09 - Barry and Susan Johnston, Part Lot 7, Concession 11 (Portland) Silver Rock Lane See By-law 2020-72

Zoning By-law Amendment - Z-20-10 - Duncan and Mary Southall, 3708 Stage Coach Road (Loughborough) See By-law 2020-73

Agreement to Encroach on a Township Road Allowance - Concession 8, Part Lot 1 (Portland) See By-law 2020-74

Hinchinbrooke Road Reconstruction - Land Purchase See By-law 2020-75

Road Closing Application - RC-20-03 - Part of Rideau Crescent adjoining Lots 16-20 on Plan 1316

The price per square footage was discussed based on the township policy of $2.41 as some Council members felt this price might be considered high, however there is a potential for increased property value that will benefit from the additional road allowance portion. Resolution No. 2020-35-09 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That Council direct staff to move forward with the process related to transferring of ownership of a 20 metres (66 foot) by approximately 30.5 metres (100 foot) portion of unopened road allowance to enlarge an adjacent parcel of land municipally known as 30 Rideau Crescent Lane. Carried 12.

Committee Meeting Minutes - not applicable

By-laws

By-law 2020-72 - Rezone Concession 11, Part Lot 7, Portland (Johnston) Resolution No. 2020-35-10 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sleeth

Page 3 of 6

Page 154 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 15, 2020 That the following by-laws be given first and second reading: • By-law 2020-72 • By-law 2020-73 • By-law 2020-74 • By-law 2020-75 Carried Resolution No. 2020-35-11 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Deputy Mayor Leonard That By-law 2020-72, being a by-law to amend By-law 2003-75, as amended, to rezone land from Rural (RU) to Limited Service Residential-Waterfront (RLSW) Concession 11, Part Lot 1, 2210 Silver Rock Lane, be given third reading signed and sealed. Carried b)

By-law 2020-73 - Rezone Concession 2, Part Lot 4, Loughborough (Southall) Resolution No. 2020-35-12 Moved by Councillor Sutherland Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That By-law 2020-73, being a by-law to amend By-law 2003-75, as amended, to rezone lands form Rural (RU) to Special Provision (RU-60), Concession 2, Part of Lot 4, Loughborough District, be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried

By-law 2020-74 - Agreement to Encroach on a Township Road Allowance Resolution No. 2020-35-13 Moved by Deputy Mayor Leonard Seconded by Councillor Roberts That By-law 2020-74, being a by-law to authorize the Mayor and the clerk to execute an encroachment agreement between the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac and Michael Deodato allowing the existing dwelling to encroach onto an unopened township road allowance be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried

By-law 2020-75- Approve the acquisition of land for Hinchinbrooke Road reconstruction Resolution No. 2020-35-14 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sleeth That B-law 2020-75, being a by-law to approve the acquisition of property for the purposes of road improvements and utility pole relocations for the Hinchinbrooke Road Reconstruction project be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried

Reports for Information

Project Funding Overages Councillor Sutherland sought clarification on the process when projects are over budget and how that overage gets funded as these do not necessarily come to Council for approve. Louise Fragnito explained that By-law 2020-21, the tax rate by-law has the provision in Section 12 of the by-law that allows for transfers to finance expenditures from reserve funds. She indicated that staff will be monitoring

Page 4 of 6

Page 155 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 15, 2020 these projects regularly in 2021 and will bring a report to Council for their review and approval. b)

Community Newspaper Boxes Councillor Sutherland thanked staff for the work done on moving towards community mailboxes and asked if a list had been provided for those areas where due to safety, the newspapers will continue to be left at individual driveways/municipal road allowances. The CAO confirmed that these locations have not been provided as yet.

Emergency Management Program and Plan

Information Items - not applicable

Notice of Motions - not applicable

Question of Clarity (from the public on outcome of agenda items) - none

Closed Session

Council will move into Closed Session in accordance with Section 239(2)(b) of the Municipal Act, to discuss personal matters about identifiable individuals, including municipal or local board employees; and, (d) labour relations or employee negotiations; to receive a verbal update from the CAO regarding proposed organizational restructuring and succession planning. and (f) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose; to receive a “Closed Meeting Investigation Report” from John Mascarin. Resolution No. 2020-35-15 Moved by Councillor Ruttan Seconded by Councillor Revill That Council move into Closed Session in accordance with Section 239(2)(b) of the Municipal Act, to discuss personal matters about identifiable individuals, including municipal or local board employees; and, (d) labour relations or employee negotiations; to receive a verbal update from the CAO regarding proposed organizational restructuring and succession planning and (f) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose: to receive a “Closed Meeting Investigation Report” from John Mascarin. Carried

Proposed Organizational Restructuring and Succession Planning - Verbal Update from CAO

Closed Meeting Investigation Report from John Mascarin

Move out of Closed Session - Resolution Resolution No. 2020-35-16 Moved by Councillor Roberts Seconded by Deputy Mayor Leonard That Council move out of Closed Session. Carried

Confirmatory By-law

By-law 2020-76

Page 5 of 6

Page 156 of 314 Minutes of Council December, 15, 2020 Resolution No. 2020-35-17 Moved by Councillor Revill Seconded by Councillor Ruttan That By-law 2020-76, being a by-law to confirm generally previous actions of the Council of the Township of South Frontenac be given first and second reading this 15 day of December 2020. Carried Resolution No. 2020-35-18 Moved by Councillor Sleeth Seconded by Councillor Morey That By-law 2020-76, being the confirmatory by-law, be given third reading, signed and sealed. Carried 20.

Adjournment

Resolution Resolution No. 2020-35-19 Moved by Councillor Morey Seconded by Councillor Sutherland That the Council meeting of December 15, 2020 be adjourned at 8:24 pm. Carried

Ron Vandewal, Mayor

Angela Maddocks, Clerk

Page 6 of 6

Page 157 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL Office of the Chief Administrative Officer AGENDA DATE:

January 12th, 2021

SUBJECT:

Declare Land Surplus: Property at Craig and Mustard Roads Addendum to October 2020 Report

Possible ATV access to the Trail via an unopened road allowance would be in close proximity to an existing residence;
Vehicular safety issues could be created by directing ATV traffic down Craig Road to access the K&P Trail at the intersection of Craig Road and Doucette Lane; and,
Significant grade changes on the subject property are not conducive to the creation of a staging area. Staff previously determined that the subject property is not needed for any other current or future purpose by any department, and planning staff have indicated that a building envelope exists on the property. Further, the property does not provide access to water and the current zoning is Rural (RU) which permits residential and other rural-compatible uses.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 158 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL Office of the Chief Administrative Officer On this basis, staff continues to recommend that Council declare the property surplus in accordance with the By-law, with the intent to sell the property. Next Steps If declared surplus, staff would obtain a valuation on the property and list the property for sale publicly, either through a realtor or independently through local channels (newspaper, web, etc.). Should an acceptable offer be received, the By-law stipulates that the public be given notice of the potential sale prior to its approval by Council. The sale of any real property must be approved by Township Council by By-law. ATTACHMENTS: • • •

October 14, 2020 Report to Council - Declaring Land Surplus Parcel Map By-law 1999-0025

Submitted/approved by: Neil Carbone Chief Administrative Officer

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 159 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL TREASURY DEPARTMENT

AGENDA DATE:

October 20th, 2020

SUBJECT:

Declare Land Surplus

RECOMMENDATION: That Council declare the parcel of real property, identified as PT LT 8 CON 14 PORTLAND PT 1, 13R11450; SOUTH FRONTENAC (PIN 36149-0291, Roll Number 102908005026700) surplus to the needs of the Township for the purpose of divestiture. BACKGROUND: In early September staff received a formal letter from a member of the public expressing interest in acquiring the subject property located at the intersection of Craig and Mustard Roads north of Verona. Information on the property was circulated to all senior staff to determine if the property should be retained for any current or future Township purposes or if the property could be declared surplus to the Township’s needs. Planning staff were also asked to review the property to determine if a suitable building envelope existed should a prospective buyer wish to develop on the land. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: By-law 1999-0025, establishes procedures governing the sale of real property by the Township. Prior to the sale of any property, Council must: a) pass a public resolution to declare the property surplus; b) Obtain a formal appraisal of fair market value; and, c) Give notice to the public of the proposed sale Based on feedback from senior staff, the subject property is not needed for any current or future purpose by any department, and planning staff have indicated that a building envelope exists on the property. Further, the property does not provide access to water and the current zoning is Rural (RU) which permits residential and other rural-compatible uses. On this basis, staff is recommending that Council declare the property surplus in accordance with the By-law, with the intent to sell the property. Next Steps If declared surplus, staff would obtain a valuation on the property and list the property for sale publicly, either through a realtor or independently through local channels (newspaper, web, etc.). Should an acceptable offer be received, the By-law stipulates that the public be given notice of the potential sale prior to its approval by Council.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 160 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL TREASURY DEPARTMENT

The sale of any real property must be approved by Township Council by By-law.

ATTACHMENTS: Parcel Map By-law 1999-0025

Submitted/approved by: Neil Carbone Chief Administrative Officer

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 161 of 314

South Frontenac Parcel Report Parcel Information: Roll #:

2020/09/15

Report Generated:

102908005026700

Mailing Address:

9/22/2020 11:56:09 AM

4432 GEORGE ST

Owner Name:

SOUTH FRONTENAC TOWNSHIP

SYDENHAM ON

Site Address:

CON 14 PT LOT 8 PLAN 13R 11450 PART 1

K0H 2T0

$72,000.00

Year Built: Legal Description:

CON 14 PT LOT 8 PLAN 13R;11450 PART 1

Area:

2.40

Overview Location

Depth:

RTC:

Property Value: Assessed

690.90

Ft.

RTQ: E

Frontage:

367.75

Unit Support:

Ft.

Property Highlighted in Blue

This report is a user generated static output from the County of Frontenac Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers and information that appear on this report may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.

Page 162 of 314

South Frontenac Parcel Report Names: Seq.

CTZ

RES

Name

SOUTH FRONTENAC TOWNSHIP

Sales: Seq.

Date

Instrument

Amount

Type

199705

666446

Soils: Seq.

Class

Acres

Texture

Points Tiling Wooded

Orchard

Structures: Seq.

Code

Type

Condition

Built

Storeys Bedrooms Baths

Area

Heat

Winterized

102

1900

320

102

1900

720

South Frontenac Parcel Report

Page 163 of 314

Page 164 of 314

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW 1999-25 A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY IN THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC. WHEREAS Section 193 of the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter M.45, as amended, requires Council to establish by by-law procedures, including the giving of notice to the public, governing the sale of real property owned by the municipality, and the establishing and maintaining of a public register listing and describing all real property owned or leased by the municipality. w-

NOW THEREFORE THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC, BY ITS COUNCIL, HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1.

In this by-law, (a)

“appraisal” shall mean an evaluation of the fair market value of real property;

(b)

“Clerk” shall mean the Clerk of the municipality;

(c)

“Council” shall mean the Clerk of the municipality;

(d)

“fair market value” shall mean the amount that would be realized by the sale of real property by a willing vendor to a willing purchaser.

(e)

“municipality” shall mean the Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac.

(

“real property” shall mean land and vice versa;

(g)

“sale” shall mean the intention or willingness to:

(i) (ii) (iii)

transfer in fee simple ownership of and title to real property; or grant a permanent easement or right of way over real property; or grant a leasehold interest in real property for a term of 21 years or longer;

from the municipality to another person, with or without consideration. 2.

Prior to the sale of any real property owned by the municipality, Council shall,

(a)

by by-law or resolution passed at a meeting open to the public declare the real property to be surplus;

(b)

obtain not sooner than one (1) year before the date of sale at least one appraisal of the fair market value of the real property from such person as the Clerk considers qualified; and

(c)

give notice to the public of the proposed sale in the manner prescribed by this by-law.

Notice to the public of a proposed sale of real property owned by the municipality shall be given prior to the date of the sale; (a)

by publication in a newspaper that is, in the Clerk’s opinion, of sufficiently general paid or unpaid circulation within the municipality to give the public reasonable notice of the proposed sale; or

(b)

in the case of a proposed sale according to any other procedure prescribed by the Municipal Act or any other Act, in the manner prescribed.

Page 165 of 314

Despite the requirement of Clause 2(b) of this by-law, the municipality may sell any of the following classes of real property without first obtaining an appraisal:

(a)

land 0.3 metres or less in width acquired in connection with an approval or decision or decision under the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P. 13, as amended;

(b)

highways, roads and road allowances;

(c)

land formerly used for railway branch lines if sold to an owner of land abutting the former railway land;

(d)

land that does not have direct access to a highway if sold to the owner of land abutting that land;

(e)

land repurchased by an owner in accordance with Section 42 of the Expropriations Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter E.42, as amended;

(f)

land designated in the municipality’s Official Plan for use as sites for the establishment and carrying on of industries and of industrial operations and incidental uses;

(g)

land sold:

(i)

for the purpose of a program to encourage small business pursuant to Section 112 of the Municipal Act;

(ii)

the sale of land to a Community Economic Development Corporation pursuant to Section 112.1 of the Municipal Act;

(iii)

the sale of land to a Community Development Corporation pursuant to Section 112.2 of the Municipal Act;

(iv)

the sale of land as a grant pursuant to Section 113 of the Municipal Act.

-9

(h)

easements granted to public utilities or to telephone companies;

(i)

land sold under the Municipal Tax Sales Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter M.60.

Despite the requirements of clause 2 (b) of the by-law, the municipality may sell any real property owned by it to any one of the following classes of public bodies without first obtaining an appraisal:

(a)

any municipality, including a metropolitan, regional or district municipality and the County of Oxford;

(b)

a local board as defined in the Municipal Affairs Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter M.46;

(c)

an authority under the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C. 27:

(d)

The Crown In Right of Ontario or of Canada and their agencies.

The requirements of clause 2 of this by-law shall not apply to lands sold or otherwise disposed of under an agreement for providing municipal capital facilities pursuant to section 210.1(2) of the Municipal Act.

Page 166 of 314

The Clerk shall establish and maintain a public register listing and describing all real property owned or leased by the municipality and which should, to the extent that it is reasonably possible, include the following information.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

the assessment roll number of the real property; the municipal address of the real property, if available;

(e)

the date of purchase; the name of the person from whom the property was purchased;

ment umber of the TransferIDeed by which title was transferred €%$=niclpa2ty;

(g)

(h) (i)

a brief legal description of the property;

the purchase price of the real property; a brief description of improvement, if any, on the real property; the date of sale of the property;

(j)

the name of the person to whom the property was sold;

(k)

the sale price of the real property;

Despite the provisions of clause 7, the Clerk is not required to list the following classes of real property in the public register:

(a)

lands 0.3 metres or less in width acquired in connection with an approval or decision under the Planning Act;

(b)

all highways, roads and road allowances, whether or not opened, unopened, closed or stopped up;

(c)

land formerly used for railway branch lines;

(d)

lands sold under an agreement for the providing of municipal capital facilities pursuant to section 210.1(2) of the Municipal Act.

Every TransferIDeed of real property sold by the municipality shall include a Certificate of Compliance issued by the Clerk in the form prescribed by the Regulations to the Municipal Act.

This by-law shall not apply to the sale of any land owned by the municipality for which an agreement was entered into by the municipality prior to January I”, 1998.

This by-law shall come into force and take effect on the day it is passed.

Dated

~~&JQO.CJU~~& day of

Read a first and second time this&

L-

,1999.

day of

IL-

Read a third time and finally passed this 20’day

,1999.

A.dalL

,1999.

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

Page 167 of 314

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

(CicutoIMatos Rezoning) (Being a By-law to amend By-law No. 1997-16 as amended to rezone Part

of Lot 23, Concession IX, in the Township of South Frontenac (Bedford District) from an existing “Rural (RU) Zone” to a “Special W a t c h t Residential-Two (RW-2) Zone”, a “Special Waterfront Residential-Three (RW-3) Zone” and a “Special Limited Service Residential-Fifty-Seven (RLS-57) Zone”)

Prepared By:

AIBLEY GRAHAM ANX) ASSOCIATES LIMITED

CONSULTING ENGlNi3ERS AND PLANNEW 157 FRONT SI"M%ET BELLEVILLE, ONTARIO K8N 2Y6

File No.: 975024

AFRlL 1999

Page 168 of 314

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

January 12, 2021 January 5, 2021

SUBJECT:

Application for Extension of Draft Plan Approval for the Ouellette Plan of Subdivision 10CD-2011/002 Owner: Roberta Ouellette Applicant/Agent: Gary Beach Planning Consultant: Youko Leclerc-Desjardins, FOTENN Consultants

RECOMMENDATION: THAT South Frontenac Council has no objection to the County of Frontenac extending draft plan approval for a period of one year for application 10T-2011/002, subject to the conditions approved by County Council on July 17, 2013 and direct the Clerk to forward this resolution to the County Clerk. BACKGROUND: The Township received notice that the County of Frontenac received an application to extend draft plan approval for the Ouellette Plan of Subdivision at 2292 Sands Road in Battersea (10T-2011/002) on December 9, 2020. The County has the full responsibility/authority to make the decision regarding the extension of draft plan approval. While the Township does not have a formal role in making the decision on draft plan extension – staff feel that it is important for Township staff to be informed about the application and have an opportunity to provide input to the County on applications for draft plan extension. The Ouellette Plan of Subdivision application was submitted in 2011. In 2013 it received draft plan approval from the County for an initial period of three years. Draft plan approval was extended for further periods of 1 year in 2016, 2017, and 2018. The Ouellette Plan of Subdivision was given a further one year extension of draft plan in 2019 that was initially due to lapse on July 17, 2020. The County further extended draft plan approval until January 29, 2021 in order to address the limitations of the applicant to be able to fulfill the draft plan conditions during the COVID 19 Provincial Emergency between March and June 2020. To date, the only draft plan condition that has been fulfilled is the rezoning of the lands within the subdivision in 2013. As draft plan approval is set to lapse on January 29, 2021, the County will have to deal with this request at their January 20, 2021 Council meeting. Reason for Draft Plan Extension: Under the Planning Act, the Owner has the right to apply to the approval authority, in this instance the County of Frontenac, to extend draft plan approval. The reason stated on the application as to why draft plan extension is required is outlined below: “Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 169 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

“A new builder (Garrison Creek Homes) has made conditional investments in this property and is eager to proceed with clearing the conditions of draft plan approval to commence development of the lands. Garrison Creek Homes is a homebuilder with experience in rural development and in constructing sustainable dwellings and communities with a focus on conserving and celebrating natural heritage, goals which align well with those of the County and Township.” The application notes that this Plan of Subdivision is located within a settlement area where development is most desired from a planning perspective. Review of Request for Draft Plan Extension: The Ouellette Plan of Subdivision was initially approved in 2011. At that time the subdivision was reviewed against the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement. Since the initial approval of the plan of subdivision we have had two further Provincial Policy Statements (2014 & 2020). The County Official Plan came into effect after the approval of this subdivision. As such, the County Official Plan was not considered in the initial approval of this subdivision. At the request of the County and Township planning staff, planning consultants on this file prepared a justification report to review the current plan of subdivision against the current planning policy framework policy framework (Provincial Policy Statement 2020, County Official Plan 2016, and South Frontenac Official Plan 2003). The Planning justification brief was prepared by FOTENN and was submitted on December 22, 2020. Upon review, Township planning staff are satisfied that this plan of subdivision application continues to be consistent with the current policy framework. It also appears that the conditions which are attached to draft plan approval continue to be appropriate to address the appropriate development of these lands. As such, Township staff have no objections to the County granting a further one year extension to draft plan approval to allow for a final opportunity to have the conditions of draft plan approval for the Ouellette Plan of Subdivision located at 2292 Sands Road. Of note in Township staff’s review of this file is that the studies (hydrogeological, terrain analysis and environmental impact assessment) that supported the initial draft plan approval are all about 10 years old. Should draft plan approval not be able to be achieved with the next one year extension – it is recommended that no further draft plan extensions be granted. Rather a new subdivision application with updated supporting studies should be submitted and reviewed in accordance with current development standards for the Township. It is also noted in the covering letter of the application for draft plan extension that the applicant intends to put forward a request to amend the draft plan conditions. Any request to amend draft plan conditions will be evaluated by the Township and County on its own merits. Depending on the nature of a request to amend draft plan conditions it may trigger public notice and may require additional studies to support the requested changes. Township staff will work closely with the County to preconsult with the developer on any proposal to amend draft plan conditions.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 170 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Next Steps The resolution of South Frontenac Council will be forwarded to the County Clerk for consideration at the January 19, 2019 County Council meeting where the application to extend draft plan approval for the Ouellette Plan of Subdivision will be considered. FINANCIAL/STAFFING IMPLICATIONS: None. ATTACHMENTS: • •

Attachment 1: Location Map of Ouellette Plan of Subdivision Attachment 2: Draft Plan Conditions for Ouellette Plan of Subdivision 10T2011/002

Prepared/Submitted by: Claire Dodds, Director of Development Services

Approved by:

Neil Carbone, Chief Administrative Officer

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Location Map - Ouellette Plan of Subdivision

Legend Road Highway Major Road Secondary Road Ferry Route

Assessment Parcels Citations

1.8

WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere © Latitude Geographics Group Ltd.

0.90

1.8 Kilometers

Notes

Page 171 of 314

1: 35,259

Page 172 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

NOTICE OF DECISION THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF FRONTENAC with respect to an Application for Approval of Draft Plan of Subdivision Subsection 51(37) of the Planning Act

TAKE NOTICE that the Council of The Corporation of the County of Frontenac approved a Draft Plan of Subdivision Application, in respect of the subject lands noted above, on July 17, 2013, under Section 51 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended. When and How to File an Appeal Notice to Appeal the Decision to the Ontario Municipal Board must be filed with the Clerk of the County of Frontenac no later than August 8, 2013 as shown above as the Last Date of Appeal. An appeal form is available from the County office or the OMB website. The notice of appeal should be sent to the attention of the Clerk, and it must:

Set out the reasons for the appeal,
Indicate the name and address of the appellant;
Be sent to the address shown below, and
Be accompanied by a fee payment in the amount of $125.00 payable by certified cheque or money order to the Minister of Finance, Province of Ontario. Who Can File an Appeal At any time before the approval of the final plan of subdivision, the following may appeal any of the conditions imposed by the County of Frontenac to the Ontario Municipal Board by filing a notice of appeal with the Clerk of the County of Frontenac: (i) the applicant; (ii) any public body that, before the approval authority made its decision, made oral submission at a public meeting or written submission to the approval authority; (iii) the Minister; or (iv) the Municipality in which the subject land is located may. i. Only individuals, corporations or public bodies may appeal the Decision of the Council of The Corporation of the County of Frontenac in respect of the proposed plan of subdivision to the Ontario Municipal Board. A notice of appeal may not be filed by an unincorporated association or group. However, a notice of appeal may be filed in the name of an individual who is a member of the association or group on its behalf. ii. No person or public body shall be added as a party to the hearing of the appeal of the Decision of the Council of The Corporation of the County of Frontenac, including the lapsing provisions or the conditions, unless the person or public body, before the Decision of the Council of The Corporation of the County of Frontenac, made oral submissions at a public County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 1 of 10

Page 173 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

meeting or written submissions to the Council or, in the Ontario Municipal Board’s opinion, there are reasonable grounds to add the person or public body as a party. How to Receive Notice of Changed Conditions The conditions of an approval of Draft Plan of Subdivision may be changed at any time before the Final Approval is given. i.

You will be entitled to receive notice of any changes to the conditions of approval of the proposed plan of subdivision if you have made a written request to be notified of changes to the conditions.

ii. No person or public body shall be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal regarding any changes to the conditions of approval unless the person or public body, before the approval authority made its decision, made oral submissions at a public meeting or written submissions to the approval authority, or made a written request to be notified of the changes to the conditions. Additional Information Additional Information about the application is available for public inspection during regular office hours at the County of Frontenac office by contacting: Peter Young, Community Planner County of Frontenac 2069 Battersea Road, Glenburnie, ON K0H 1S0 or phone (613) 548-9400 during regular business hours. Mailing Address for Filing a Notice of Appeal The appeal must be sent to: K. Elizabeth Savill, CAO/Clerk County of Frontenac 2069 Battersea Road, Glenburnie, ON K0H 1S0 Tel: (613) 548-9400 Fax: (613) 548-8460

County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 2 of 10

Page 174 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

CONDITIONS TO DRAFT APPROVAL The conditions of approval for the draft plan of subdivision are as follows:

Approved Draft Plan: That this conditional approval applies to the Draft Plan of Subdivision, dated April 26, 2013, prepared and certified by Hopkins, Cormier, and Chitty Surveying Consultants Inc OLS. which shows the following: 15 lots for single detached dwellings (Lots 1-15); Two stormwater blocks (Blocks 16 and 17) 1 block for an existing single detached dwelling (Block 18) One public road (Street A) One future road allowance (Street B)
Subdivision Agreement: That the owners of the subject land enter into a subdivision agreement with the municipality, prepared to the satisfaction of the municipality, to be registered on title of the subject land.
Financial Requirements: A. That the owner agree in writing to satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise of the municipality concerning the provision of roads, installation of services and drainage, in accordance with the municipality’s standards and procedures. B. That the Owner shall reimburse the Township of South Frontenac and County of Frontenac for all legal, engineering, planning, administrative expenses and permit fees including the cost of any peer review that the Township of South Frontenac or County of Frontenac may require in relation to the subdivision.
Access: A. That the road allowance included in this draft plan as ‘Street A’ shall be shown and constructed to Township standards for public roads with paved asphalt surfacing and that the road be dedicated as a public highway. B. That visual screening in the form of fencing and/or earthen berms and/or trees may be required to be constructed along the east and west side of the new road allowance where it abuts the existing neighbouring property and Lot 15 at Sands Road. After final grading of the new road is completed, the Township will determine the extent of buffering required based on providing an adequate measure of privacy for Lot 15 and the existing property-owner who could be negatively affected by the traffic on the new street. C. That the street shall be named to the satisfaction of the municipality. D. That any dead ends and open sides of road allowance created by this plan of subdivision shall be terminated in 0.3 metre reserves to be conveyed to and held County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 3 of 10

Page 175 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

in trust by the municipality and that ‘Street B’ which is a 20 metre wide area of land, be dedicated to the Township extending north from the new street and ending at the northern limit of the subject land to be for the purpose of providing a future road access to the north. E. That a 1.5 metre wide concrete sidewalk be constructed to a standard satisfactory to the Township along the southeast side of the road allowance from Sands Road in the south and terminating at the cul-de-sac in the north and that the technical drawings prepared by EXP services Inc. be revised to show this sidewalk in relation to ditching and stormwater flows. The Township acknowledges that the 20 metre wide road allowance may be required to be further widened to accommodate this construction. 5. On-Site Sewage Disposal and Water Systems: A. That the recommendations outlined in the letter dated November 14, 2012 and July 5, 2013 from KFL&A Public Health to the County of Frontenac, be addressed to the satisfaction of the municipality. B. That all requirements and recommendations specified in the Hydrogeology, Terrain Analysis and Nitrate Impact Assessment Report, revised dated April 9, 2013, from EXP Services Inc., and associated drawings be complied with. C. That any existing wells and or septic systems that may be present on the site and are not to be used as part of the plan of subdivision be decommissioned as per applicable regulations. 6. Environment A. That all conditions outlined in the letters dated October 29, 2012 and May 29, 2013 from the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority to the County of Frontenac, be addressed to the satisfaction of the municipality. B. That the 30 metre setback from the wetland as illustrated by a grey dashed line on the ‘Site and Existing Conditions Plan C-01’, by EXP Services Inc, revision date 13/04/17, be identified on Lots 6 through 14 with a line of shrubs with a minimum height of 0.5 metres to be installed by the developer and maintained by each future Lot-owner for the purpose of defining a no-build area on each of these lots. C. That a development agreement be entered into and registered on the title of Lots 6 through 14 which would require each Lot-owner to maintain a line of shrubs defining the 30 metre setback from the wetland and which would impose prohibitions on development within the area of each Lot that lies within the 30 metre setback from the wetland in accordance with the recommendations of the Environmental Impact Statement, dated March 5, 2011, from Ecological Services, and the Township’s environmental protection policies. D. That recommendation number two of the EIS (Ecological Services, March 5, 2011) regarding the maintenance of a 15 m no disturbance area adjacent to the

County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 4 of 10

Page 176 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

swamp areas be implemented through site plan control, development agreements, or other such means as deemed appropriate by the Township. E. That prior to final approval, the County of Frontenac is to be advised by the municipality that this proposed subdivision conforms to the Zoning By-law in effect of the Township of South Frontenac including that the wetland within Lots 6 through 14 be zoned Environmental Protection (EP) Zone and that the zoning is satisfactory to the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority. F. That the recommendations of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) dated March 5, 2011, be implemented including the recommendation to complete a ‘Woodland Preservation Plan’ prepared by a qualified professional to maintain the ecological integrity of the woodlands on the high-ground in the northwest portion of the property and to ensure that it is not fragmented in accordance with the specifications presented in the EIS. G. That the recommendations of the ‘Woodland Preservation Plan’ for preserving the woodlands on the high ground on the northwest portion of the subdivision be incorporated into an agreement to be entered into and registered on the title of Lots 2 through 7. The agreement shall require each Lot-owner to maintain the trees as specified in the Plan. H. That the Subdivision Agreement include text to the satisfaction of the Township and the CRCA to provide notice to purchasers of Lots 5 to 14 inclusive and Blocks 16 and 17 that site alteration and construction (including but not limited to buildings, structures, filling and grading) on these lots will require permission under Ontario Regulation 148/06: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses prior to commencing these activities. I. That the Subdivision Agreement include text to the satisfaction of the Township and the CRCA notifying the Owner that permission will be required under Ontario Regulation 148/06: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses prior to commencing rough grading, stockpiling, etc. associated with this subdivision. 7. Stormwater A. That a lot grading and drainage plan and a sediment and erosion control plan be completed and approved to the satisfaction of the Township of South Frontenac and the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority (‘CRCA’), and be included in the Subdivision Agreement between the Owner and the Township. B. That a stormwater management plan be prepared by a qualified Professional Engineer and approved to the satisfaction of the Township and the CRCA, and that appropriate text to implement its findings be included in the Subdivision Agreement. C. That site drainage design, construction and maintenance be in accordance with the recommendations contained in the ‘Stormwater Management Report for the Sands Road Residential Development’, revised dated April, 2013 by EXP Services Inc., and associated drawings including the construction of ditches, County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 5 of 10

Page 177 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

culverts and stormwater management facilities designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the municipality on Blocks ‘16’ and ‘17’ and that such facilities be dedicated to the Township of South Frontenac. D. That the blocks to be dedicated to the Township for the two stormwater management ponds be designed with a minimum of 10 metres of frontage on the new street to provide direct access for drainage and maintenance of the stormwater management facilities. 8. Parkland Dedication: That the owner convey up to five percent of the land included in the plan to the municipality for park purposes. Alternatively, the municipality may require cash-inlieu for all or a portion of the conveyance. 9. Human Remains: The subdivision agreement shall contain a clause providing that any Owner(s) be advised, and also that a notice be placed in the purchase and sale agreement alerting any prospective purchasers that in the event that human remains are discovered during construction or site development of a lot, that the property owner shall immediately contact the OPP, the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport and the Registrar or Deputy Registrar of the Cemeteries Unit of the Ministry of Consumer Services. 10. Archaeological Resources: A. That the subdivision agreement include all recommendations contained in the Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment Report dated June 2011, from Golder Associates Ltd. B. That the archaeological resource identified in the Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment Report, dated October 11, 2011 by Abacus Archaeological Services on Lot 4 in the subdivision and further noted in the letter dated October 10, 2012 from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, be protected by way of special zoning on Lot 4 and that any required future measures to protect the feature be implemented to the satisfaction of the Township. 11. On-Site Works A. That all entrances to the lots including entrance culverts be located and constructed to the satisfaction of the Township. B. That all servicing including Bell, Hydro etc. be installed underground. C. That, prior to final approval, the municipality shall be satisfied that all servicing issues are resolved such as road and sidewalk construction, Canada Post, Bell Canada, and stormwater pond construction. D. That, the subdivision agreement include a requirement that one tree be planted in the front yard of each of the fifteen lots in the subdivision of a size, type and location specified in the Township’s Site Plan Guidelines. County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 6 of 10

Page 178 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

E. That, prior to final approval, street lighting shall be installed according to Township standards and to the satisfaction of the municipality. F. That, prior to final approval, street signage shall be installed according to Township standards and to the satisfaction of the municipality. 12. Revisions to Draft Plan: A. That Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the Owner shall submit a revised Block Plan, if required, to reflect any significant alterations caused from this Draft Plan Approval. B. That where final engineering design(s) result in minor variations to the Plan (e.g., in the configuration of lots, etc.), these may be reflected in the Final Plan subject to the satisfaction of the Township of South Frontenac and the County of Frontenac. 13. Community Mailboxes: A. That Prior to Final Plan Approval, the Owner shall, in consultation with and to the satisfaction of Canada Post, identify the method of mail delivery. If community mailboxes are required, the location of the community mailboxes within the Plan shall be identified on drawings for approval by the Township. The locations of these community mailboxes shall be identified in the notice to future purchasers of the lots within the Subdivision. B. The Owner shall, if required, provide detailed design plans for the community mailboxes including a landscape plan. C. If required, the Owner shall provide a suitable temporary community mailbox location to the satisfaction of the Township. 14. Bell Canada A. The Developer is hereby advised that prior to commencing any work within the Plan, the Developer must confirm that sufficient wire line communication/telecommunication infrastructure is currently available within the proposed development to provide communication/telecommunication service to the proposed development. In the event that such infrastructure is not available, the Developer is hereby advised that the Developer may be required to pay for the connection to and/or extension of the existing communication/telecommunication infrastructure. If the Developer elects not to pay for such connection to and/or extension of the existing communication/telecommunication infrastructure, the Developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Municipality that sufficient alternative communication/telecommunication facilities are available within the proposed development to enable, at a minimum, the effective delivery of communication/telecommunication services for emergency management services (i.e., 911 Emergency Services).

County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 7 of 10

Page 179 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

B. The Owner shall agree in the Agreement, in words satisfactory to Bell Canada, to grant to Bell Canada any easements that may be required for telecommunication services. Easements may be required subject to final servicing decisions. In the event of any conflict with existing Bell Canada facilities or easements, the owner/developer shall be responsible for the relocation of such facilities or easements. C. The Owner shall be required to enter into an agreement (Letter of Understanding) with Bell Canada complying with any underground servicing conditions imposed by the Municipality, and if no such conditions are imposed the owner shall advise the municipality of the arrangement made for such servicing. 15. General conditions: A. That when requesting final Approval from the County of Frontenac, the Owner shall accompany such request with the required number of originals and copies of the Final Plan, together with a surveyor’s certificate stating that the lots/blocks thereon conform to the frontage and area requirements of the Zoning By-Law. B. That the lands within this Draft Plan shall be appropriately zoned by a Zoning ByLaw which has come into effect in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. 16. Clearance Letters: A. That Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the County of Frontenac shall be advised that all Conditions of Draft Plan Approval have been satisfied; the clearance memorandum shall include a brief statement detailing how each Condition has been met. B. That Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the County is to be advised in writing by the Township of South Frontenac the method by which conditions 1 to 15 have been satisfied. C. That Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the County is to be advised in writing by KFL&A Public Health the method by which conditions 5 A and B have been satisfied. D. That Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the County is to be advised in writing by the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority the method by which conditions 6) and 7) A to C have been satisfied. E. That Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the County is to be advised in writing by Canada Post the method by which condition 13 has been satisfied. F. That Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the County is to be advised in writing by Bell Canada the method by which condition 14 has been satisfied. 17. Lapsing Provisions: A. That pursuant to Section 51(32) of the Planning Act, this Draft Plan Approval shall lapse at the expiration of three (3) years from the date of issuance of Draft County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 8 of 10

Page 180 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

Plan Approval if final approval has not been given, unless an extension is requested by the Owner and, subject to review, granted by the approval authority. B. That pursuant to Section 51(33) of the Planning Act, the Owner may submit a request to the approval authority for an extension of the Draft Plan Approval. The extension period shall be for a maximum of three (3) years and must be submitted prior to the lapsing of Draft Plan Approval. Further extensions may be considered at the discretion of the Township and the County.

County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 9 of 10

Page 181 of 314 Applicant/Agent: FoTenn Consultants Inc. File No.: 10T-2008/002 Municipality: Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac Subject Lands: 2292 Sands Road, Battersea

Owner: Roger and Roberta Ouellette Date of Decision: July 17, 2013 Date of Notice: July 19, 2013 Last Date of Appeal: August 8, 2013

NOTES TO DRAFT APPROVAL

It is the applicant’s responsibility to fulfill the foregoing Conditions of Draft Plan Approval and to ensure that the required clearance letters are forwarded by the appropriate agencies to the County of Frontenac.
When requesting Final Approval, the applicant will submit an account of how each Condition of Draft Approval has been satisfied along with the appropriate clearance letter from the Agency, Ministry or body requesting the condition.
Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the applicant shall submit to the County of Frontenac for review four (4) draft copies of all Reference Plans and Surveys and three (3) draft copies of the Final M-Plan.
When requesting final approval, such a request must be directed to the Deputy Clerk, and be accompanied with: Eight (8) mylars and four (4) paper prints of the completed Final M-Plan; Four (4) copies of all Reference Plans and (4) copies of all Conveyance Documents for all easements and lands being conveyed to the Municipality; and, A Surveyor’s Certificate to the effect that the lots and blocks on the Plan conform to the Zoning By-Law with respect to lot area and lot frontage. A digital file in AutoCad format.
All measurements in subdivision final plans must be presented in metric units.
The Final Plan approved by the County of Frontenac must be registered within thirty (30) days or the County of Frontenac may, under Subsection 51(59) of the Planning Act, withdraw it approval.
Clearances are required from the following agencies: Township of South Frontenac KFL&A Public Health Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority Canada Post Bell Canada

County of Frontenac File No. 10T-2008/002 – 2292 Sands Road Draft Plan of Subdivision Notice of Decision for Draft Approval – July 19, 2013 Page 10 of 10

Page 182 of 314

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

January 12, 2021 January 7, 2021

SUBJECT:

Application for Extension of Draft Plan Approval for the Cranberry Cove Plan of Condominium 10CD-2012/002 Owner: Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation Applicant: Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation, Gavin Marshall Planning Consultant: Tracy Zander, Zanderplan

RECOMMENDATION: THAT South Frontenac Council has no objection to the County of Frontenac to extend draft plan approval for application 10CD-2012/002, should it be necessary to ensure final approval is issued for this application prior to the current lapsing date of January 29, 2021, and direct the Clerk to forward this resolution to the County Clerk. BACKGROUND: Township and County staff have been working closely with the owner of Cranberry Cove Condominium, Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation, their lawyers and planning consultant over the past 18 months. The combined efforts over that time frame has resulted in the owner clearing all conditions of draft plan approval for Cranberry Cove. The owner has obtained clearance letters from relevant agencies (Public Health and Cataraqui Conservation) and the Township (Attachment 1). The owner has filed their application for final approval with the County of Frontenac. Final approval is anticipated within the next few weeks. However, out of an abundance of caution the owner has also filed an application to the County to extend draft plan approval. While County and Township staff feel confident that final approval will be issued prior to the current lapsing date of January 29, 2021, the owner and his lawyer are concerned about what impact the Provincial COVID-19 shutdown may have on the ability to issue final approval prior to the lapsing date. The application for draft plan extension cited that “all parties, the County and land registry office may be impacted by the current provincial shut down as a result of COVID-19. Under these circumstances we are seeking an extension to draft plan approval to accommodate the last steps in the approval process.” The owner has satisfied all Township and agency conditions. Final approval by the County is an administrative function and is fully anticipated to be completed prior to the lapsing date of January 29, 2021. Should it be necessary to extend draft plan approval to complete the final approval process, Township staff are supportive of the County extending draft plan approval for a further short period of time to ensure final approval is able to be issued.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 183 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Next Steps It is recommended that Council pass a resolution that they have no objection to the extension of draft plan approval for Cranberry Cove Plan of Condominium should it be required by the County of Frontenac. The resolution of South Frontenac Council will be forwarded to the County Clerk for consideration at the January 20, 2021 County Council meeting where the application to extend draft plan approval will be considered. FINANCIAL/STAFFING IMPLICATIONS: None ATTACHMENTS: • •

Attachment 1: Location Map of Cranberry Cove Plan of Condominium Attachment 2: Township Clearance Letter for Cranberry Cove – 10CD-2012002

Prepared/Submitted by: Claire Dodds, Director of Development Services Approved by:

Neil Carbone, Chief Administrative Officer

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Location Map - Cranberry Cove Plan of Condominium

Legend Road Highway Major Road Secondary Road Ferry Route

Assessment Parcels Citations

3.6

WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere © Latitude Geographics Group Ltd.

1.79

3.6 Kilometers

Notes

Page 184 of 314

1: 70,517

Page 185 of 314

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC Development Services Department Township of South Frontenac Box 100, Sydenham ON K0H 2T0 613-376-3027 │planning@southfrontenac.net December 18, 2020 Joe Gallivan Director of Planning & Development County of Frontenac 2069 Battersea Road Glenburnie, Ontario K0H 1S0 Dear Mr. Gallivan RE:

Clearance Letter for Cranberry Cove Condominium 10CD-2012/002 Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation Parts 1, 6 & 7 Plan 13R-8978, Except Parts 1-5, Plan 13R-18799, and Part 1, Plan 13R-19396, Part of Lot, Concession 10, Geographic Township of Pittsburgh, Township of South Frontenac, County of Frontenac

The Township of South Frontenac is in receipt of a completed and signed Condominium Agreement and all supporting documents and drawings for the above noted plan of condominium. In accordance with Condition 15B of the County of Frontenac’s Notice of Decision on the above file, the Township is now in a position to advise in writing the method by which the conditions 1 to 14 of draft plan approval have now been met. The italicized text indicates the original draft plan condition. Township comments indicating how these conditions have been met are in bold directly following each draft plan condition for Plan of Condominium 10CD-2012/002.

Approved Draft Plan: That this conditional approval applies to the Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium, dated 01/04/12, revised May 30, 2014 prepared and certified by Clancy and Hopkins Surveying Limited, OLS, which shows the following:

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 1

Page 186 of 314

      

13 units for single detached dwellings (Units 1-13); 1 storage garage (Unit 14) 1 parking area (Unit 15) Three road blocks (Blocks 16-18) One common element open space block (Block 19) One easement block (Block 20) Two 0.3 m reserves (Blocks 21 & 22)

The Township has reviewed the draft M plan for the proposed plan of condominium containing 13 units for single detached dwellings, 1 storage garage and 1 parking area on lands described Parts 1, 6 & 7 Plan 13R-8978, Except Parts 1-5, Plan 13R-18799, and Part 1, Plan 13R-19396, Part of Lot, Concession 10, Geographic Township of Pittsburgh, Township of South Frontenac. The Township is satisfied that the draft M plan is consistent with the plan of condominium applied for by the Owner. The plan of condominium is also shown on RP13R22165. 2. Condominium Agreement: That the owners of the subject land enter into a plan of vacant land Condominium Agreement with the municipality, prepared to the satisfaction of the municipality, to be registered on title of the subject land. Township of South Frontenac Council passed by-law 2017-37 directing the Mayor and Clerk to sign the Condominium Agreement for the Cranberry Cove Vacant Land Plan of Condominium. The agreement was recently updated to include missing information that was not included in the 2017 version of the agreement. The Owner has signed the Condominium Agreement and it was executed by the Mayor and Clerk on December 2, 2020. The Township has forwarded the Agreement to the Township solicitor for registration upon the final approval of the Plan of Condominium. The Township is satisfied condition 2 has been met. 3. Financial Requirements: A. That the owner agree in writing to satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise of the municipality concerning the provision/upgrading of roads, installation of services and drainage, in accordance with the municipality’s standards and procedures. The Condominium Agreement includes provisions (clause 19, p. 4 and Schedule E, clause 17. p.12) for any outstanding works and financial contributions to upgrades of roads/drainage in accordance with the Township standards. The Township is satisfied condition 3A has been met.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 2

Page 187 of 314

B. That the Owner shall reimburse the Township of South Frontenac and County of Frontenac for all legal, engineering, planning, administrative expenses and permit fees including the cost of any peer review that the Township of South Frontenac or County of Frontenac may require in relation to the condominium. The Condominium Agreement includes provisions (clause 19, p. 4) for any future professional, administrative or permit fees incurred by the Township. All invoices to date for outstanding expenses have been paid by the Owner. The Township is satisfied condition 3B has been met.

Access A. That the road allowances included in this draft plan identified as Block 16 Common Element’, ‘Block 17 Common Element’ and ‘Block 18 Common Element’ shall be shown and constructed to Township standards for new private lanes. The draft M plan, and Reference Plans 13R-20852 and 13R-22165 show what was identified as Blocks 16, 17 and 18 on the draft plan as private lanes. The Condominium Agreement includes provisions (Schedule E, Clause 17, p.12) and includes securities (Schedule B) for the development of these bocks as private lanes and names these lanes. The Township is satisfied condition 4A has been met. B. That a portion of Carrying Place Road from the existing fire hall on the road to the entranceway to the development (approximately 712 metres) be surface treated to the satisfaction of the Township The Condominium Agreement includes a financial contribution to surface treat a portion of Carrying Place Road from Cranberry Cove Lane to the existing fire hall (Schedule B (securities); Schedule E, Clause 19). The Township is satisfied condition 4B has been met.

C. That the new lanes identified as ‘Block 17 Common Element’ and Block 18 Common Element’ shall be named to the satisfaction of the municipality. The Condominium Agreement includes provisions (Schedule E, Clause 20) to name and sign these private lanes. New lanes identified as 3, 4, 5, 21 and 23 Plan 13R-22165 and 13, 14, 15, 18 and 19, Plan 13R-22165 shall be named Winterberry Lane and Fern Lane respectively. The intersection signs have been installed for Cranberry Cove Lane, Winterberry Lane and Fern Lane. The Township is satisfied condition 4C has been met.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 3

Page 188 of 314

D. That 0.3 metre reserves be identified by survey along the road allowance of Carrying Place Road where it abuts proposed units 6, 9, and 10 to be conveyed to and held in trust by the municipality for the purpose of denying additional access onto Carrying Place Road. The Condominium Agreement includes provisions (Clause 10 and Schedule D) for the transfer of 0.3m reserve along Carrying Place Road where it abuts units 6, 9 and 10. The 0.3m reserve is shown as Part 15, 16, 17 & 18 on Reference Plan 13R21517. This 0.3m reserve will be transferred to the Township for the purpose of denying additional access to Carrying Place Road. The Township is satisfied condition 4C has been met.

E. That, prior to final approval, street signage shall be installed according to Township standards and to the satisfaction of the municipality. The Township installed a stop sign at Carrying Place Road and Cranberry Cove Lane on October 13, 2020. The civic addressing signage has also been installed for the lane names within the Plan of Condominium. The Owner has been invoiced for this work. Securities in the] amount outlined in Schedule B have been paid to the Township for this work. The Township is satisfied condition 4E has been met.

Declaration, Easements and Joint Use Agreement A. That the easements referred to in the August 19, 2013 letter from Soloway Wright to the County of Frontenac be created within the declaration of a condominium, with the proposed additional access from the island located at Part 2, Plan 13R-8978 being subject to confirmation that the proposed easement is to the Township’s satisfaction Schedule E, clause 21 of the Condominium Agreement requires an easement to be created within the Declaration for the condominium in favour of the Island described as described as Part of Lot 26, Concession 10, Storrington, being Part 2 on Plan 13R-8978, South Frontenac (PIN 36288-0301) (the “Island”) providing additional access to the Island. Schedule E, clause 32 of the Condominium Agreement establishes that Units 14 and 15 shall be reserved exclusively for the use of Part of Lot 26, Concession 10, Storrington, being Part 4 on Plan 13R-8978, South Frontenac (PIN 36288-0303) (“Part 4, 13R-8978”) in the Declaration. Units 14 and 15 shall have the benefit of an easement over part of Unit 4 in the condominium plan, being Part 17 on Plan 13R22165 for access to the lake, and such Units shall be conveyed to the owner of Part

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 4

Page 189 of 314

4 13R-8978 upon registration of the Declaration and Description. A Restrictive Covenant shall be registered on title to Unit 14 and Unit 15 and Part 4, 13R-8978 in favour of the Condominium such that neither Units 14 and 15 nor Part 4, 13R-8978 may be sold without the other Unit and that at all times, the Units cannot be sold without the concurrent sale of Part 4, 13R-8978. Such restrictive covenants are intended to run with the lands benefited and burdened thereby and shall be binding on and ensure for the benefit of the Condominium and the Units and its respective successors in title thereto, all to the satisfaction of the Municipality. Section 9.1 of the Condominium Declaration speaks to the granting of easements for the purpose of ingress, egress and maintenance of Cranberry Cove Lane and for the purpose of access by the owner of Units 14 and 15 to the Island. Schedule “A” (p. 26) of the Condominium Declaration also reserves an easement over part of Unit 4, being Part 17 on Plan 13R-22165 (Part of PIN 36288-1373) in favour of the owners from time to time of Units 14 and 15 of the Condominium Lands (Part of PIN 36288-1373) for the purpose of ingress and egress to the lake, including the right to locate and maintain a shared private boat dock with the owner of Unit 4. Schedule “A” (p. 26) of the Condominium Declaration for Cranberry Cove describes an easement over the private lane common elements being Parts 6, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 15 on Plan 13R-22165 in favour of the owners from time to time of Part of Lot 26, Concession 10, Storrington, being Part 2 on Plan 13R-8978, South Frontenac (PIN 36288-0301) for the purpose of ingress and egress. Schedule “A” (p. 27) of the Condominium Declaration for Cranberry Cove describes an easement in favour of the owners of Part 2 on Plan 13R-8978 over part of Unit 15 being Part 16 on Plan 13R22165 and provides an easement over part of Unit 4, being Part 16 on Plan 13R-22165. The Township is satisfied that condition 5A has been met.

B. That Cranberry Cove Lane be subject to a joint use agreement (or other similar legal agreement), to be registered on title, between the condominium corporation/declarant and the properties listed in the August 19, 2013 letter from Soloway Wright to the County of Frontenac to the satisfaction of the Township. Section 8 of the Condominium Agreement establishes that there will be a joint use and maintenance agreement (JUMA) between the Corporation and the owners of adjacent and/or nearby properties over lands described as Part 6, 9 and 10 on

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 5

Page 190 of 314

Plan 13R-22165, and the extension of described as Parts 24 and 25 on Plan 13R22165. The JUMA was reviewed by Tony Fleming on March 1, 2020 and determined that the JUMA that has been prepared clears condition #5B. A signed copy of the JUMA has now been provided to the Township for our files. The Township is satisfied that condition 5B has been met. 6. On-Site Sewage Disposal and Water Systems: A. That the recommendations outlined in the letter dated January 10, 2014 from KFL&A Public Health to the County of Frontenac, be addressed to the satisfaction of the municipality and KFL&A Public Health This condition was cleared by KFLA Public Health in an email dated August 18, 2020. The Township is satisfied that the recommendations outlined in the January 10, 2014 letter have been incorporated into the Condominium Agreement and declaration. The January 10, 2014 letter from KFL&A Public Health is referenced in the Condominium Agreement in Schedule E, clause 3(b)(ix). The Condominium Agreement requires the owner to provide a purchaser a copy of this letter. The same letter is referenced in section 4.3 (l) and 4.4. (b) and (g) of the Condominium Declaration The Township is satisfied that condition 6A has been met. B. That all requirements and recommendations specified in the Hydrogeology, Terrain Analysis and Nitrate Impact Assessment Report, revised dated April 9, 2013, from Lissom Soil and Water Inc., and ‘Cranberry Cove Nitrate Attenuation Calculations’ from Greer Galloway Group Inc., dated November 12, 2013, and project letter dated March 15, 2014 and all associated drawings and peer review recommendations be complied with. Township staff worked closely with the owner of Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation, his lawyer and planning consultant, as well as County Planning staff and County Hydrogeologist to obtain a comprehensive list of hydrogeological studies and peer review responses for Cranberry Cove Plan of Condominium. In the document search, no party was able to locate a report dated April 9, 2013 from Lissom.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 6

Page 191 of 314

The below comprehensive list of studies relating to the hydrogeology, terrain analysis and nitrate impact assessment for Cranberry Cove were included in the Condominium Agreement (clause 3 (b)) and Condominium Declaration (clause 4.3 (p)): (i)

KFL&A Public Health Letter dated January 10, 2014; Hydrogeological Assessment for Proposed Subdivision, dated January, 2012 prepared by Lissom Soil and Water Inc.; (iii) First Peer Review prepared by Malroz Engineer Incorporated dated December 11, 2012; (iv) Technical Peer Review – Response to Application for Plan of Condominium prepared by Greer Galloway Group Inc dated October 15, 2013; (v) Cranberry Cove Nitrate Attenuation Calculations from Greer Galloway Group Inc. dated November 12, 2013; (vi) Second Peer Review prepared by Malroz Engineering Incorporated dated December 24, 2013; (vii) Technical Peer Review – Response to Application for Plan of Condominium prepared by Greer Galloway Group Inc dated March 5, 2014; (viii) Hydrogeology, Terrain Analysis and Nitrate Impact Assessment Reports prepared by BluMetric Environmental Inc. and dated February 9, 2017 and February 22, 2017;

(ii)

The Condominium Agreement (Schedule E, clause 3(b)) obligates the owner of the condominium to provide purchasers with these studies and the purchasers hereby agree to comply with the recommendations of these reports. Section 4.4. (b) of the Condominium Declaration notes that the owners shall operate, maintain and completed period inspections of the water supply and sewage disposal systems in accordance with these reports. Township staff are satisfied the intent of condition 6B has been cleared. C. That any existing wells and or septic systems that may be present on the site and are not to be used as part of the plan of condominium be decommissioned as per applicable regulations. Documentation was forwarded to the Township on February 3, 2020 from Ms. Zander that demonstrates the unused wells for Unit 5 and Unit 11 have both been decommissioned per Well Records for well tags A200727 and A200732.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 7

Page 192 of 314

The Township is satisfied that condition 6C has been met. 7. Environment A. That the recommendations of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) dated January 12, 2012 prepared by Ecological Services, be implemented including the requirement that all development be set back a minimum of 35 metres from the high water mark of Cranberry Lake and inland ponds. The Condominium Declaration includes clauses 4.3 (a) and (b) that speak to any development on Units within Cranberry Cove condominium must be in accordance with the EIS prepared by Ecological Services. Schedule E, Clause 3(b) (i) in the Condominium Agreement indicates that purchasers will be provided with a copy of the EIS report and agree to comply with the recommendations listed therein. The 2015 Zoning By-law (By-law 2015-09) amendment incorporates the 35m setback from Cranberry Lake and for inland ponds in Cranberry Cove. The Township is satisfied that condition 7A has been met. B. That all conditions and issues outlined in the letters dated November 26, 2012, December 12, 2013, and July 14, 2014 from the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority/Rideau Waterway Development Review Team to the County of Frontenac, be addressed to the satisfaction of the municipality and Rideau Waterway Development Review Team. All three Cataraqui Conservation Authority/RWDRT letters have been referenced in both Schedule E, 3 (b)(xi)) in the Condominium Agreement and clause 4.3 (p)(x) in the Condominium Declaration. The Township is in receipt of an email from Mr. Dakin of Cataraqui Conservation dated July 20, 2020 indicating that they are satisfied with the Condominium Agreement The Township is satisfied that condition 7B has been met. C. That a practical building envelope in compliance with the Zoning By-law and EIS be identified to the Township’s satisfaction on Unit 2 Schedule E, clause 26 of the Condominium Agreement and clause 4.3 (b) and (w) of the Condominium Declaration identifies that prior to applying for any building permit on Unit 2, the Owner agrees that a practical building envelope shall be established in compliance with the Zoning By-law and EIS. A holding zone was

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 8

Page 193 of 314

established (By-law 2015-09) on Unit 2 requiring a site plan agreement to be registered prior to the holding zone being released. An updated EIS for Unit 2 will be required to support a site plan application for the development of Unit 2. The Township is satisfied that condition 7C has been met. D. That the area on ‘Block 19 Common Element’ near Unit 14 at the narrowest point between the lane and the water’s edge be vegetated with natural species of shrubs and trees as identified in the Township’s Site Plan Guidelines and to the satisfaction of the Township. Schedule E, clause 27 of the Condominium Agreement states that the Common Element near Unit 15 (closest adjacent Unit) shall vegetated with natural species of shrubs and trees at the narrowest point. The Township is satisfied that condition 7D has been met. E. That the Condominium Agreement include text to the satisfaction of the Township and the CRCA notifying the Owner that permission will be required under Ontario Regulation 148/06: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses prior to commencing rough grading, stockpiling, road construction, etc. within 30 metres of the wetland, within 30 m of all watercourses and ponds and within 15 m of the 98.86 m GSC flood elevation on the subject property. Schedule E, Clause 3(f) of the Condominium Agreement includes the text of condition 7E. Clause 4.3 (d) of the Condominium Declaration also makes reference to Cataraqui Conservation approval is required in accordance with Regulation 148/06 prior to commencing rough grading, stockpiling and road construction on the subject property. The Township is satisfied that condition 7E has been met. F. That the Condominium Agreement include text to the satisfaction of the Township and the CRCA to provide notice to purchasers of Units 1 to 5 and 10 to 13 inclusive and Block 18 (based on May 30, 2014 Draft Plan revision) that site alteration and construction (including but not limited to buildings, structures, filling and grading) on these lots may require permission under Ontario Regulation 148/06: Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses prior to commencing these activities.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 9

Page 194 of 314

Schedule E, Clause 3(g) of the Condominium Agreement includes the text of condition 7F. Clause 4.3 (e) of the Condominium Declaration also makes the purchasers of Units 1 to 5 and 10 to 13 aware that any site alteration and construction of these Units require Cataraqui Conservation approval under Regulation 148/06. The Township is satisfied that condition 7F has been met. G. That notice be provided to future purchasers advising them of any other applicable CRCA and Parks Canada regulations, and any other particular environmental restrictions on individual lots, in wording and in a manner to the satisfaction of the Rideau Waterway Development Team and the Township Schedule E, Clause 3(f) of the Condominium Agreement incorporates language that other applicable CRCA and Parks Canada regulations that may apply to the development of individual units. Several clauses (4.3 (i); (m) and 8.3) are included in the Condominium Declaration to make future purchasers aware of CRCA and Parks Canada regulations that may apply to individual Units, including the installation of docks. The Township is satisfied that condition 7G has been met. H. That an agreement be registered on the subject land applying to all of the proposed units to deal with setting out the municipality’s limited service policies to recognize that there is no commitment or requirement by the municipality to assume responsibility for ownership or maintenance of the private lanes within the plan. In addition, the agreement applying to Units 1-5 shall set out the municipality’s standard environmental protection policies requiring that the area within 35 metres of the highwater mark of the lake be maintained in a natural state for soil and vegetation. Schedule E, Clause 28 establishes that the Condominium Declaration shall contain the Municipality’s limited services policies and that the agreement that applies to Units 1-5 shall address the municipality’s environmental protection policies. The Condominium Declaration satisfies this condition by including language in Clause 4.8 (a) that Common Element Private Roads shall remain private and that the Township has no obligation to improve these roads. Clause 4.3 (c) includes language noting that the development or redevelopment of Units 1-5 shall be subject to the Township’s standard environmental protection policies requiring

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 10

Page 195 of 314

the area within 35m of the highwater mark of Cranberry Lake be maintained in a natural state for soil and vegetation. The Township is satisfied that condition 7H has been met. 8. Stormwater A. That a lot grading and drainage plan and a sediment and erosion control plan be completed and approved to the satisfaction of the Township of South Frontenac and the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority (‘CRCA’), and be included in the Condominium Agreement between the Owner and the Township. Schedule “C” of the Condominium Agreement lists the approved lot grading and drainage plans for Cranberry Cove (revised October 19, 2017). These plans have been approved by the Township and the Cataraqui Conservation (formerly CRCA) The Township is satisfied that condition 8A has been met. B. That a final stormwater management plan be prepared by a qualified Professional Engineer and approved to the satisfaction of the Township and the CRCA, and that appropriate text to implement its findings be included in the Condominium Agreement. A final stormwater management report was provided to Cataraqui Conservation to support this development. The Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, Cranberry Cove Lane Condominium, Project Number 16847-1, dated February 2017 was reviewed by Cataraqui Conversation staff and revised on October 19, 2017. This report and associated servicing and grading drawings are listed in Schedule C and are referenced in Schedule E, clauses 18 and 31. Cataraqui Conservation staff provided correspondence on July 20, 2020 that they were satisfied with the wording in the Condominium Agreement regarding stormwater management and grading. The Township reviewed the August 20, 2019 letter from Ainley Engineering regarding the outstanding works and are satisfied that these outstanding items are addressed through securities filed with the Township (email from Mark Segsworth dated September 30, 2019). The Township is satisfied that condition 8B has been met. C. That, prior to final approval, the Township shall be satisfied that all servicing issues are resolved such as lane construction; stormwater drainage, design, and maintenance; and the construction and design of ditches and culverts.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 11

Page 196 of 314

The Township is satisfied that all major servicing issues have been completed to date. Securities have been collected for any minor outstanding works in the amount of $11, 900 for upgrading the lane (improvement to turning circles; maintenance to widen the lane adjacent to units 11 and 12; completion of the SWM weirs and culvert replacement at the south end of Unit 13). The Township is satisfied that condition 8C has been met. 9. Parkland Dedication: That the owner convey up to five percent of the value of the land in the form of cashin-lieu of parkland. Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation has satisfied their cash-in-lieu of parkland requirements by paying $25,000 to the Township (5% of appraised value). The Township is satisfied that condition 9 has been met. 10. Human Remains: The Condominium Agreement shall contain a clause providing that any Owner(s) be advised, and also that a notice be placed in the purchase and sale agreement alerting any prospective purchasers that in the event that human remains are discovered during construction or site development of a lot, that the property owner shall immediately contact the OPP, the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport and the Registrar or Deputy Registrar of the Cemeteries Unit of the Ministry of Consumer Services (or the applicable agencies at the time of final approval). Schedule E, Clause 3(h) of the Condominium Agreement includes language regarding the discovery of any human remains to satisfy condition 10. The Township is satisfied that condition 10 has been met. 11. Archaeological Resources: A. That all recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment (Stage 1-2 & Stage 3) Report, dated June 4, 2010 by Adams Heritage and further revised May 2013 be implemented to the satisfaction of the Township. Schedule E, Clause 3(b)(xii) of the Condominium Agreement lists the Archaeological Assessment as a report that will be provided to purchasers and that purchasers agree to comply with any recommendations contained therein.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 12

Page 197 of 314

Clause 4.3(p)(xi) of the Condominium Declaration lists that this report exists and is available to the condominium corporation. The Township is satisfied that condition 11A has been met. B. That if during the process of development any archaeological resources or human remains of Aboriginal interest are encountered, the Algonquins of Ontario Consultation Office will be contacted immediately at: Algonquins of Ontario Consultation Office 31 Riverside Drive, Suite 101 Pembroke, Ontario K8A 8R6 Telephone: (613) 735-3759 Fax: (613) 735-6307 email: algonquins@nrtco.net Schedule E, Clause 3(i) of the Condominium Agreement includes language regarding contacting the Algonquins of Ontario should there be a discovery of archaeological or human remains of Aboriginal interest to satisfy condition 11B. The Township is satisfied that condition 11B has been met.

Utilities and On-Site Works A. That a garbage pick-up area be included on the plan at a location near Carrying Place Road and to the satisfaction of the Township. The communal garbage and recycling depot has been constructed to the satisfaction of the Township, near Carrying Place Road. The Condominium Agreement also addresses this requirement in Schedule E, Clause 10. The Township is satisfied that condition 12A has been met. B. That an easement be included and a dry fire hydrant shall be constructed at a location to be determined to provide for a Dry Hydrant - this hydrant and the access to it shall be left unobstructed and accessed by the Township for inspection anytime year round and shall be maintained 100 percent, twelve months per year by the Corporation which requirement shall be incorporated into the final Condominium Agreement. Construction of the hydrant and all maintenance costs shall be borne by the developer/condominium corporation and shall be to the satisfaction of the Township The South Frontenac Fire Chief confirmed via email on January 16, 2020 that there was no suitable location found to construct a dry hydrant within the “Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 13

Page 198 of 314

boundaries of Cranberry Cove Plan of Condominium, but that the lack of a dry hydrant will not negatively impact delivery of fire services to this development. As such, the Township is satisfied that this condition has been cleared. The Township is satisfied that condition 12B has been met. C. That, subject to the requirements of Canada Post, any mail boxes shall be placed at a location near the entrance to the development near Carrying Place Road and to the satisfaction of the Township. Canada Post mailboxes have been constructed at an acceptable location to the Township, near Carrying Place Road. The Condominium Agreement also addresses this requirement in Schedule E, clause 30. The Township is satisfied that condition 12C has been met. D. That prior to final approval, the Owner satisfy the Township that public utilities, including without limitation Bell Canada, Hydro One, etc., are adequate to service the proposed development. The Condominium Agreement also addresses this requirement in Schedule E, clause 13. The agreement states that it is the responsibility of the Owner and each subsequent owner of a Unit within the Plan of Condominium to make whatever arrangements with Hydro One and such other utility provider as are necessary for the installation of hydro-electric, telephone and other utility services for the Unit. Ms. Zander’s letter to the Township dated November 25, 2020, indicates that hydro easements are in place on this site. The Township is satisfied that condition 12D has been met. E. That, prior to final approval, street lighting shall be installed at the entrance to the

development at Carrying Place Road such lighting to also illuminate any garbage pick-up area and mail box location. Securities have been taken for the installation of a street light at the intersection of Carrying Place Road and Cranberry Cove Lane at the sole cost of the Owner. The Township will order and have the streetlight installed on behalf of Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation in order to ensure the street light meets the Township’s specifications. The Condominium Agreement also addresses this requirement in Schedule E, clause 19.

The Township is satisfied that condition 12E has been met.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 14

Page 199 of 314

Revisions to Draft Plan: A. That Prior to Final Condominium Approval, the Owner shall submit a revised Block Plan, if required, to reflect any significant alterations caused from this Draft Plan Approval. Minor revisions have been made to the original draft plan of vacant land plan of condominium for Cranberry Cove. These revisions are shown on Reference Plan 13R22165 and the draft vacant land plan of condominium drawing. The turning circle what services Unit 10, 11 and 13 has been enlarged to accommodate vehicle turning and has been centered at the end of Winterberry Lane. The Township is satisfied that condition 13A has been met. B. That where final engineering design(s) result in minor variations to the Plan (e.g., in the configuration of lots, etc.), these may be reflected in the Final Plan subject to the satisfaction of the Township of South Frontenac and the County of Frontenac. The Township is satisfied that having an enlarged and centred turning is preferable over the dimensions shown on the draft plan, and are more consistent with the Township private lane standards. Securities have been collected in the amount shown on Schedule “C” of the Condominium Agreement for upgrades required for the condominium lane, in accordance with an engineering estimate from Ainley Engineering, dated August 20, 2019. The Township is satisfied that condition 13B has been met.
General conditions: A. That when requesting final Approval from the County of Frontenac, the Owner shall accompany such request with the required number of originals and copies of the Final Plan, together with a surveyor’s certificate stating that the lots/blocks thereon conform to the frontage and area requirements of the Zoning By-Law. The draft condominium plan was provided to the Township by Ron Clancy, surveyor, indicating the area, frontage on the private lane and water frontage of the Units within Cranberry Cove. The Township is satisfied that the Units and Common element blocks within the Cranberry Cove Plan of Condominium meet the frontage and area requirements of the Zoning By-law.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 15

Page 200 of 314

Mr. Clancy provided a surveyor’s certificate on December 17, 2020 confirming that each of the units exceed the minimum frontage and area of the zoning that applies to Cranberry Cove (By-law 2015-09). The Township is satisfied that condition 14A has been met. B. That prior to final approval, the County of Frontenac is to be advised by the municipality that this proposed subdivision conforms to the Zoning By-law in effect of the Township of South Frontenac including that the zoning is satisfactory to the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority. The Township approved By-law 2015-09 to establish appropriate zoning by-law provisions to regulate the development of the residential units within Cranberry Cove plan of condominium. The Township is satisfied that condition 14B has been met. C. That the Owner submit a draft Vacant Land Condominium Declaration for approval by the Township and County to ensure all conditions of approval will be satisfied. Township staff have worked with Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation’s lawyer to develop a Condominium Declaration for Cranberry Cove. The Township is satisfied that the draft Vacant Land Condominium Declaration addresses all relevant conditions. The Township is satisfied that condition 14C has been met.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 16

Page 201 of 314

Summary In accordance with condition 15 B of draft plan approval of Cranberry Cove, this letter advises the County of Frontenac the method by which draft plan conditions 1 to 14 have been satisfied. This letter confirms that conditions 1-14 have been fulfilled to the Township’s satisfaction, and subject to the comments of other approval agencies, are supportive of the County of Frontenac issuing final approval to the Cranberry Cove Condominium, file number 10CD-2012/002. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss any aspect of this development further. Sincerely,

Claire Dodds, MCIP, RPP Director of Development Services cc:

Tracy Zander, Zanderplan Gavin Marshall, Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation Bryan Thaw, Nelligan Law

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader” 17

Page 202 of 314

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

January 12, 2021 January 7, 2021

SUBJECT:

Application for Extension of Draft Plan Approval for the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium 10CD-2014/001 Owner: Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation & Applicant: Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation, Gavin Marshall Planning Consultant: Tracy Zander, Zanderplan

RECOMMENDATION: THAT South Frontenac Council has no objection to the County of Frontenac extending draft plan approval for application 10CD-2014/001 for a short period of time in order to allow the remaining outstanding administrative items to be completed on this application, and to direct the Clerk to forward this resolution to the County Clerk. BACKGROUND: Township and County staff have been working closely with Magenta Waterfront Development Corporation, their lawyers and planning consultant over the past two years on the Johnston Point plan of condominium. While there are two owners of Johnston Point, Magenta Waterfront Corporation and their planning consultant, Tracy Zander, were appointed as project managers on this application by the Courts (Justice Hurley) for the purpose of fulfilling conditions and obtaining draft plan approval. Magenta has worked to fulfill all the conditions of draft approval and have obtained clearance letters from Public Health and Cataraqui Conservation. Council passed a by-law in October 2020 authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to sign the condominium agreement. The signing of this agreement by the Mayor and Clerk is conditional on the co-owner of Johnston Point signing the agreement. Magenta has been going through the process of seeking an order of the court to confirm its authority to sign all documents on behalf of both registered owners in order to complete registration of all required documents for final plan registration. The application was heard by Justice Hurley on an urgent basis on December 15, 2020. To date, Magenta has not had the authority to sign the condominium agreement on behalf of the other owner. As such, the Mayor and Clerk have been unable to execute the condominium agreement to date. Until the condominium agreement is executed, Township staff cannot complete the clearance letter and submit it to the County. While Township staff have been advised by Magenta’s lawyers that the Judge has made a decision that Magenta is able to sign the agreement on behalf of the other owner, formal documentation from the Courts has not yet been received by the Township solicitor.

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 203 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Recognizing the Court system and the Land Registry system has been slowed due to the COVID 19 Provincial Shutdown, Magenta’s lawyers have applied to have draft plan approval extended for Johnston Point in order to ensure there is sufficient time for all the documentation to be finalized in order to apply for final approval to the County of Frontenac. As such, Magenta’s lawyers submitted an application to extend draft plan approval for Johnston Point on January 7, 2021. With draft plan approval set to lapse on January 29, 2021, the only meeting for County Council to consider the extension of draft plan approval is at the January 20, 2021 Council meeting. If all the documentation comes through the Courts in short order, the condominium agreement can be signed and the Township clearance letter can be finalized. Following that, Magenta can then submit to the County an application for final approval. While it may be possible for this to be completed by January 29, 2021, Magenta’s lawyer has stated on the application that “all parties, the County and land registry office may be impacted by the current provincial shut down as a result of COVID-19. In the circumstances we are seeking an extension to draft plan approval to accommodate the last steps in the approval process.” Magenta also wants to ensure that Township and County staff have sufficient time to finalize the remaining paperwork for this file. Township staff are supportive of the County extending draft plan approval for a further short period of time (e.g. 3-6 months) to give Township staff the opportunity to finalize the clearance letter and to allow County staff time to review materials related to the final approval of the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium. Next Steps It is recommended that Council pass a resolution that they have no objection to the extension of draft plan approval for Johnston Point of Condominium by the County of Frontenac. The resolution of South Frontenac Council will be forwarded to the County Clerk for consideration at the January 20, 2021 County Council meeting where the application to extend draft plan approval will be considered. FINANCIAL/STAFFING IMPLICATIONS: None ATTACHMENTS: • •

Attachment 1: Location Map of Johnston Point Plan of Condominium Attachment 2: Johnston Point Conditions of Draft Plan Approval

Submitted/Prepared by: Claire Dodds, Director of Development Services Approved by:

Neil Carbone, Chief Administrative Officer

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Location of Johnston Point Plan of Condominium, South Frontenac

Legend Assessment Parcels Ownership Parcels Citations

1.8

WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere © Latitude Geographics Group Ltd.

0.90

1.8 Kilometers

Notes

Page 204 of 314

1: 35,259

Page 205 of 314 CONDITIONS TO APPROVAL

The conditions of approval for the draft plan of condominium are as follows:

Approved Draft Plan: That this conditional approval applies to the Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium, dated February 26, 2016, last revised March 31, 2016, prepared by FOTENN Consultants Inc. and certified by Ronald Clancy, Ontario Land Surveyor comprising a total of 15 Residential Units and 4 blocks subject to the following: I.

II.

The locations of proposed dwellings and septic locations on Unit 7 and 15 shall be evaluated by a qualified environmental consultant and an addendum to the EIS prepared to confirm the locations and any conditions necessary for construction. The boundaries of the common element open space shall ensure that a 5m buffer between any units and the wetland boundary within the common element open space is established, consistent with the drawing attached as Attachment “A”.

Condominium Agreement: A. That the owners of the subject land enter into a vacant land condominium agreement with the municipality, prepared to the satisfaction of the municipality, to be registered on title of the subject land. B. That the Vacant Land Condominium Agreement include a clause stating that 911 civic addressing and locations of all entrances to the units, including the construction and locations of any entrance culverts, shall be shown on a plan prepared to the Townships satisfaction prior to any development of the property.
Financial Requirements: A. That the owner agree in writing to satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise of the municipality concerning the provision of private lanes and upgrading of roads, installation of services and drainage, in accordance with the municipality’s standards and procedures. B. That the Owner shall reimburse the Township of South Frontenac and County of Frontenac for all legal, engineering, planning, administrative expenses and permit fees including the cost of any peer review that the Township of South Frontenac or County of Frontenac may require in relation to the condominium.
Access A. That the private roads included in this draft plan identified as ‘Blocks 16 and 17 shall be constructed to Township standards for new private lanes. Final approval of the constructed road will be required by the Township Public Works Manager. B. That the private roads included in this draft plan identified as ‘Blocks 16 and 17 shall be located a minimum of 30 metres from the nearest point of any wetland or waterbody. C. All driveway construction for each Unit shall require Site Plan approval. All driveways shall require engineering design by a qualified Engineer to ensure mitigative measures are applied to direct stormwater runoff and reduce erosion. Following construction, inspection and approval of the Township Public Works Manager shall be required.

Page 206 of 314 D. That traffic counts be undertaken at North Shore Road and that the entrance location at the road be constructed to a standard acceptable to the Township, particularly in regards to safe sight lines and any requirements of the municipality related to traffic counts. E. That the private roads identified as ‘Blocks 16 and 17 to be created as ‘Common Element’, including the “Existing Roadway Easement Over Private Lands”, be named to the satisfaction of the municipality. F. That a 0.3 metre reserve be identified by survey along the road allowance of North Shore Road where it abuts proposed Unit 12, which 0.3 metre reserve shall be conveyed to and held in trust by the municipality for the purpose of denying additional access onto North Shore Road. G. That legal access to proposed Units 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 14 be obtained over the abutting portion of the existing lane that is on other private lands, and that the vacant land condominium agreement contain wording to permit this access. This wording must also acknowledge that the existing residential lots’ access over the lane will be maintained all the way back to the public road. 5. Environment and Natural Heritage A. That the vacant land condominium agreement contains wording applying to all of the proposed units setting out the municipality’s limited service policies to recognize that there is no commitment or requirement by the municipality to assume responsibility for ownership or maintenance of the private lane within the plan. In addition, the vacant land condominium agreement applying to all the waterfront units shall set out the municipality’s environmental protection policies requiring that the area within 30 metres of the highwater mark of a waterbody or wetland shall be maintained in a natural state for soil and vegetation. This 30 metre environmental protection area is identified as Attachment “B”. B. That the wetland area within the boundary of proposed Unit 14 be surveyed by the Owner prior to construction of any driveway within the Unit. The driveway shall be surveyed prior to construction to ensure that the driveway is constructed a minimum of 30m from the boundary of the surveyed wetland. The driveway shall be constructed by the Owner as a condition of sale of the Unit. This condition shall be included in the condominium agreement with the Township and the agreement of purchase and sale for Unit 14. C. That all conditions outlined in the letter dated November 12, 2014 from the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority to the County of Frontenac, be included in the vacant land condominium Agreement with the Township, including that all driveways be placed a minimum of 30 metres from any waterbody and that all recommendations of the stormwater management plan be implemented. D. The owner shall confirm that MNRF have been consulted on all species at risk issues and that the Declaration and the Vacant Land Condominium Agreement shall incorporate all recommendations from the MNRF included in any Benefit Permit, if issued, related to Gray Rat Snakes and Blandings Turtles or any other species at risk identified. E. That the Owner shall complete Whip Poor Will surveys to determine if they are present at the site and submit this information to the MNRF. 6. Declaration, Easements and Joint Use Agreement That the Declaration contain, at a minimum, clauses addressing the following to the satisfaction of the municipality, which clauses shall also form part of the Vacant Land Condominium Agreement: i. all access roads and driveways shall be set back a minimum of 30 m from all wetlands and water bodies; ii. silt barriers between all construction areas and wetlands or other water bodies shall be installed and maintained throughout the construction process until all disturbed areas have been revegetated;

Conditions of Approval Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

Page 2 of 11

Page 207 of 314 iii. all building envelopes and septic beds shall be located at the top of slope, complying with the setback distances established in Attachment “C” to these Draft Plan Conditions; iv. subject only to condition 6 (v), (vii), all living trees greater than 4 inches diameter at breast height within 40 m of any water body shall not be removed, with the exception of trees knocked over naturally; v. subject only to condition 6 and (vii), all vegetation, with the exception of invasive species, shall be retained and maintained in their natural state within 30 m of all water bodies; vi. An Ecological Committee shall be set up as part of the Condominium Board whose mandate would be to promote environmental stewardship initiatives on Johnston Point. vii. Notwithstanding sub-paragraphs 6(iv) and (v) above, the owner of a Unit, with the exception of Units 7, 9, 12, 13 and 15, may construct a walkway to the water provided that the walkway is no wider than 1.5m and provided that the walkway is constructed in the locations set out in the drawing attached to these Conditions of Draft Approval as Attachment ‘A’. Any deviation from these prescribed locations may only be considered if in consultation with a qualified environmental professional to the satisfaction of the Township; viii. The Owner shall construct the walkways to the water as a condition of sale of the Units where a walkway is permitted. This condition shall be included in the condominium agreement with the Township and the agreement of purchase and sale for all Units where a walkway is permitted; ix. The existing Butternut tree at Unit 8 shall be retained and no development shall be permitted within 25 m of the tree; x. Signage shall be installed at the PSW boundary to ensure residents do not alter, fill or negatively impact the PSW, which signage shall be worded to the satisfaction of the municipality and the CRCA; xi. Docks may only be constructed on units 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (Unit 6 is subject to obtaining access in accordance with these conditions), 8, 10, 11 and 14 provided that the following restrictions are complied with:

docks may only be constructed at the general locations identified on Attachment “A” to these Conditions of Draft Plan Approval;
The joint use docks may only be constructed in accordance with all applicable approvals issued by the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority and/or the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry;
docks must be floating or pole docks;
no aquatic vegetation shall be removed during construction, use or maintenance of any dock;
the surface area of any dock located in Long Bay shall not exceed 15 m² and its length shall not exceed 8 m;
subject to 6(xii), the surface area of any dock not located in Long Bay may not exceed 20 m² and its length shall not exceed 8 m;
the Owner shall work with any purchaser of any Unit to determine their preference and docking needs and shall construct all docks as a condition of sale of the Units where a dock is permitted. As per condition 6 xi.(2), dock location and construction shall only occur following CRCA and/or MNRF permit issuance. This condition shall be included in the condominium agreement with the Township and the agreement of purchase and sale for all Units where a dock is permitted. xii. Joint use docks may be constructed on Unit 10 to provide shared docking for the owners of Units 7, 9, 12, 13 and 15, subject to the following restrictions:
The Owner’s qualified environmental professional, in cooperation with the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority, will identify a low/no impact 1.5 metre walkway to the joint use docking facility through the vegetated buffer on lot 10 generally in the location identified on Attachment “A” to the water’s edge. The walkway shall be constructed a minimum of 3m from the adjacent wetland Conditions of Approval Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

Page 3 of 11

Page 208 of 314 boundary and be delineated by a page wire fence. The Owner shall construct the joint use docks as a condition of sale of the first Unit that is permitted to use the joint use docks. This condition shall be included in the condominium agreement with the Township and the agreement of purchase and sale for all Units that are permitted to use the joint use dock; 2. The joint use docks may only be constructed in accordance with an approval provider; 3. The joint use docks must be floating, cantilever, or pole docks; 4. No aquatic vegetation shall be removed during construction, use or maintenance of any dock; 5. The owners of Units 7, 9, 12, 13 and 15 will have exclusive use of the 0.31 ha small island located south of and between units 8 & 9 , and held in ownership by the Condominium Corporation; 6. Development on this small island will comply with Clause 6(v). The old corduroy road/path to the island shall be removed in accordance with the recommendations of a qualified environmental professional. The location of the dock shall be limited to the east side of the island. Permanent exclusionary fencing and signage shall be installed limiting access to the west side of the island. Signage will explain why no access to the west side of the island is permitted. Any deviation from these prescribed locations on Attachment ‘A’ may only be considered if in consultation with a qualified environmental professional to the satisfaction of the Township; 7. The owners of Units 7, 9, 12, 13 and 15 will be permitted additional shared docking on this small island. All joint use docking on the island shall conform to the requirements of this condition; 8. The joint use docks shall be constructed so that they do not interfere with navigation and shall conform with the applicable zoning for docks. B. The Common Element Open Space shall be governed by Condominium Rules to, at a minimum and without limitation, prohibit the removal of any vegetation within this area and to prohibit the creation of walkways and structures. Use of the Common Element Open Space shall be restricted to “passive recreational uses” as defined in Condition 9A.

On-Site Sewage Disposal and Water Systems: A. That the recommendations outlined in the letter dated September 3, 2014 from KFL&A Public Health to the County of Frontenac, be addressed to the satisfaction of the municipality.
Dock and Deck Access A. Subject to Condition 6(xi),that any dock that is placed at Unit 2 shall be located on the western shore of Unit 2 so that the dock is not located in Long Bay, but is on the open water of Loughborough Lake. Only one (1) dock shall be permitted to service Unit 2, all other existing docks shall be removed as a condition of site plan approval for the Unit. B. Subject to Condition 6(xi), only one (1) dock shall be permitted to service Unit 1, all other existing docks shall be removed as a condition of site plan approval for the Unit. C. That, in recognition that access to the open water of Long Bay from proposed Unit 6 is by way of an island within a wetland, a walking bridge be installed under the supervision of the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority to provide this access to Long Bay. Such walking bridge must be installed to the satisfaction of the CRCA and the Township prior to registration of the Description and vacant land condominium Agreement. Conditions of Approval Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

Page 4 of 11

Page 209 of 314 9. Parkland Dedication: A. That Block 18, Common Element Parkland, be renamed a Common Element Open Space. The Common Element Open Space shall be governed by Condominium Rules to, at a minimum and without limitation, prohibit the removal of any vegetation within this area and to prohibit the creation of walkways and structures. Use of the Common Element Open Space shall be restricted to passive recreational uses and all motorized vehicles shall be prohibited. For the purposes of this section, “passive recreational uses” shall not include trails, hunting, motor boating, or use of any motorized vehicle. An overlook/viewing area shall be permitted in this Block; such overlook to be located adjacent to the private road and be subject to Site Plan Approval. B. That the owner convey up to five percent of the land included in the plan to the municipality for public park purposes. Alternatively, the municipality may require cash-in-lieu for all or a portion of the conveyance. 10. Stormwater A. That the recommendations contained in the ‘Stormwater Management Brief for the Johnston Point Condominium Development’, undated, by Asterisk Engineering Corporation and associated drawings related to site drainage design, construction and maintenance, including construction of ditches and culverts, be included in the Vacant Land Condominium Agreement and that they be complied with to the satisfaction of the municipality. B. That all requirements and recommendations specified in the ‘Hydrogeological Assessment at Johnston’s Point’ report, dated June 2014 from WESA, and all associated drawings be included in the Vacant Land Condominium Agreement and that they be complied with to the satisfaction of the municipality. Human Remains: The condominium agreement shall contain a clause providing that any Owner(s) be advised, and also that a notice be placed in the purchase and sale agreement alerting any prospective purchasers that in the event that human remains are discovered during construction or site development of a lot, that the property owner shall immediately contact the OPP, the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport and the Registrar or Deputy Registrar of the Cemeteries Unit of the Ministry of Consumer Services (or the applicable agencies at the time of final approval). 11. Archaeological Resources: A. That all recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment (Stage 1-4) Report by Abacus Archaeological Services be implemented to the satisfaction of the Township. B. That the applicant provide clearance letters for the Stage 1-4 Archaeological Assessments from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport. C. That if during the process of development any archaeological resources or human remains of Aboriginal interest are encountered, the Algonquins of Ontario Consultation Office will be contacted immediately at: Algonquins of Ontario Consultation Office 31 Riverside Drive, Suite 101 Pembroke, Ontario K8A 8R6 Telephone: (613) 735-3759 Fax: (613) 735-6307 email: algonquins@nrtco.net 12. Utilities and On-Site Works A. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Conditions of Approval Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

Page 5 of 11

Page 210 of 314 i. The private road shall be posted with a 30 km/h speed limit placed to the satisfaction of the municipality; ii. a turtle crossing and education sign developed to the satisfaction of the municipality shall be installed on the private road near the southern end of lot 13; iii. the private road shall be maintained as a gravel surface only; for clarity, no future hard surface paving shall be permitted without additional environmental impact analysis; iv. a land owner education program and environmental sensitivity information package shall be developed and provided to every owner of a Unit and the clause shall be included in all agreements of purchase and sale for any unit enclosing the education information package; and v. a permanent exclusion fence shall be constructed on both sides of the private road along the frontage of lots 6 and 8, to the satisfaction of the municipality. B. That, prior to final approval, the portion of the unopened road allowance identified on the Plan through Units 12 and 13 and Block 17, be closed and the ownership transferred to the owner of the subject lands. C. That, prior to final approval, a garbage collection facility be installed at the entrance to the development near North Shore Road to the satisfaction of the Township. D. That, prior to final approval, any required Canada Post box be installed on the right-of-way for the lane near the entrance to the development at North Shore Road. E. That, prior to final approval, street lighting shall be installed to the Township’s satisfaction at the location for the Canada Post boxes and garbage collection area near North Shore Road. F. That, prior to final approval, street signage shall be installed according to Township standards and to the satisfaction of the municipality. G. Speed limit signs shall be erected at the water at the entrance to Long Bay advising that all watercraft shall adhere to a maximum 10 km/h speed limit H. That, prior to final approval, the municipality be satisfied that all servicing issues are resolved such as private lane construction and any required upgrades to North Shore Road. 13. Site Plan Control That the development of all Units shall be subject to site plan control approval. Site Plan Control applications shall be circulated to Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority for review and comment prior to Township approval. Prior to applying for any building permit the owner of any Unit shall obtain site plan control approval and enter into a site plan control agreement with the Township, which agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the following: i. An approved site plan showing the location of all structures, including the septic disposal system and well, consistent with the recommendations of the EIS; ii. A location for the alternate septic disposal system location, which location shall not be developed; iii. The location of any walkway to the water, where such walkway is permitted; iv. The location of any dock, where a dock is permitted; v. The location of any driveway; and vi. Notwithstanding condition 6 (iv), all living trees on each Unit greater than 4 inches diameter at breast height shall be maintained unless approved for removal as part of Site Plan review. 14. Revisions to Draft Plan:

Conditions of Approval Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

Page 6 of 11

Page 211 of 314 A. That Prior to Final Condominium Approval, the Owner shall submit a revised Block Plan, if required, to reflect any significant alterations caused from this Draft Plan Approval. B. That where final engineering design(s) result in minor variations to the Plan (e.g., in the configuration of lots, etc.), these may be reflected in the Final Plan subject to the satisfaction of the Township of South Frontenac and the County of Frontenac. 15. General conditions: A. That when requesting final Approval from the County of Frontenac, the Owner shall accompany such request with the required number of originals and copies of the Final Plan, together with a surveyor’s certificate stating that the lots/blocks thereon conform to the frontage and area requirements of the Zoning By-Law. B. That prior to final approval, the County of Frontenac is to be advised by the municipality that this proposed subdivision conforms to the Zoning By-law in effect of the Township of South Frontenac including that the zoning is satisfactory to the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority. C. That the Owner submit a draft Vacant Land Condominium Declaration for approval by the Township and County to ensure all conditions of approval will be satisfied 16. Clearance Letters: A. That prior to final approval, the County of Frontenac is to be advised by the municipality that this proposed development conforms to the Zoning By-law in effect of the Township of South Frontenac including that the zoning is satisfactory to the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority. B. That Prior to Final Condominium Approval, the County is to be advised in writing by the Township of South Frontenac the method by which conditions 1 to 14 have been satisfied. C. That Prior to Final Condominium Approval, the County is to be advised in writing by KFL&A Public Health the method by which condition 6A has been satisfied. D. That Prior to Final Condominium Approval, the County is to be advised in writing by the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority the method by which conditions 7 and 8 have been satisfied. 17. Lapsing Provisions: A. That pursuant to Section 51(32) of the Planning Act, this Draft Plan Approval shall lapse at the expiration of three (3) years from the date of issuance of Draft Plan Approval if final approval has not been given, unless an extension is requested by the Owner and, subject to review, granted by the approval authority. B. That pursuant to Section 51(33) of the Planning Act, the Owner may submit a request to the approval authority for an extension of the Draft Plan Approval. The extension period shall be for a maximum of three (3) years and must be submitted prior to the lapsing of Draft Plan Approval. Further extensions may be considered at the discretion of the Township and the County.

Conditions of Approval Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

Page 7 of 11

Page 212 of 314 Attachment “A” Conceptual Site Plan Unit, Path and Dock Locations

Conditions of Approval Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

Page 8 of 11

6.00

TOTAL SITE AREA

.5m

DOCKING AT SHARED ISLAND (BLOCK 19)

COMMUNAL DOCK AT UNIT 9/10 BOUNDARY

m 7.5

JPTP13

JPTP12

JPTP11

36.84

0.31

Block 19

EXCLUSIVE USE

Part of PROVINCIALLY SIGNIFICANT Units/Blocks 1, 6, WETLAND 9, 14 and 18

2.72

Part of Block 18

OPEN SPACE/PARKLAND

2.50

Blocks 16-17

TW5

JPTP01

JPTP02

35m

JPTP04

ack

Setb

JPTP03

JPTP15

P A

JPTP05

JPTP06

7m 10

m 118

TW4

300mm CULVERT

JPTP23

76 m

TW1

1m 15

TW3

JPTP10

JPTP09

A JPTP07 JPTP08

600mm CULVERT

JPTP25

BLOCK 18

JPTP24

ack Setb 60m

m 115

5m 10

JPTP16

tbac

JPTP19

Se 60m

bac

Set

BL O 17

ROADS/STREETS

P JPTP22

117 ack

JPTP18

60m Setb

Units 1-15

TW2

JPTP20

450mm CULVERT

JPTP21

AREA +/DENSITY (ha) 25.31 0.59

1010 PEBBLE

RESIDENTIAL

13m

k ac

UNITS/BLOCKS

m 60

LAND USE TABLE

etb

EMERALD

LAND USE

4m P

A P

Se m

A P

45 m 40 Se m tba Se c tb k ac k

1101EMERALD

SUBJECT SITE

Shown on Draft Plan Shown on Draft Plan All adjacent lands owned, or in which the applicants have an interest are shown on the Key Plan Residential: Single Dwelling Units Residential: Rural / Single Dwelling Units Shown on Draft Plan Shown on Existing Conditions and Proposed Condominium Plan Private Wells Loam - shallow phase, loam, rock outcrop, shallow monteagle sandy loam, muck and peat Shown on Draft Plan Garbage collection, Telephone, Cable, Electricity Restrictive Covenants, Utility Easements

DATE

O.L.S

DRAWN BY REVIEWED BY DATE SCALE

YL MK 2016.02.29 1:1400

108-6 Cataraqui Street Kingston ON K7K 1Z7 Tel: 613 542 5454 Fax: 613 730 1136 www.fotenn.com N

CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN

DRAWING

JOHNSTON POINT PLAN OF CONDOMINIUM

PROJECT

MAGENTA WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT LIMITED

CLIENT

No. REVISION

DATE: JUNE 12, 2014

I CERTIFY THAT: PROPERTY PERIMETER IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING UNDERLYING SURVEY: 13R-13844

SURVEYOR’S CERTIFICATE

SIGNED:_____________ DATE: ________________

I, ______________ HERBY AUTHORIZE ________________________ TO PREPARE AND SUBMIT THIS PLAN TO THE COUNTY OF FRONTENAC FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.

OWNER’S CERTIFICATE

j) k) l)

d) e) f) g) h) i)

a) b) c)

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 51.17 (A-L) OF THE PLANNING ACT:

KEY PLAN

Page 213 of 314

A P

50m

Page 214 of 314 Attachment “B” 30 Metre Environmental Protection Area

Conditions of Approval Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

Page 9 of 11

688

Page 215 of 314

no yes yes yes yes yes no no no no no no no no no

Conditions of Approval Johnston Point Plan of Condominium

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Unit No. waterfrontage long bay

yes yes no no no no no yes no yes yes no no yes no

waterfrontage main lake

Johnston Point Site Plan Matrix

yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes no yes yes no no yes no

individual dock permitted

20m2 20m2 15m2 15m2 15m2 15m2 n/a 20m2 n/a 20m2 20m2 n/a n/a 20m2 n/a

no no no no no no yes no yes no no yes yes no yes

Page 10 of 11

no no no no no no yes no yes no no yes yes no yes

yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes no yes yes no no yes no

no no no no no yes no no no no no no no no no

40 40 50 50 50 50 50 40 60 40 40 60 60 35 50

maximum shared shared 3 meter 1.5 m building dock size dock w/ 0.31 ha path to bridge to setback from easement island water island wetland/lake on unit 10

Attachment “C” Site Plan Matrix

45 50 50 60 60 60 60 45 60 60 60 60 60 35 60

yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

septic Site details in setback Plan APS from Control wetland/lake

Page 216 of 314

Page 217 of 314

Page 218 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL Office of the Chief Administrative Officer AGENDA DATE:

January 12th, 2021

SUBJECT:

Vaccination roll out for Long Term Care Home Employees

RECOMMENDATION: That the Township of South Frontenac requests that Kingston Health Sciences Centre (KHSC) and KFL&A Public Health work with local municipalities to implement local options for the delivery of vaccinations to front line workers and the community; and, That the Township of South Frontenac express its sincere thanks to KHSC and KFL&A Public Health for their leadership on the delivery of COVID-19 vaccinations in the region and pledge support for the program. BACKGROUND: Health Canada approved the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine on December 9, 2020, and the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine on December 23, 2020, with other potential vaccines expected to follow. The Public Health Agency of Canada has announced that the federal government has negotiated agreements with seven vaccine manufacturers that would provide access to COVID-19 vaccines to everyone living in Canada by September 2021. Both the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines require two doses. Given that COVID-19 has had a disproportionate effect on people working in LTC homes and their residents, and understanding that staff are at higher risk due to the nature of their work, COVID-19 vaccinations are being prioritized for people working in LTC settings and higher risk Retirement Homes. Kingston Health Sciences Centre (KHSC), with support from KFL&A Public Health (KFLAPH), Hastings Prince Edward Public Health (HPEPH), and Leeds, Grenville and Lanark District Health Unit (LGLDHU) and under the guidance of the Ministry of Health (MOH) will be providing COVID-19 vaccinations urgently to staff working in long-term care (LTC) and higher risk retirement homes (RH) when a small supply of vaccine arrives in the southeast in the coming week. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: The heads of Council and the CAO’s within the jurisdiction of KFL&A meet weekly via teleconference with KFL&A Public Health to receive updates on the COVID-19 pandemic. During the Monday, January 11, 2020 call, the group was advised that KHSC is moving forward with a plan to vaccinate LTC staff onsite at KHSC. County staff anticipates that the decision to vaccinate onsite at KHSC will result in lower vaccination rates than expected. While Paramedics have been included in the first phase of vaccine roll out, it has been noted that volunteer fire fighters should also be considered for early vaccination and that local delivery would be the preferred model to maximize the number of vaccinations administered. A similar community-based approach to Covid testing has proven to be very effective. While regional CAOs appreciate the logic behind the decision to vaccinate onsite at KHSC, particularly with the more logistically challenging Pfizer vaccine, staff submits

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 219 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL Office of the Chief Administrative Officer that a more efficient and effective approach would be for vaccinations to be delivered within LTC facilities in a manner similar to regular flu immunization. The rationale for this approach includes: •

•

• •

•

Fairmount Home regularly attains over 90% coverage for flu shots by incorporating it into daily routines for staff. Needles are administered by trusted and friendly faces with little resistance. To illustrate further, weekly COVID testing regime is now incorporated into our regular morning screening and has become an accepted part of the work routine. Many workers travel from north of Kingston; to travel to KHSC places a barrier to many who are already stressed and in many instances are subject to mandatory overtime. As well, many of our employees come from single car families and face transportation barriers. Given current staffing challenges, LTC homes cannot provide time off during regular shifts for staff to attend an offsite clinic, leaving vulnerable residents in an untenable situation. Regional LTC homes are advising employees to avoid any contact outside of their trusted bubble and work. Requiring travel to KHSC goes against messaging that has largely been heeded to date. At this point, there is reluctance to attending a hospital site under any circumstance, despite our assurances that all necessary safety measures are in place. The County’s Fairmount LTC Home has sufficient staffing (including a medical director, nurse practitioners, nurses, occupational health nurse and paramedics) to effectively deal with any adverse reactions to vaccinations.

It has been noted to KFLA Public Health that the County is concerned that the challenges listed above would result in lower vaccination rates and place residents, families and staff at risk. For this reason, the County is prepared to work with Public Health to address this issue for the next round of vaccinations, including establishing proper protocols and ensure that vaccinations for our front line workers can be delivered in the home. Public Health noted that similar messaging has been heard from the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) and that once the KHSC clinic is up and running at KGH, that it would be going mobile as soon as possible, noting the following points:  This process will be a partnership between KHSC and the PHUs. We know that there is excellent experience and expertise with PHUs administering many vaccines on site at LTCs and will be taking advantage of that.  The Pfizer vaccine has complexities related to the ultracold chain, IT requirements, security (allocations come with an OPP escort), and the hospital’s accountability for quality, security, delivery, and wastage.  First allocations are small and will not cover all regional LTC or RH needs as KHSC is the distribution center for the three (3) PHUs in Southeastern Ontario covering from Bancroft and Trenton over to Brockville and Almonte.  In initial pilots KHSC and KFLA Public Health will be seeking a balance between KGH clinic and mobile delivery, however they will very likely be giving priority for mobile administration to the more remote locations.  The KGH clinic will have a dedicated entrance and be subject to all screening and Infection Prevention and Control (IPAC) practices. However, Public Health acknowledges that in Peel Region the uptake has been better when vaccinations are administered in LTC facilities. As vaccination roll outs are unpredictable on both arrivals and numbers for the area, and that turn around to administer vaccines is coming quickly and may come with “Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

Page 220 of 314

REPORT TO COUNCIL Office of the Chief Administrative Officer little warning, County/LTC staff want to ensure they are prepared and able to meet quick turnaround times, and so are looking for support to work with Kingston Health Sciences Centre and KFL&A Public Health, along with local municipalities in KFL&A to implement local options for the delivery of vaccinations to front line workers and the community. The County is seeking support from area municipalities, in expressing to KHSC and KFL&A Public Health the importance of vaccinations taking place as close as possible to our residents and LTC/RH employees, and to offer support in ensuring its efficient delivery. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial implications associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS: None.

Submitted/approved by: Neil Carbone Chief Administrative Officer

“Natural, Vibrant and Growing – a Progressive Rural Leader”

South Frontenac Residential Growth Allocations

Page 221 of 314

November 2020

What Drives Population Growth? Economics Local and Regional Economic Outlook

Economic Drivers of Population and Employment Growth by Area

Labour Force Growth within the Commuter Shed

Forecast Employment Growth by Sector

Demographics Population and Housing forecast 2016 to 2046

Allocation of Local Municipal Forecast by Settlement Area and Remaining Rural

Page 222 of 314

Net Migration and Natural Increase

Allocation of Countywide Growth Forecast by Local Municipality

Frontenac County Population and Housing Forecast by Local Municipality

Page 223 of 314

Frontenac County Forecast Permanent Population Growth Comparison 33,200

34,000 32,500

33,200

31,700

32,000

32,500 31,700

30,000

30,700

Permanent Population

29,600 28,000 26,000 24,000

28,400 25,000

27,000

27,300

2011

2016

25,300

22,000 20,000 2001

2006

2021

2026

2031

2036

2041

2046

Year Frontenac County Growth Projections, 2014

Historical

Frontenac County Growth Projections, 2019

Growth Rate Comparison Study Frontenac County Growth Projections, 2014 Frontenac County Growth Projections, 2019

Period 2011 to 2036 2016 to 2046

Annual Growth Rate 0.70% 0.65%

Page 224 of 314

Source: Forecasts in 2011 and 2013 previously conducted by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. 2001 to 2016 population derived from Statistics Canada Census, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. 2016 to 2046 forecast prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. Note: Population includes the net Census undercount estimated at 2.3%.

Frontenac County Forecast Population Growth by Local Municipality, 2016 to 2046 Permanent Population Central Frontenac, 5%

North Frontenac, 3%

Permanent + Seasonal Population Frontenac Islands, 7%

North Frontenac, 12%

Frontenac Islands, 11%

South Frontenac, 80%

South Frontenac, 66%

Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019.

Page 225 of 314

Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019.

Central Frontenac, 15%

Township of South Frontenac Forecast Permanent Population Growth Comparison 25,000 23,800

24,000

23,200 22,600

23,000 21,800

Permanent Population

22,000

21,000

20,300

21,600

22,100

20,800

20,000 19,900

19,000 18,600

18,000

19,100

17,000 16,000 15,000 2006

2011

Historical

2016

2021

2026 Year

2031

Frontenac County Growth Projections, 2014

2036

2041

2046

Frontenac County Growth Projections, 2019

Growth Rate Comparison Study Frontenac County Growth Projections, 2014 Frontenac County Growth Projections, 2019

Period 2011 to 2036 2016 to 2046

Annual Growth Rate 0.69% 0.74%

Page 226 of 314

Township of South Frontenac Growth Drivers and Disruptors

Page 227 of 314

Township of South Frontenac Growth Drivers and Disruptors Local and Regional Employment Growth •

The Inverary employment area represents a marketable location to facilitate the bulk of forecast industrial and commercial growth within Frontenac County. The settlement areas of Hartington and Harrowsmith also have potential to facilitate highway commercial employment uses; and

•

Sustained employment growth in the City of Kingston will continue to drive housing and population development in the Township, as individuals seek competitively priced, groundoriented housing within reasonable commuting distance to the City of Kingston;

Seasonal Growth Opportunities The seasonal component of the Township’s population places significant demand on housing, infrastructure, economic development and municipal services;

•

Demand for seasonal housing largely driven from G.G.H. and Greater Ottawa Region residents;

•

Conversion of seasonal housing to permanent occupancy will potentially add to the rate of permanent population growth.

Page 228 of 314

•

Township of South Frontenac Growth Drivers and Disruptors Population Growth of the 55+ Age Group • Future housing demand across the Township generated by the 55+ age group is anticipated to remain strong over the next decade driven by the aging of the Baby Boom population. • The source of net migration to South Frontenac in the 55+ age category will largely be from the G.G.H. region and Greater Ottawa Region.

Quality of Life

Page 229 of 314

• A key factor influencing the location decisions of businesses and residents. Encompasses several sub-factors such as employment opportunities, cost of living, housing affordability, crime levels, quality of schools, transportation, recreational opportunities, climate, arts and culture, entertainment, amenities, and population diversity.

Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing, and Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046

Page 230 of 314

Defining Township of South Frontenac Settlement Areas 2019 Permanent Population Base

• Primary Settlement Areas: Inverary, Sydenham and Verona; • Secondary Settlement Areas: Battersea, Harrowsmith, Hartington and Sunbury; • Remaining Settlement Areas: Bellrock, Perth Road, Petworth, Railton, Spaffordton and Wilmer; and • Rural: Growth outside of the defined settlement areas.

Primary Settlement Areas, 11%

Secondary Settlement Areas, 7% Remaining Settlement Areas, 2%

Rural, 80%

Page 231 of 314

Source: Data from MPAC, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020.

Township of South Frontenac Forecast Employment Growth, 2016 to 2046 18% 18%

18%

Total Employment

4,000 3,360

3,470

18%

3,890

3,680

19% 4,100

19% 4,250

19% 4,390

19% 18% 17%

3,280

16%

3,000 15% 14%

2,000

Activity Rate

5,000

2016 to 2046 Annual Growth Rate: 1%

13% 12%

1,000

11%

10% 2006

2016

2021

2026

2031

2036

2041

2046

Year Forecast Employment

Employment Activity Rate

Source: 2001 to 2016 from Statistics Canada place of work data including work at home and no fixed place of work. Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. Note: Numbers have been rounded.

Page 232 of 314

Historical Employment

Township of South Frontenac Forecast Housing Growth, 2016 to 2046 120

114

100

Annual Units

105

101

Annual Forecast Average, 89

83 75

40 20 0 2011 to 2018

2016 to 2021

2021 to 2026

2026 to 2031

2031 to 2036

2036 to 2041

2041 to 2046

Year Total

Seasonal

Low density is comprised of singles and semi-detached. Medium density is comprised of townhouses. High density is comprised of apartments. Source: Source: Data from Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), derived by Watson & Associates Economists Lt., 2019. Forecast (2021 to 2046) estimated by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019.

Page 233 of 314

Conversions

Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing, and Employment Forecast by Location, 2016 to 2046

Page 234 of 314

Township of South Frontenac Forecast Employment Growth by Location, 2016 to 2046

Rural, 20% Remaining Settlement Areas, 5% Primary Settlement Areas, 51% Secondary Settlement Areas, 24%

Page 235 of 314

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020.

Township of South Frontenac Forecast Population Growth by Location, 2016 to 2046 Permanent + Seasonal Population

Permanent Population

Rural, 38%

Primary Settlement Areas, 30%

Primary Settlement Areas, 34%

Rural, 46%

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020.

Remaining Settlement Areas, 4%

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. 16

Page 236 of 314

Remaining Settlement Areas, 4%

Secondary Settlement Areas, 24%

Secondary Settlement Areas, 21%

Township of South Frontenac Forecast Housing Growth by Location, 2016 to 2046 1,400

49%

1,200

Total Housing Units

1,000 800

29%

600

19%

400 200

0 Secondary Settlement Remaining Settlement Areas Areas Conversions

Permanent

Seasonal

Rural Total

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020.

Page 237 of 314

Primary Settlement Areas

Conclusions

Page 238 of 314 18

Conclusions Township of South Frontenac Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046

•

Alongside commercial employment growth in Inverary, the secondary settlement areas of Hartington and Harrowsmith have potential to facilitate highway commercial employment uses;

•

A majority of Industrial employment growth is forecast to occur in primary settlement areas with some opportunity for rural development. The settlement area of Sydenham has potential for light industrial growth on municipal water services; and

•

The Inverary employment area also represents a marketable location to facilitate the bulk of forecast industrial employment. 19

Page 239 of 314

•

Conclusions Township of South Frontenac Population and Housing Forecast, 2016 to 2046

The Township of South Frontenac permanent population base is forecast to increase over the next 30 years, from approximately 19,100 in 2016 to 23,800 in 2046. This represents an annual growth rate of approximately 0.7%;

•

Over the 2016 to 2046 forecast period, new housing growth is forecast to be comprised of 90% low-density (singles and semi-detached), 4% medium-density (townhouses) and 6% high-density (apartments);

•

Compared to historical trends, housing growth is forecast to shift more towards settlement areas between 2016 to 2046; and

•

Rural areas are forecast to contain 40% of all new permanent unit growth. This rural share of growth increases when also considering dwelling unit conversions from permanent to seasonal occupancy as well as demand for new seasonal dwellings. 20

Page 240 of 314

•

Page 241 of 314

Growth Analysis Study, 2016 to 2046 Township of South Frontenac

Final Draft

November 2020

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

Page 242 of 314

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

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………… 1-1 1.1 Terms of Reference …………………………………………………………………….. 1-1

Approach ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 2-1 2.1 Long-term Population, Household and Employment Forecast Approach …………………………………………………………………………………… 2-1

Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046 ………………………………………………………………………… 3-1 3.1 Regional and Local Growth Drivers ……………………………………………….. 3-1 3.2 Frontenac County Population, Housing and Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046 ………………………………………………………………………………. 3-2 3.3 Township of South Frontenac Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046 …… 3-2 3.3.1 Township of South Frontenac Forecast Employment Growth by Major Sector, 2016 to 2046 ……………………………….. 3-3 3.4 Township of South Frontenac Population and Housing Forecast, 2016 to 2046 ………………………………………………………………………………. 3-4 3.4.1 Township of South Frontenac Permanent Population Forecast, 2016 to 2046 …………………………………………………….. 3-4 3.4.2 Township of South Frontenac Permanent Housing Forecast, 2016 to 2046 …………………………………………………….. 3-7 3.4.3 Township of South Frontenac Permanent + Seasonal Housing Forecast, 2016 to 2046 ………………………………………… 3-8

Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 ………………………………………………………… 4-1 4.1 Township of South Frontenac Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 ………………………………………………………………………………. 4-2

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 243 of 314

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations (Cont’d) 4.2 5.

Township of South Frontenac Permanent Population and Housing Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 ………………………………………………….. 4-3

Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………………. 5-1

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 244 of 314

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations (Cont’d) List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym

Full Description of Acronym

G.G.H.

Golden Greater Horseshoe

G.M.S.

Growth Management Strategy

MPAC

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation

N.F.P.O.W.

No Fixed Place of Work

O.P.

Official Plan

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 245 of 314

Executive Summary

Page 246 of 314

Executive Summary Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (Watson) was retained by the Township of South Frontenac in the winter of 2019 to undertake an assessment of the Township’s growth potential by settlement area to the year 2046. More specifically, this study provides the following: • • •

•

A brief discussion of regional and local growth drivers within Frontenac County and the Township of South Frontenac; An employment forecast by major sector from 2016 to 2046; Forecast growth trends in population and housing by structure type (i.e. singles/semi-detached, townhouses and apartments) including trends related to seasonal population and housing on a Township-wide basis; and An allocation of population, housing and employment growth between 2016 to 2046, by settlement areas and rural area.

The primary objective of this report is to assess the amount, type and location of population and employment growth within South Frontenac to the year 2046. This analysis will serve as a technical background document to the Township’s growth management strategy (G.M.S.) and Official Plan (O.P.) review. It is important to note that Frontenac County recently undertook a review of its long-term population, housing and employment growth projections, which was completed in January 2020, hereafter referred to as the 2020 Frontenac County Growth Analysis Study.1 This County-wide analysis provides a range of long-term growth scenarios to the year 2046 as well as an allocation of the preferred residential growth forecast by Area Municipality. The growth analysis carried out for South Frontenac as part of this study largely focuses on the allocation of residential and non-residential development throughout the Township by settlement area and remaining rural area. The following provides a summary of the key findings of this report with respect to forecast population, housing and employment trends for South Frontenac:

Population, Housing and Employment Projections Study. County of Frontenac. Final Report. January 20, 2020. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE i

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 247 of 314

Regional and Local Economic Growth Drivers •

•

Regional and local employment growth opportunities will continue to drive housing and population development in the Township, as individuals largely seek competitively priced, ground-oriented housing within reasonable commuting distance to the City of Kingston; The Township of South Frontenac is characterized by a blend of expansive rural lands and settlement areas. The existing employment base is concentrated in retail, small to medium-scale industrial and commercial businesses and home occupations, government and education, accommodation and food services, agriculture and tourism. Growth opportunities within the Township’s local employment base also represent a key driver of future housing demand and population growth; and Quality of life attributes offered in South Frontenac are also expected to drive net migration from a broad range of demographic groups, including first time home buyers, families, empty nesters and seniors. The Township of South Frontenac’s rural character, proximity to the City of Kingston and access to a wide range of recreational opportunities represents a draw to both new residents and businesses.

•

Employment Growth Forecast •

•

The Township’s employment base is expected to increase by approximately 1,100 jobs between 2016 and 2046, increasing from 3,300 to 4,400. This represents an annual growth rate of 1% over the 30-year forecast period; Employment growth in work at home and no fixed place of work (N.F.P.O.W.) categories is forecast to account for the majority of all job growth in South Frontenac; Population-related employment (commercial/institutional including work at home and N.F.P.O.W. employment) is anticipated to generally follow population growth. Alongside commercial employment growth in Inverary, the settlement areas of

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE ii

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 248 of 314

Hartington and Harrowsmith have potential to facilitate highway commercial employment uses; •

The majority of Industrial employment growth is forecast to occur in primary settlement areas with some opportunity for rural development. The settlement area of Sydenham has potential for light industrial growth on municipal water services; and

•

The Inverary employment area also represents a marketable location to facilitate the bulk of forecast industrial employment.

Residential Growth Forecast •

•

• •

The Township of South Frontenac permanent population base is forecast to increase over the next 30 years, from approximately 19,100 in 2016 to 23,800 in 2046.1 This represents an annual growth rate of approximately 0.7%; Over the 2016 to 2046 forecast period, new housing growth is forecast to be comprised of 90% low-density (singles and semi-detached), 4% medium-density (townhouses) and 6% high-density (apartments); Compared to historical trends, housing growth is forecast to shift more towards settlement areas between 2016 to 2046. This shift is anticipated to be largely driven by the aging of the population, local desire for more housing options within settlement areas, opportunities in primary settlement areas for communal serving and continued upward pressure on local housing prices; Housing growth in settlement areas is anticipated to be concentrated in the primary areas of Inverary, Sydenham and Verona; and Rural areas are forecast to contain 40% of all new permanent unit growth. This rural share of growth increases when also considering dwelling unit conversions from permanent to seasonal occupancy as well as demand for new seasonal dwellings.

Population figures include an upward adjustment of approximately 2.3% to account for the net Census undercount.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE iii

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 249 of 314

Report

Page 250 of 314

Chapter 1 Introduction

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 251 of 314

Introduction 1.1 Terms of Reference Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (Watson) was retained by the Township of South Frontenac in the winter of 2019 to undertake an assessment of the Township’s growth potential to the year 2046. More specifically, this study provides the following: • • •

•

A brief discussion of regional and local growth drivers within Frontenac County and the Township of South Frontenac; A long-term employment forecast by major sector; Forecast growth trends in population and housing by structure type (i.e. singles/semi-detached, townhouses and apartments) including trends related to seasonal population and housing on a Township-wide basis; and An allocation of population, housing and employment growth between 2016 to 2046, by settlement areas and rural area.

Population, Housing and Employment Projections Study. County of Frontenac. Final Report. January 20, 2020. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 252 of 314

Chapter 2 Approach

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 1-2

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 253 of 314

Approach 2.1 Long-term Population, Household and Employment Forecast Approach As previously mentioned, the long-term Township-wide growth analysis builds upon the results of the 2020 Frontenac County Growth Analysis Study. The Township-wide growth forecast has been further disaggregated by settlement area and remaining rural area. Details with respect to the housing growth allocations have been provided by structure type, while the employment allocations are presented by major sector. The growth allocations have been largely derived from a review of Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) data, recent building permit activity (2016 to 2019), Statistics Canada data, active residential development applications and residential and non-residential land supply data. More specifically, forecast population, housing and employment growth by location have been assessed in five-year increments from 2016 to 2046 as follows: •

•

Forecast housing demand and corresponding population growth has been allocated in accordance with the rate of historical housing construction in the Township, adjusted to incorporate factors such as development constraints, active/future housing supply, opportunities for communal servicing and discussions with Township staff regarding anticipated market demand; Forecast population is then generated by developing assumptions regarding average household size by unit type, taking into consideration the higher average occupancy of new housing units and the decline in persons per unit (P.P.U.) over time within existing households; and Forecast employment trends by major sector have been summarized by geographic area based on recent development trends, forecast demand and opportunities to accommodate future growth. Employment growth allocations have been based on a broad review of market potential, expansion opportunities within Employment Areas, the distribution of population growth, and discussions with Township staff.

Figure 2-1 provides a schematic overview of the employment, population and housing growth forecast approach discussed above.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 2-1

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 254 of 314

Figure 2-1 Township of South Frontenac Approach to Long-Term Employment, Population and Housing Growth Forecast

Forecast market demand for seasonal housing has also been analyzed in the 2020 Frontenac County Growth Study, based on a review of market demand for seasonal housing by local municipality in Frontenac County. Seasonal dwelling counts were derived from MPAC data between 2011 and 2018. Forecast seasonal housing demand has been largely based on an assessment of the key market areas which are anticipated to drive the demand for seasonal housing (i.e. City of Kingston, Greater Golden Horseshoe (G.G.H.), Ottawa Region and other major market areas). A geographical analysis of seasonal dwelling growth has not been included in this report. The vast majority of all seasonal housing and population growth in Frontenac County is projected to occur within rural areas. This trend is consistent with historical seasonal dwelling development in South Frontenac. A more detailed analysis of Countywide seasonal housing and population growth by Area Municipality in Frontenac County can be found in the 2020 Frontenac County Growth Analysis Study.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 2-2

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 255 of 314

Chapter 3 Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 256 of 314

Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046 3.1 Regional and Local Growth Drivers Prospective economic and population growth in Frontenac County and the Kingston C.M.A. is largely tied to the economic outlook of Ontario and beyond. Provincial economic growth positively influences the number of potential international, interprovincial and intra-provincial migrants attracted the broader economic region of Frontenac County and the Kingston C.M.A.1 Population and employment growth within South Frontenac are closely tied to the City of Kingston. The proximity of South Frontenac to the Kingston area employment market represents a key driver of permanent population growth and the distribution of local housing demand. In 2016, 6,700 Frontenac County residents worked in the City of Kingston, of this total, 5,800 lived in the Township of South Frontenac.2 The City of Kingston employed nearly 78% of all employed South Frontenac residents in 2016. Sustained employment growth in the City of Kingston will continue to drive new housing development and population growth in the Township, as individuals largely seek competitively priced, ground-oriented housing within a reasonable commuting distance to the City of Kingston. Quality of life factors largely attributed to “rural living” offered in South Frontenac are also expected to drive net migration from a broad range of demographic groups, including first time home buyers, families, empty nesters and seniors. Further details regrading regional and local growth drivers can be found in the 2020 Frontenac County Growth Analysis Study.

Inter-provincial migration refers to migrants from other Canadian Provinces/Territories while intra-provincial migration refers to migrants from other areas of Ontario. 2 Statistics Canada Table 98-400-X2016325.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-1

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 257 of 314

3.2 Frontenac County Population, Housing and Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046 In regard to County-Wide population, housing and employment growth, the key findings of the Frontenac County Growth Study are as follows: • •

• • •

Under the Medium (Base Case) Employment Scenario, total employment is forecast to increase from approximately 5,400 in 2016 to 7,000 in 2046;1 The Frontenac County permanent population is forecast to increase over the next 30 years, from approximately 27,300 in 2016 to 33,200 in 2046. This represents an annual growth rate of approximately 0.7%; Relative to historical trends, housing growth is forecast to increasingly shift towards the County’s settlement areas;2,3 Seasonal population accounts for approximately half of the County’s total population base; and Including the County’s seasonal population base, the total permanent + seasonal population for Frontenac is forecast to reach a total of 62,900 persons by 2046.

3.3 Township of South Frontenac Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046 The following subsection provides an assessment of long-term employment potential by major sector for South Frontenac under the Preferred County-wide employment Scenario (medium forecast) to the year 20464. The medium County-wide employment forecast was selected as the Preferred Scenario in accordance with historical employment and labour force growth trends as well as forecast labour force growth potential for the Kingston C.M.A. As summarized in Figure 3-1, the Township’s employment base is expected to increase by approximately 1,100 jobs between 2016 1

Including work and home and no fixed place of work employment. Excluding seasonal dwellings and seasonal-to-permanent unit conversions. 3 This shift is anticipated to be largely driven by the aging of the local population base, market demand for broader housing options within settlement areas, opportunities in primary settlement areas for communal servicing and continued upward pressure on local housing prices. Refer to section 4.2 of this report for further details. 4 Population, Housing and Employment Projections Study. County of Frontenac. Final Report. January 20, 2020. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 2

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-2

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 258 of 314

and 2046, increasing from 3,300 to 4,400. This represents an average annual growth rate of 1% over the 30-year forecast period. The employment activity rate (ratio of jobs to population) is expected to slightly increase over the forecast period, representing a slightly faster rate of long-term employment growth relative to permanent population growth. Figure 3-1 Township of South Frontenac Employment Forecast, 2016 to 2046 20% 18% 18%

18%

Total Employment

4,000 3,360

3,470

18%

3,890

3,680

19% 4,100

19% 4,250

4,390

19% 18% 17%

3,280

16%

3,000 15% 14%

2,000

Activity Rate

5,000

19%

13% 12%

1,000

11%

10% 2006

2016

2021

2026

2031

2036

2041

2046

Year Historical Employment

Forecast Employment

Employment Activity Rate

3.3.1 Township of South Frontenac Forecast Employment Growth by Major Sector, 2016 to 2046 Employment growth within South Frontenac is expected across a range of sectors driven by the continued development of the regional and local economic base and steady local population growth. Figure 3-2 summarizes the 2016 to 2046 employment forecast by major employment sector for the Township. Employment growth related to work at home and no fixed place of work (N.F.P.O.W.), i.e. off-site employment categories, is forecast to account for the majority of job growth in South Frontenac.1 Adjusted for work at home and off-site employment, on-site employment in institutional,

Over half of the Township’s employment growth forecast to occur in sectors that do not generate a gross floor area (G.F.A.). 1

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-3

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 259 of 314

commercial and industrial sectors is expected to account for 44% of employment growth between 2016 to 2046. Figure 3-2 Township of South Frontenac Share of Employment Growth by Sector, 2016 to 2046 Primary, 0%

N.F.P.O.W., 26% Work at Home, 30%

Share of Employment Growth by Sector Industrial, 8%

Institutional, 22% Commercial/ Population Related, 14%

Source: Forecast is estimated by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019.

3.4 Township of South Frontenac Population and Housing Forecast, 2016 to 2046 3.4.1 Township of South Frontenac Permanent Population Forecast, 2016 to 2046 Figure 3-3 summarizes the population growth forecast for the Township from 2016 to 2046 under the Preferred County-wide Population Growth Scenario (i.e. medium forecast).1 Similar to employment, the Preferred Population Scenario anticipates strong 1

Population, Housing and Employment Projections Study. County of Frontenac. Final Report. January 20, 2020. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-4

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 260 of 314

employment and population growth within the Kingston C.M.A., translating into steady labour and housing force growth within Frontenac County. Sustained employment growth in the City of Kingston will continue to support housing development in South Frontenac, as workers continue to seek competitively priced housing options within a reasonable commuting distance to the City. Quality of life attributes offered in South Frontenac are also expected to drive housing demand across a broad range of demographic groups, including first time home buyers, families, empty nesters and seniors. The Township of South Frontenac’s rural character, proximity to the City of Kingston and access to a wide range of recreational opportunities represents a key draw to both new residents and businesses. The following observations can be made with respect to long-term permanent population growth potential in the Township of South Frontenac: •

•

The Township-wide permanent population base is forecast to increase from approximately 19,100 in 2016 to 23,800 by 2046, representing a population growth rate of 0.7% over the 30-year forecast period; Population growth is expected to be driven by net in-migration, largely from other areas of the Province, resulting in steady new housing construction across the Township; and The rate of population growth in the latter half of the forecast period is anticipated to moderate slightly due to the aging of the existing population. As the population continues to age, population growth associated with natural increase (births less deaths) is expected to become increasingly negative, placing downward pressure on future population growth potential in South Frontenac.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-5

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 261 of 314

Figure 3-3 Township of South Frontenac Permanent Population Forecast, 2016 to 2046 25,000 23,800

24,000

23,200 22,600

23,000 21,800

Permanent Population

22,000

20,800

21,000

19,900

20,000

19,194

19,000 18,000

18,911

18,668

2006

2011

17,072

17,000 16,000

15,000 2001

2016

2021

2026

2031

2036

2041

2046

Year Historical

Forecast

Source: 2011 to 2016 from Statistics Canada Census, derived by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. 2016 to 2046 forec ast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. Note: Population figures are rounded and include the net Census undercount estimated at 2.4%.

Seasonal residents account for a significant component of the Township’s total population base, accounting for approximately 35% of total base population as of 2016 (approximately 41% of the total 2016 housing base). It is important to recognize population growth potential related to seasonal residents, as these residents place demands on municipal services and infrastructure, particularly during peak summer months. Over the forecast period, the potential conversion of dwellings occupied by seasonal residents to permanent occupancy may also place further upward pressure on the Township’s permanent population growth rate. This trend has been occurring in recent years and is anticipated to continue, largely given the Township’s attractiveness as a retirement destination. Figure 3-4 summarizes forecast permanent and seasonal population growth for the Township of South Frontenac from 2016 to 2046. During this period, Township-wide permanent and seasonal population is forecast to increase from approximately 29,400 in 2016 to 34,800 by 2046, representing a population growth rate of 0.6% over the 30year period.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-6

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 262 of 314

Figure 3-4 Township of South Frontenac Permanent + Seasonal Population Forecast, 2016 to 2046 37,000 34,800

Permanent + Seasonal Population

35,000

34,200 33,500 32,500

33,000 31,400 30,400

31,000 29,400 29,000

28,700

27,000 25,000 2011

2016

2021

2026

2031

2036

2041

2046

Year Historical

Forecast

Source: 2011 to 2016 from Statistics Canada Census and MPAC, derived by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. 2016 to 2 046 forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. Note: Population figures are rounded and include the net Census undercount estimated at 2.4%.

3.4.2 Township of South Frontenac Permanent Housing Forecast, 2016 to 2046 Figure 3-5 summarizes the Township’s household forecast from 2016 to 2046 in fiveyear growth increments by structure type. Housing trends between 2001 and 2016 are also provided for historical context. Key observations include: •

• •

•

Based on a review of recent MPAC data and residential building permits issued for new dwellings between 2016 to 2019, projected annual housing development during the 2016 to 2021 period is forecast to remain relatively consistent with most recent 5-year historical trends; Total permanent households are expected to increase from roughly 7,200 in 2016 to 9,700 in 2046, representing an increase of 2,500 total units; Forecast housing growth is expected to follow similar overall trends to the most recent 15-year historical period in terms of annual new housing construction levels; and Over the 2016 to 2046 forecast period, new housing is forecast to be comprised of 90% low-density (singles and semi-detached), 4% medium-density

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-7

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 263 of 314

(townhouses) and 6% high-density (apartments) units. In comparison to historical trends, a slight increase in the share of medium and high-density housing forms is anticipated, largely driven by the aging of the population, potential opportunities in primary settlement areas for communal serving and continued upward pressure on local housing prices. Figure 3-5 Township of South Frontenac Five-Year Incremental Housing Growth Forecast, 2016 to 2046 800

760

700

5-Year Housing Growth

600 500 400

Historical 5-Year Average, 400 360

300 200 100

350 3%

97% 90

440 7% 5%

500 6% 6%

470 6% 6%

High Forecast 5-Year Average, 390 320 6% 6%

89%

88%

87%

88%

Medium Low

260 8% 8%

Historical

85%

Historical 5-Year Average Forecast 5-Year Average

0 2001 to 2006 to 2011 to 2016 to 2021 to 2026 to 2031 to 2036 to 2041 to 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 Period

Source: Statistics Canada Census Profules, 2001 to 2016. Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020.

3.4.3 Township of South Frontenac Permanent + Seasonal Housing Forecast, 2016 to 2046 Figure 3-6 summarizes the Township’s permanent and seasonal housing forecast (including converted dwellings from seasonal to permanent occupancy) over the 2016 to 2046 planning horizon in comparison to historical trends from 2011 to 2018. Further details regarding seasonal population and housing growth in the Township of South Frontenac can be found in Appendix D of the 2020 Frontenac County Growth Analysis Study. The following trends can be observed:

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-8

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 264 of 314

•

Net demand for seasonal housing development in South Frontenac is anticipated to average approximately 7 new units per year;

•

The potential for seasonal housing conversions in South Frontenac is anticipated to average approximately 7 net conversions per year (roughly 50% of the County’s anticipated total housing conversions from seasonal to permanent occupancy over the forecast period). Seasonal-to-permanent conversions are captured within ‘permanent’ population and housing growth; Permanent + seasonal dwellings are forecast to increase from 10,000 total units in 2016 to 12,700 by 2046, representing an annual increase of just under 90 units; The Township’s permanent + seasonal population is expected to increase by 5,400 persons over the forecast period; and The rate of permanent and seasonal population growth in the latter half of the forecast period is anticipated to slow due to the aging of the Township’s ‘Baby Boomer’ population (persons born between 1946 and 1964).

•

• •

Figure 3-6 Township of South Frontenac Permanent + Seasonal Housing Growth, 2016 to 2046 120

114

Annual Units

105

101

100 79

Annual Forecast Average, 89

83 75 57

60 40 20 0 2011 to 2018

2016 to 2021

2021 to 2026

2026 to 2031

2031 to 2036

2036 to 2041

2041 to 2046

Year Permanent

Seasonal

Source: Source: Historical data from Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), derived by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019. Forecast (20 21 to 2046) estimated by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2019.

Figure 3-7 summarizes total housing growth over the 2016 to 2046 forecast period between permanent households and seasonal dwellings. Over this time period,

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-9

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 265 of 314

permanent households are forecast to account for approximately 85% of all housing growth over the forecast period, while seasonal dwellings are anticipated to account for the remaining 15%.1 Figure 3-7 Township of South Frontenac Township-wide Housing Growth by Type, 2016 to 2046

Seasonal Dwelling Units 15% Conversions 15% Permanent Households 70%

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. .

Adjusted for the net conversion seasonal dwellings to households occupied on a permanent basis.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 3-10

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 266 of 314

Chapter 4 Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 267 of 314

Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 As previously discussed, the Township-wide growth forecast has been further disaggregated by settlement area and remaining rural area. According to 2019 MPAC data, approximately 22% of permanent South Frontenac residents live within settlement areas. Between 2016 to 2046, new housing development is expected to steadily shift towards settlement areas. As previously noted, this transition will be largely driven by: •

•

• •

The aging of the population base within the 65+ age group, which is anticipated to generate increased demand for new homes located within proximity to urban amenities (i.e. local shopping and health care services) as well as other community services and urban infrastructure; Increased demand from all demographic groups (including first-time home buyers, move-up home buyers/families, empty-nesters and seniors) for a broader range of housing options within primary settlement areas (including townhomes, low-rise apartments and seniors’ housing); Continued upward pressure on local housing prices, particularly (ground-oriented homes on large lots); and Opportunities in primary settlement areas for communal servicing.

For the purpose of this study, settlement area definitions are as follows: •

• •

•

Primary Settlement Areas provide a broad degree of services including commercial and community lands, as well as a broad range of housing options: Inverary, Sydenham and Verona; Secondary Settlement Areas are predominately residential with a smaller degree of commercial services: Battersea, Harrowsmith, Hartington and Sunbury; Remaining Settlement Areas are almost entirely residential and have not experienced as much growth and development in relation to primary and secondary settlement areas: Bellrock, Perth Road Village, Petworth, Railton, Spaffordton and Wilmer; and Rural: Growth outside of the defined settlement areas, including waterfront properties.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 268 of 314

4.1 Township of South Frontenac Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Figure 4-1 summarizes employment growth forecast between 2016 to 2046 by geographic area. Key observations include: •

•

Primary settlement areas (Inverary, Sydenham and Verona) are forecast to accommodate approximately 570 new jobs (just over 50% of total employment growth) between 2016 to 2046; Population-related employment (commercial/institutional including work at home and off-site employment) is anticipated to generally follow population growth. Alongside forecast commercial employment growth in Inverary, the secondary settlement areas of Hartington and Harrowsmith have potential to facilitate highway commercial employment uses; and The majority of Industrial employment growth is forecast to occur in primary settlement areas with some opportunity for rural development. The settlement area of Sydenham has potential for light industrial growth on municipal water services. The Inverary employment area also represents a marketable location to attract and accommodate the majority of forecast industrial employment.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 4-2

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 269 of 314

Figure 4-1 Township of South Frontenac Forecast Employment Growth by Settlement Area and Rural, 2016 to 2046

Remaining Settlement Areas, 5%

Rural, 20%

Primary Settlement Areas, 51% Secondary Settlement Areas, 24%

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. Note: Figure displays new unit growth, excluding the conversion of dwellings from seasonal-to-permanent status.

4.2 Township of South Frontenac Permanent Population and Housing Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Figure 4-2 summarizes forecast permanent population growth by location between 2016 to 2046, while Figure 4-3 presents the forecast allocation of permanent + seasonal population growth. In developing the growth allocations provided herein, broad consideration has been given to a number of factors which are anticipated to influence future housing development by geographic area within the Township, such as: •

The hierarchy of existing settlement areas, in relation to their current population and employment base as well as existing infrastructure and community services;

•

Development constraints, active/future housing supply, and available land supply within settlement areas; and Opportunities for communal servicing.

•

Discussions were also held with Township staff regarding anticipated market demand and land use planning policy objectives. The following trends can be observed:

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 4-3

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 270 of 314

•

The primary settlement areas of Inverary, Sydenham and Verona are expected to accommodate approximately 34% of permanent population growth between 2016 to 2046; Of the total permanent population growth forecast, approximately 38% is expected to occur in rural areas. This share increases when adjusting for seasonal + permanent population, since all seasonal population growth is anticipated to occur in the Township’s rural areas; and Population growth associated with dwelling unit conversions from seasonal to permanent occupancy is also anticipated exclusively in rural areas. Figure 4-2 Township of South Frontenac Permanent Population Growth by Settlement Area and Rural, 2016 to 2046

Rural, 38%

Remaining Settlement Areas, 4%

Primary Settlement Areas, 34%

Secondary Settlement Areas, 24%

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. Note: Figure displays new unit growth, excluding the conversion of dwellings from seasonal-to-permanent status.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 4-4

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 271 of 314

Figure 4-3 Township of South Frontenac Permanent + Seasonal Population Growth by Settlement Area and Rural, 2016 to 2046

Primary Settlement Areas, 30% Rural, 46%

Remaining Settlement Areas, 4%

Secondary Settlement Areas, 21%

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. Note: Figure displays new unit growth, excluding the conversion of dwellings from seasonal-to-permanent status.

Figure 4-4 and Figure 4-5 summarize the anticipated location of total housing growth between 2016 to 2046 by development type.1 The following trends can be observed: •

•

Rural areas are forecast to accommodate approximately 40% of all new permanent housing growth and 46% of total permanent + seasonal housing development.2 This rural share of growth increases when also considering dwelling unit conversions from permanent to seasonal occupancy as well as demand for new seasonal dwellings; As of 2019, 92% of all seasonal dwellings in the Township were waterfront properties. This share is expected to continue into the forecast period, with the majority of seasonal dwelling growth expected to occur on waterfront lots;

Including conversions as well as the creation of new permanent and seasonal dwellings. 2 It is noted that the share of rural housing development is forecast to outpace the share of rural population growth. Currently, a large share of the population live in rural areas. As the rural population base in South Frontenac continues to age, this is anticipated to place downward pressure on population change in the rural area.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 4-5

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 272 of 314

•

• •

Comparatively, 27% of all permanent dwellings were located on the waterfront in 2019. As housing development shifts towards settlement areas, the share of permanent waterfront dwellings is expected to slowly decline over the forecast period; All medium- and high-density housing development is forecast in primary settlement areas due to the for potential communal servicing opportunities; and Primary settlement areas are expected to accommodate approximately 57% of total dwelling unit growth within settlement areas between 2016 to 2046, followed by 37% in Secondary Settlement Areas and 6% in Remaining Settlement Areas. Figure 4-4 Township of South Frontenac Total Housing Growth Allocations by Settlement Area and Rural, 2016 to 2046 3,000

2,680

Total Housing Units

2,500

2,280 49%

2,000 40% 1,500 1,000 60%

51%

Permanent Units

Permanent + Seasonal Units

500 0 Settlement Areas

Rural

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. Note: Seasonal-to-permanent unit conversions included in seasonal unit categorization.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 4-6

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 273 of 314

Figure 4-5 Township of South Frontenac Settlement Area Housing Growth by Location, 2016 to 2046 Remaining Settlement Areas, 6%

Secondary Settlement Areas, 37%

Primary Settlement Areas, 57%

Source: Forecast by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2020. .

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 4-7

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 274 of 314

Chapter 5 Conclusion

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 275 of 314

Conclusion The following key findings are provided with respect to forecast population, housing and employment trends for the Township of South Frontenac: Regional and Local Economic Growth Drivers •

•

Economic growth in South Frontenac is closely tied to the City of Kingston. The proximity of South Frontenac to the Kingston area employment market represents a key driver of permanent population growth and the distribution of local housing demand; Regional and local employment growth opportunities will continue to drive housing and population development in the Township, as individuals largely seek competitively priced, ground-oriented housing within reasonable commuting distance to the City of Kingston; The Township of South Frontenac is characterized by a blend of expansive rural lands and historical settlement areas. The existing employment base is concentrated in retail, small to medium-scale industrial and commercial businesses and home occupations, government and education, accommodation and food services, agriculture and tourism. Growth opportunities within the Township’s local employment base also represent a key driver of future housing demand and population growth; and Quality of life attributes offered in South Frontenac are also expected to drive net migration from a broad range of demographic groups, including first time home buyers, families, empty nesters and seniors. The Township of South Frontenac’s rural character, proximity to the City of Kingston and access to a wide range of recreational opportunities represents a draw to both new residents and businesses.

Employment Growth Forecast •

•

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 5-1

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 276 of 314

•

Population-related employment (commercial/institutional including work at home and N.F.P.O.W. employment) is anticipated to generally follow population growth. Alongside commercial employment growth in Inverary, the secondary settlement areas of Hartington and Harrowsmith have potential to facilitate highway commercial employment uses; The majority of industrial employment growth is forecast to occur in primary settlement areas with some opportunity for rural development. The settlement area of Sydenham has potential for light industrial growth on municipal water services; and The Inverary employment area also represents a marketable location to facilitate the bulk of forecast industrial employment.

Residential Growth Forecast •

•

• •

Population figures include an upward adjustment of approximately 2.3% to account for the net Census undercount.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

PAGE 5-2

H:\South Frontenac\2020 OP\5. Deliverables\Report\Final\Township of South Frontenac Population, Housing and Employment Growth Allocations, 2016 to 2046 Final.docx

Page 277 of 314

REPORT ON CLOSED MEETING INVESTIGATION – 2020-01

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC

John Mascarin Aird & Berlis LLP

November 30, 2020

Page 278 of 314

John Mascarin Direct: 416.865.7721 E-mail: jmascarin@airdberlis.com

REPORT ON CLOSED MEETING INVESTIGATION – 2020-01 INTRODUCTION A request made pursuant to section 239.1 of the Municipal Act, 20011 (the “Complaint”) was filed with the office of the Clerk of The Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac (the “Township”) on August 17, 2020. Our office was provided with the Complaint and all applicable documentation and records on September 2, 2020 in our capacity as the closed meeting investigator (“Investigator”) for the Township. The Complaint alleges that the Council of the Township (“Council”) and the Township’s Committee of the Whole (the “Committee”) contravened section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001or the Township’s Procedure By-law.2 Specifically, the Complaint asserts that a portion of the meeting of Council on October 18, 2016 (the “October 18, 2016 Meeting”) and a portion of the meeting of the Committee on July 14, 2020 (the “July 14, 2020 Meeting”) were improperly held in closed session. CLOSED MEETING INVESTIGATOR – AUTHORITY & JURISDICTION The Township appointed Local Authority Services Inc. (“LAS”) as its closed meeting investigator pursuant to section 239.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001. LAS has delegated to Aird & Berlis LLP its authority to act as the Investigator for the Township. Our jurisdiction as Investigator is set out in section 239.2 of the Municipal Act, 2001. Among other things, we are authorized to investigate, in an independent manner, a complaint made by any person to determine whether the Township has complied with section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 or a by-law enacted under subsection 238(2) (i.e. a procedure by-law) in respect of a meeting or part of a meeting that was closed to the public, and to report on the investigation to Council, together with any recommendations as may be applicable. THE COMPLAINT The Complaint was properly filed pursuant to section 239.2 of the Municipal Act, 2001. The Complaint, as originally filed, contained extensive background information on the history of a longstanding and contentious development project within the municipality at Johnston Point 1 S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended. 2 The Township had two (2) procedure by-laws in effect during the period of time of the two meetings in

question: Procedure By-laws: 2015-56 and 2017-76 (collectively, the “Procedure By-law”). When a specific by-law is being referenced in this Report, the by-law number will be used. For the sake of completeness, we note that By-law 2017-76 was recently amended by By-law No. 2020-18 to permit electronic participation by members of Council and local boards at meetings. However, these amendments came into force and effect after the closed meetings in question were held. Therefore, we have not considered this matter in relation to By-law 2017-76 as amended.

Page 279 of 314 Page 3

Closed Meeting Investigation Report 2020-01

(the “Development”). We understand this matter was before the former Ontario Municipal Board (the “OMB”) and has also been dealt with by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (the “Ministry”). With respect to the former, a settlement was reached between the Township and the proponent of the Development that included various conditions that needed to be satisfied before the Development could be finalized. With respect to the latter, the Ministry issued an Overall Benefit Permit with respect to the Development that we understand was also accounted for by way of the aforementioned settlement conditions. Based on our initial review of the Complaint, we determined the Complaint was incomplete as it did not contain sufficiently clear allegations regarding matters within our jurisdiction as Investigator. As such, we provided the complainant with the opportunity to supplement the Complaint to address this issue. We received supplemental submissions in this regard from the complainant on October 8, 2020. We have considered and addressed these submissions as part of the Complaint in arriving at our determinations with respect to this matter. Primarily, the Complaint appears to question the merit of various decisions made by Council and other actors and agencies with respect to the Development and specifically in relation to the protection and preservation of species at risk and natural heritage at Johnston Point. In terms of the closed meetings in question, the Complaint alleges that the October 18, 2016 Meeting and the July 14, 2020 Meeting were improperly held in closed session. Specifically, we have gleaned that the allegations set out therein are as follows: 

Council contravened section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 or the Procedure By-law by improperly holding a portion of the October 18, 2016 Meeting in closed session on the basis that the subject matter discussed related to the Conditions and the Permit; and



the Committee contravened section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 or the Procedure Bylaw by improperly holding a portion of the July 14, 2020 Meeting in closed session on the basis that the subject matter discussed concerned the Permit.

INVESTIGATION In order to properly assess this matter and make a determination with respect to the issues, we have reviewed the following materials, in addition to the applicable law, as set out below: 

the Complaint and all attachments thereto, including the aforementioned supplemental submissions;



the Township’s Procedure By-laws: 2015-56 and 2017-76;



the open and closed sessions meeting minutes, agendas and reports from the meetings at issue; and



the applicable OMB decisions.3

3 Magenta Waterfront Development Corp. v. South Frontenac (Township) (June 28, 2016 and August 25,

(PL150246) (unreported).

Page 280 of 314 Page 4

Closed Meeting Investigation Report 2020-01

Additionally, we interviewed the Township’s Clerk who was in attendance at the closed meetings that are the subject of the Complaint. We also reviewed, considered and had recourse to such applicable secondary source materials, including other closed meeting investigation reports, that we believed to be pertinent to the issues at hand. The Township was fully cooperative with respect to the conduct of our investigation. This is a report on the investigation of the Complaint made in accordance with subsection 239.2(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001. APPLICABLE LAW (1)

Municipal Act, 2001

Subsection 239(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001 provides that all meetings of Council are to be open to the public, unless otherwise excepted.4 Therefore, all council or committee meetings, unless they deal with a subject matter falling within a specific exception, are required to be held in a public forum. The exceptions that are relevant to this matter are set out in clauses 239(2)(e) and (f) of the Municipal Act, 2001: Exceptions 239 (2) A meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered is, … (e) litigation or potential litigation,5 including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality or local board; (f) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose;

4 The term “meeting” is defined in subsection 238(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 as follows:

“meeting” means any regular, special or other meeting of a council, of a local board or of a committee of either of them, where,

(a)

a quorum of members is present, and

(b)

members discuss or otherwise deal with any matter in a way that materially advances the business or decision-making of the council, local board or committee.

The Municipal Act, 2001 does not define “litigation” or “potential litigation”. However, the Ontario Ombudsman and courts have determined this exception is reserved for circumstances where the subject matter discussed is ongoing litigation or involves a reasonable prospect of litigation. See Investigation into the Township of West Lincoln’s alleged violation of the Municipal Act, 2001 on June 15 and June 22, 2015, Ontario Ombudsman (November 2015) at para. 36 citing R. (C.) v. Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton (2004), 50 R.F.L. (5th) 394 at para. 21.

Page 281 of 314 Page 5

Closed Meeting Investigation Report 2020-01

Before proceeding in camera, a municipality is required to state by resolution the fact of the holding of the closed meeting and the general nature of the matter to be considered at the closed meeting.6 Voting in closed session is permitted pursuant to subsection 239(6) provided that the closed meeting itself is permitted or required to be closed in accordance with subsection 239(2) or (3)7 and the vote is for a procedural matter or for giving directions or instructions to officers of the municipality, staff, and otherwise, as set out in the provision. (2)

Procedure By-law

Subsection 238(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 requires the Township to pass a procedure by-law for governing the calling, place and proceedings of meetings. As noted above, the closed meetings that are referenced in the Complaint are subject to two (2) different versions of the Township’s Procedure By-law: 

the October 18, 2016 Meeting was subject to By-law 2015-56; and



the July 14, 2020 Meeting was subject to By-law 2017-76.

The Procedure By-law provides that its rules of procedure “shall govern Council meetings and all Committees of Council”, which includes the Committee.8 In summary, the relevant provisions in the Procedure By-law include: 

an indication that a meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the matter to be considered falls under one of the exceptions set out at subsection 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, above; and



a requirement that Council or the Committee, as the case may be, state by resolution the fact that a meeting or part of a meeting is being held in closed session and the general nature of the matter to be considered.

The Procedure By-law does not contain a requirement that, upon resuming open session, the chair of the meeting shall report to the public on what was discussed in closed session, such as information on any decisions, resolutions and directions given to staff, to the extent possible without undermining the purpose of considering the matter in camera to begin with. While this action, commonly referred to as “reporting out” or “reporting back”, is not required under the Municipal Act, 2001, it is common practice among municipalities and has been recommended as a closed meeting “best practice” by the Ontario Ombudsman.9

6 Clause 239(4)(a). Additional rules apply under clause 239(4)(b) in circumstances where the municipality

proceeds in camera pursuant to subsection 239(3.1) (the “education and training” exception). 7 Subsection 239(3) requires a council or local board to consider certain matters in closed session. This

subsection is not relevant to this matter and so is not set out or discussed further. 8 Section 2.2(b) of By-law 2015-56 and section 2(b) of By-law 2017-76. 9 See this document from the Ontario Ombudsman for information and guidance on the practice of “reporting

back”.

Page 282 of 314 Page 6

Closed Meeting Investigation Report 2020-01

THE MEETINGS (1)

The October 18, 2016 Meeting

The public minutes from the October 18, 2016 Meeting demonstrate that Council passed the following resolution before proceeding in camera: THAT Council move into closed session to adopt previous closed session minutes and to discuss litigation. In terms of what was discussed during the closed meeting, the closed meeting minutes indicate that Council received a verbal update on matters related to the aforementioned OMB matter from the Township’s solicitor. Specifically, the closed meeting minutes demonstrate that the Township’s solicitor discussed potential litigious proceedings that could arise in relation to the matter that had been before the OMB, and that legal counsel provided legal advice to Council in this regard. (2)

The July 14, 2020 Meeting

The public minutes from the July 14, 2020 Meeting demonstrate that the Committee passed the following motion before proceeding in camera: That Committee of the Whole move into closed session as permitted by Sections 239. 2 of the Municipal Act,10 to discuss… (f) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose related to the Johnston Point Plan of Condominium Benefit Permit. In terms of what was discussed during the closed meeting, the closed meeting minutes indicate that legal counsel provided advice to the Committee on the Township’s obligations and options with respect to the aforementioned OMB matter, the Conditions of Draft Plan Approval and the Overall Benefit Permit. The closed meeting minutes also demonstrate that the Committee engaged in a vote at this meeting. The minutes indicate that the vote was to direct staff to take certain actions in relation to the matter under discussion. FINDINGS (1)

The October 18, 2016 Meeting

Based on the foregoing, it is our determination that Council did not contravene section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 or the Procedure By-law in respect of the October 18, 2016 Meeting for the following reasons. In terms of the resolution, as set out above, Council resolved to go into closed session, in part, “to discuss litigation”. This resolution clearly indicates the fact that Council was proceeding into in camera as well as the general nature of the matter to be discussed. This satisfies the criteria set out in clause 239(4)(a) of the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Procedure By-law. 10 This reference to “Section 239.2” is technically incorrect. The correct provision in the circumstances is

subsection 239(2). As this is merely a technical deficiency, it has not impacted our findings in this matter.

Page 283 of 314 Page 7

Closed Meeting Investigation Report 2020-01

In terms of the meeting itself, the evidence demonstrates that the matter discussed in camera was potential litigation, specifically regarding litigation that could arise in relation to the abovenoted matter that had been before the OMB. This falls within the exception set out at clause 239(2)(e) for “litigation or potential litigation”. Accordingly, we find that Council was permitted to discuss this matter in a closed session. Furthermore, we also find that the “solicitor-client privilege” exception under clause 239(2)(f) was applicable in this instance as Council received legal advice from the Township’s solicitor in relation to the OMB matter under discussion. (2)

The July 14, 2020 Meeting

Based on the foregoing, it is our determination that the Committee did not contravene section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 or the Procedure By-law in respect of the July 14, 2020 Meeting for the following reasons. In terms of the resolution, as set out above, the Committee resolved to go into closed session, in part, “to discuss… (f) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege”. The resolution satisfies the criteria set out in clause 239(4)(a) as it clearly indicates that the Committee was proceeding in camera and states the nature of the matter to be discussed, including an explicit reference to the applicable exception under the statute. This complies with the requirements set out in clause 239(4)(a) of the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Procedure By-law. In terms of the meeting itself, the evidence demonstrates that, as noted above, the Committee received legal advice from the Township’s solicitor at this meeting. This action (i.e. receiving advice from legal counsel) falls squarely within the exception set out at clause 239(2)(f) that allows the Committee to proceed into closed to discuss “advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege”. Accordingly, the Committee was permitted to discuss this matter in closed session. As noted above, the Committee also engaged in a vote at this meeting. The record shows the vote was to provide certain directions to staff arising from a matter that was permitted by the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Procedure By-law to be considered in a setting that was closed to the public. Therefore, Committee’s vote satisfies the criteria set out at subsection 239(6) and was permitted. CONCLUSIONS On the basis of the foregoing, it is our determination that neither Council nor the Committee breached the closed meeting provisions of section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 or the Procedure By-law. RECOMMENDATIONS Notwithstanding that we have found that neither Council nor the Committee breached the closed meeting provisions of section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 or the Procedure By-law, we would recommend that the Township adopt the following best practices going forward to further enhance accountability and transparency within the municipality.

Page 284 of 314 Page 8

Closed Meeting Investigation Report 2020-01

First, we recommend that Council amend Procedure By-law 2017-76 to add a requirement that the resolution to go into closed session include explicit reference to the applicable exception under section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001. While we understand this is a practice that the Township has adopted informally, as demonstrated by the minutes of the July 14, 2020 Meeting, this practice has not been codified in By-law 2017-76. Codifying this practice would increase certainty in terms of what is expected of Council procedurally in respect of closed meetings. This would also help to ensure that Council has adequately turned its mind to which exception, if any, applies in the circumstances. Second, we recommend that Council amend By-law 2017-76 to add a requirement to “report out” after closed session. As discussed above, “reporting out” or “reporting back” is a best practice that is recommended by the Ontario Ombudsman and is practiced by many municipalities. This practice enhances accountability and transparency in local government by providing the public with some information on what was discussed and, if applicable, voted upon in closed session. This practice necessarily balances the interests of upholding the reason for which Council considered a matter in closed session to begin with and the interests of accountability and transparency. How much information is appropriate to disclose in any given case will depend on the particular facts of that case. This report has been prepared for and is forwarded to the Council of the Township. Council is not required to make this report public or to pass a resolution stating how it intends to address the report in accordance with subsections 239.2(11) and (12) of the Municipal Act, 2001, respectively, as no contraventions were found to exist. However, we would recommend that Council do so in any event as the matters set out herein are relevant to the ongoing conduct of the business of Council and the Committee and would serve to reinforce members’ obligations in relation to the confidential information that they receive as a result of their offices. AIRD & BERLIS LLP

John Mascarin Closed Meeting Investigator for The Corporation of the Township of South Frontenac Dated this 30th day of November, 2020

42129022.4

Page 285 of 314

December 22, 2020 Angela Maddocks Clerk Township of South Frontenac 4432 George Street, Box 100 Sydenham ON K0H 2T0

Re:

Proposed 2021 Budget and Work Plan for Municipal Review and Comment

Dear Ms. Maddocks, This past year has certainly been full of challenges as businesses, families and government adjusted to the global pandemic. The RVCA was very fortunate to be able to pivot and continue delivering our programs and services to residents and municipalities across the watershed with COVID safety in place. • Development review services continued with no interruption in service. Even with a record number of development applications this year, staff shifted client service online and continued to meet our reduced review timelines to ensure efficient, streamlined approvals. • All stewardship programs were delivered, albeit under modified conditions. RVCA was able to plant 266,000 trees this spring, naturalize another 4 kms of shoreline, provide over $222,000 in clean water grants to farmers and rural residents and reinspect 431 septic systems around lakes. • We also saw an increase of 50% in the number of people visiting our Conservation Areas. With COVID restrictions in place, residents turned to natural areas to unwind, relax and spend time outdoors and RVCA staff worked diligently to make these spaces safe and welcoming. • Our education programs were also reinvented, offering forest school to children from kindergarten to age 10. Registration was full for the fall and now the winter, taking the place of school field trips that would normally fill most of our program slots. • We were also able to continue our science and engineering work with modifications, monitoring flood and drought conditions, completing new or updated floodplain mapping, as well as continued monitoring of water quality and aquatic health across the watershed. In addition to many challenges, 2020 was also a year of significant change with many amendments to provincial legislation including the Conservation Authorities Act. As we head into 2021, the RVCA will work closely with our member municipalities and the province to implement these changes in a way that reflects the programs and services you want to see from your local conservation authority.

Page 286 of 314

2021 Budget and Work Plan Each fall, the RVCA prepares a draft budget for the coming year and circulates it to member municipalities for review and comment. Any comments received from municipalities are considered by the Board of Directors before approving a budget in the new year. This year, the budget has been prepared to reflect the current situation heading into 2021 – continuing to operate remotely for the first part of the year, implementing changes made to our legislation, but also taking steps to meet the evolving needs of our watershed, municipalities and residents. This includes proposed enhancements to our natural hazard program to ensure continued protection of residents and properties from flooding, erosion and unstable slopes; a review of our environmental monitoring programs to ensure we are collecting the data needed to make the best decisions to protect the health of our shared watershed; and a sharper focus on understanding the impact of climate change on the Rideau watershed to help guide the actions of the RVCA, municipalities, residents and our many partners moving forward. Budget Process This fall, the RVCA’s Board of Directors oversaw the preparation of RVCA’s proposed budget for 2021. The proposed budget (operations and capital) as well as the municipal levy apportionment sheet for 2021 is attached for municipal review and comment. Accompanying the budget is RVCA’s proposed work plan for 2021. The RVCA Board of Directors, comprised of representatives from all of our member municipalities, will vote on the budget and its associated municipal levy at their meeting on February 25, 2021. At this meeting, the Board will first consider any comments received from member municipalities. To facilitate this process: • We would appreciate receiving any comments from your municipality by February 17, 2021 • We would also be pleased to make a presentation to your council about the budget & workplan Budget Overview The RVCA has continued to refine its budget format to reflect Public Sector Accounting Standards and align with year-end Financial Statements. You will find operations and capital separated out in the attached budget documents to provide greater clarity and transparency. The RVCA has also kept our municipal levy increase at a two percent tax increase (plus assessment growth of 1.5%) and this increase covers both our operations and capital budget. While we received budget direction from the City of Ottawa supporting a tax increase of 2.5%, our Board recognized that this has been a challenging year financially for residents and wanted to support municipalities in their efforts to maintain modest tax increases. RVCA has taken steps in recent years to reduce costs and maximize other revenues like grants, fundraising, program revenue and user fees. While the municipal levy remains the foundation of our budget, other sources make up half our revenue. This means we double our municipalities’ investment by providing $2 worth of services for every $1 of levy. Our attached Budget and Work Plan document provides a further explanation of our proposed 2021 budget and gives an overview of the programs, services and priorities that it will support.

Page 287 of 314

The attached budget documents themselves include: • 2021 Proposed Budget – On the first page are operating revenues, on the second page are operating expenditures, and on the third page is a capital budget along with adjustments for tangible capital assets, reserve transfers and our office building debenture. • Revenue Breakdowns – A breakdown of revenues by program is also provided for additional information, first for the operations budget and then the capital budget. • 2021 Proposed Municipal Levy Apportionment – This sheet shows the apportionment of our municipal levy across all member municipalities.

Apportioning the Municipal Levy The municipal levy is divided among all municipalities in the Rideau watershed using the Current Value Assessment (modified). This process is prescribed by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry under the Conservation Authorities Act. This means the more assessment value a municipality has in the watershed (as a proportion of the total assessment value) the higher the percentage of levy they pay. Based on assessment value, the City of Ottawa pays nearly 91 percent of our levy leaving our other 17 municipalities to cover the remaining 9 percent. Attached is a levy apportionment sheet which identifies each municipality’s levy. • The Township of South Frontenac’s proposed municipal levy for 2021 is $24,956.73.

Special Levies In addition to the municipal levy, special levies are applied to certain municipalities for projects that only benefit their municipality. This year, there are five special levies applied to the City of Ottawa: • Rideau River Ice Management $946,215 • Routine operation and maintenance of flood and erosion control structures $40,000 o Structures include Brewer Park, Windsor Park, Graham Creek, Borden Farm, Sawmill Creek and Stillwater Creek • Ottawa Infrastructure Reserve (to repair water control structures) $10,000 • Britannia Village Flood Control Project Infrastructure Reserve $21,500 • Aquatic Monitoring (augmented monitoring in the City of Ottawa) $158,696

Municipal Input We hope you find the attached information regarding RVCA’s budget, municipal levy apportionment and work plan helpful and clear as it is designed to provide municipalities with a clear and transparent understanding of the programs we deliver on your behalf and how they are funded. Municipalities play a key role in the preparation of our budget. Our Board of Directors, who oversees our budget process, is composed of municipal appointees, many of whom sit on council. This ensures all municipalities are represented around the decision-making table. In addition, our Board of Directors completed a review of all of our programs in 2018 and have been working with management on ongoing improvements to enhance program effectiveness, cost efficiency and service delivery.

Page 288 of 314

Thank You In a year like 2020, it is important to recognize the many partners that help you achieve your objectives and enable you to deliver your programs and services, and for the RVCA our main partner is you, our member municipalities. Your staff worked even more closely with our staff this year which enabled us to pivot quickly following the COVID lockdown and maintain our service level with little interruption for residents. It is also the strong support of your Councils during the review of the Conservation Authorities Act that tempered the final changes to our legislation and has now led the province to create a working group to work more collaboratively with conservation authorities and municipalities moving forward. Thank you for your support and for the close working relationship we have with you. If you have any questions about our 2021 proposed budget or work plan, please do not hesitate to contact me or your municipal representative on our Board of Directors. You are also invited to attend our February 25, 2021 meeting when the budget will be considered for approval. This meeting will be held at 6:30 pm at the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, 3889 Rideau Valley Drive, just north of Manotick. If the meeting is to be held electronically, notice and login instructions will be provided in advance of the meeting. Sincerely

Sommer Casgrain-Robertson General Manager / Secretary-Treasurer Enclosed: cc.:

RVCA 2021 Proposed Workplan
RVCA 2021 Proposed Budget and Levy Apportionment Sheet

Pat Barr, RVCA Representative

RVCA 2021 Proposed Budget (December 22, 2020)

Operating Revenue Municipal operating levies Special levies Rideau River Ice Management Water Quality Monitoring Britannia Water Control Structure - Capital Water Control Operations Water Control Structures - Capital Provincial funding MNRF Operating Grant Drinking Water Source Protection Program Revenues Watershed Science and Engineering Services Watershed Report Cards Drinking Water Source Protection Surface Water Quality Monitoring Hydrometric Monitoring and Forecasting Flood Erosion and Drought Studies Groundwater Monitoring Aquatic and Terrestrial Habitat Monitoring Water Control Infrastructure Operations Planning Advisory and Regulatory Services Site Specific Plan Review S. 28 Conservation Authorities Act Part IV Clean Water Act Part VIII Building Code Act Septic Re-Inspection Program Stewardship Services LRC - Storefront\General Stewardship LRC - Production Centre Private Land Forestry Assistance Clean Water Program Shoreline Stewardship Program Beaver Management Ontario Rural Wastewater Centre Conservation Land Management Services Land Donations / Acquisitions Baxter Conservation Area Foley Mountain Conservation Area Other Developed Conservation Areas Other Conservation Lands Lease and Management Agreements Corporate Services Finance and Administration Communications GIS Engineering Projects Water Control Structures/Engineering TOTAL REVENUES - OPERATING

Page 289 of 314

Fiscal 2019 (Audited)

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

5,833,355 1,561,586 1,329,002 161,084 21,500 40,000 10,000 325,877 125,287 200,590

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

5,559,161 1,144,911 946,215 158,696 40,000 354,751 121,344 233,407

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

5,926,339 1,144,911 946,215 158,696 40,000 317,168 107,422 209,746

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

773,696 786 750 14,009 131 607,093 75,409 74,450 1,069 1,451,168 426,282 300,056 3,830 652,967 68,033 785,116 497,575 80,523 131,952 75,066 344,675 1,766 171,422 96,769 43,181 100 31,437 134,595 131,537 2,435 623 648,042 648,042 11,858,110

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

213,288 169,488 43,800 1,183,336 346,800 284,800 7,800 505,828 38,108 962,230 605,932 206,000 82,000 68,298 337,000 20,000 175,000 72,000 30,000 8,000 32,000 41,800 40,000 1,800 400,000 400,000 10,196,477

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

91,781 53,781 38,000 1,270,651 353,736 290,496 14,617 550,254 61,547 962,230 605,932 206,000 82,000 68,298 300,035 20,000 130,325 79,710 30,000 8,000 32,000 51,000 50,000 1,000 50,000 50,000 10,114,115

Page 290 of 314

Operating Expense Watershed Science and Engineering Services Program Management Watershed Report Cards Drinking Water Source Protection Surface Water Quality Monitoring Hydrometric Monitoring and Forecasting Flood Erosion and Drought Studies Groundwater Monitoring Aquatic and Terrestrial Habitat Monitoring Water Control Infrastructure Operations Amortization Planning Advisory and Regulatory Services Program Management Site Specific Plan Review Non-Site Specific Plan Input S. 28 Conservation Authorities Act S. 28 Conservation Authorities Act - Program Dev. Part IV Clean Water Act Part VIII Building Code Act Septic Re-Inspection Program Amortization Stewardship Services Program Management LRC - Storefront\General Stewardship LRC - Production Centre Private Land Forestry Assistance Clean Water Program Shoreline Stewardship Program Beaver Management Ontario Rural Wastewater Centre Amortization Conservation Land Management Services Program Management Land Donations / Acquisitions Baxter Conservation Area Foley Mountain Conservation Area Other Developed Conservation Areas Other Conservation Lands Lease and Management Agreements Amortization Corporate Services Management and Members Finance and Administration Communications Foundation GIS Headquarter Lease and Management Internal Cost (Recoveries) Common Cost Vehicles and Equipment

Fiscal 2019 (Audited)

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

3,976,039 94,086 141,835 201,342 435,099 294,081 745,345 162,202 346,280 1,448,544 107,225 2,177,743 153,335 504,325 171,533 673,177 29,060 3,830 569,935 69,811 2,736 1,420,417 137,436 623,300 322,803 274,525 2,558 57,128 2,667 1,275,744 101,876 7,120 345,926 280,988 252,837 204,384 33,184 49,429 1,382,039 284,263 410,145 210,320 83,825 214,244 179,242 160,883 16,247 (121,455)

3,114,286 91,483 159,395 233,407 435,042 225,129 377,793 110,654 403,301 1,078,082 2,180,817 129,581 642,912 170,551 665,600 20,439 7,799 505,827 38,108 1,628,030 152,519 720,421 451,885 228,907 6,000 68,298 1,300,007 85,693 20,000 337,311 305,675 297,180 222,148 32,000 1,552,303 316,099 464,336 280,419 92,736 231,690 167,023

3,174,311 101,261 160,659 209,746 445,690 271,388 401,159 113,575 391,776 1,079,056 2,314,202 132,418 674,071 166,810 666,207 48,276 14,617 550,254 61,547 1,632,313 157,257 723,740 449,854 226,954 6,210 68,298 1,327,078 79,381 20,000 326,506 304,618 330,036 234,537 32,000 1,608,527 326,755 526,127 283,933 95,697 218,244 157,771 0 0

Page 291 of 314 Amortization Contingency Gain on Disposal Engineering Projects Water Control Structures/Engineering Non Pension Post Retirement Benefit Obligation Non pension post retirement benefit obligation TOTAL EXPENSES - OPERATING ANNUAL SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) - OPERATING

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

278,148 (12,057) 696,331 696,331 14,562 14,562 11,103,757 754,353

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

400,000 400,000 21,034 21,034 10,196,477 0

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

50,000 50,000 7,684 7,684 10,114,115 (0)

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

608,286 274,667 70,000 15,000 248,619 31,500 21,500 10,000

$ $

182,736 822,522

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

478,361 255,568 70,000 15,000 137,793 31,500 21,500 10,000 0 30,000 539,861

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

322,497 202,704 70,000 12,000 37,793 31,500 21,500 10,000 0 1,226,000 888,000 2,467,997

Capital Expenses Principle Repayment of Obligation under Capital Lease HQ Capital Projects/Purchases - see schedule Transfer to Building Life Cycle Reserve Transfers to Reserves - see schedule TOTAL EXPENSES - CAPITAL ANNUAL SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) - CAPITAL

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

573,903 274,667 229,236 70,000 248,619 822,522

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

370,568 255,568 45,000 70,000 169,293 539,861 0

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

2,398,704 202,704 2,126,000 70,000 69,293 2,467,997 0

ANNUAL SURPLUS - OPERATING & CAPITAL

754,353

(0)

Capital Budget Municipal levies - Capital Headquarters Building - Capital (repayments) Building Life Cycle Reserve Investment Other Asset Management - Capital - see schedule Transfers to Reserves Special levies - Capital Britannia Water Control Structure - Capital Other Water Control Structures - Capital Province - Capital Foundation - Capital Funded Capital Projects Transfers from Capital Reserves - see schedule TOTAL REVENUES - CAPITAL

Accounting Reconciling Items Fiscal 2019 (Audited) TCA, Reserves, and Debenture Activity Assets Capitalized as TCA Gain on Disposal of Tangible Capital Assets Amortization Proceeds on Disposal of Tangible Capital Assets Repayment of obligation under capital lease Transfers from reserves Transfers to reserves Accounting Surplus/(Deficit)

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

2020 Budget

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ (206,457) $ (175,144) (12,057) 440,206 (274,667) 67,161 (251,956)

(45,000) 420,190 (255,568) 30,000 (169,293) (19,671)

2021 Budget

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

(2,126,000) 416,300 (202,704) 788,000 (69,293) (1,193,697)

Page 292 of 314 RVCA 2021 Proposed Capital Budget Schedule (December 22, 2020) Note: Most projects are contingent on securing external funding

Total Capital Purchases Baxter Bridge and Boardwalk Replacement Hydrometrics & Monitoring Equipment Chapman Pedestrian Bridge Principle Repayment on Building LIDAR Acquistion Baxter Washroom Accessibility Upgrade Trail Counters Baxter Trail Upgrades

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

1,070,000 500,000 288,000 202,704 140,000 100,000 12,000 16,000 $

2,328,704

Transfers to Reserves Building Reserve Water Control Infrastructure Flood Aerial Imaging Topographical Data Vehicles Mike 11 Drape

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

70,000 31,500 12,000 10,000 6,793 6,000 3,000 $

139,293

2,467,997

Total Capital Needs Funding Breakdown Funded by 2021 Municipal Levy

322,497 $

322,497

Funded by Special Levy Water Control Infrastructure

31,500 $

31,500

Funded by External Sources Baxter Bridge and Boardwalk Replacement Hydrometrics & Monitoring Equipment Baxter Washroom Accessibility Upgrade LIDAR Acquisition

$ $ $ $

856,000 300,000 100,000 70,000 $

1,326,000

Funded by Transfers from Reserves Chapman Pedestrian Bridge Baxter Bridge and Boardwalk Replacement Hydrometrics & Monitoring Equipment LIDAR Acquistion Baxter Trail Upgrades

$ $ $ $ $

288,000 214,000 200,000 70,000 16,000

788,000

Total Funding

2,467,997

Net Transfers to/(from) Capital Reserves

(648,707)

RVCA 2021 Proposed Operating Budget - Revenue Breakdown (December 22, 2020) REVENUE Municipal Levy

Watershed Science and Engineering Services Program Management Watershed Report Cards Drinking Water Source Protection Surface Water Quality Monitoring Hydrometric Monitoring and Forecasting Flood Erosion and Drought Studies Groundwater Monitoring Aquatic and Terrestrial Habitat Monitoring Water Control Infrastructure Operations Amortization

Planning Advisory and Regulatory Services Program Management Site Specific Plan Review Non-Site Specific Plan Input S. 28 Conservation Authorities Act S. 28 Conservation Authorities Act - Program Dev. Part IV Clean Water Act Part VIII Building Code Act Septic Re-Inspection Program Amortization

Stewardship Services Program Management LRC - Storefront\General Stewardship Private Land Forestry Assistance Clean Water Program Shoreline Stewardship Program Beaver Management Ontario Rural Wastewater Centre Amortization

Conservation Land Management Services Program Management Land Donations / Acquisitions Baxter Conservation Area Foley Mountain Conservation Area Other Developed Conservation Areas Other Conservation Lands Lease and Management Agreements Amortization

Province

EXPENSES Foundation

Other Revenue

TOTAL REVENUE

TOTAL EXPENSES

2020 Budget 2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

$ 82,983 $ 159,395 $ $ 276,346 $ 215,129 $ 180,461 $ 110,655 $ 359,501 $ 27,866 $ $ 1,412,336

$ 92,761 $ 160,659 $ $ 286,994 $ 261,388 $ 333,456 $ 113,575 $ 353,776 $ 28,841 $ $ 1,631,451

$ $ $ $ 158,696 $ $ $ $ $ 986,215 $ $ 1,144,911

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

8,500 233,407 10,000 27,844 64,000 343,751

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

8,500 209,746 10,000 13,922 64,000 306,168

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

53,781 38,000 91,781

$ 91,483 $ 159,395 $ 233,407 $ 435,042 $ 225,129 $ 377,793 $ 110,655 $ 403,301 $ 1,078,081 $ $ 3,114,286

$ 101,261 $ 160,659 $ 209,746 $ 445,690 $ 271,388 $ 401,159 $ 113,575 $ 391,776 $ 1,079,056 $ $ 3,174,311

$ 91,483 $ 159,395 $ 233,407 $ 435,042 $ 225,129 $ 377,793 $ 110,654 $ 403,301 $ 1,078,082 $ $ 3,114,286

$ 101,261 $ 160,659 $ 209,746 $ 445,690 $ 271,388 $ 401,159 $ 113,575 $ 391,776 $ 1,079,056 $ $ 3,174,311

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

129,581 296,111 159,551 380,800 20,439 986,482

$ 132,418 $ 320,335 $ 155,810 $ 375,711 $ 48,276 $ $ $ $ $ 1,032,551

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

11,000 11,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

11,000 11,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ 346,800 $ $ 284,800 $ $ 7,800 $ 505,828 $ 38,108 $ $ 1,183,336

$ $ 353,736 $ $ 290,496 $ $ 14,617 $ 550,254 $ 61,547 $ $ 1,270,651

$ 129,581 $ 642,911 $ 170,551 $ 665,600 $ 20,439 $ 7,800 $ 505,828 $ 38,108 $ $ 2,180,818

$ 132,418 $ 674,071 $ 166,810 $ 666,207 $ 48,276 $ 14,617 $ 550,254 $ 61,547 $ $ 2,314,201

$ 129,581 $ 642,912 $ 170,551 $ 665,600 $ 20,439 $ 7,799 $ 505,827 $ 38,108 $ $ 2,180,817

$ 132,418 $ 674,071 $ 166,810 $ 666,207 $ 48,276 $ 14,617 $ 550,254 $ 61,547 $ $ 2,314,202

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

152,519 114,490 245,885 146,907 6,000 665,801

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

157,257 117,808 243,854 144,954 6,210 670,083

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

120,000 40,000 160,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

120,000 40,000 160,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

485,932 206,000 42,000 68,298 802,230

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

485,932 206,000 42,000 68,298 802,230

$ 152,519 $ $ 720,422 $ 451,885 $ 228,907 $ 6,000 $ 68,298 $ $ 1,628,031

$ 157,257 $ $ 723,740 $ 449,854 $ 226,954 $ 6,210 $ 68,298 $ $ 1,632,313

$ 152,519 $ $ 720,421 $ 451,885 $ 228,907 $ 6,000 $ 68,298 $ $ 1,628,030

$ 157,257 $ $ 723,740 $ 449,854 $ 226,954 $ 6,210 $ 68,298 $ $ 1,632,313

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

85,693 162,310 233,675 267,179 214,148 963,004

$ 79,381 $ $ 196,181 $ 224,908 $ 300,036 $ 226,537 $ $ $ 1,027,043

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

10,000 5,000 6,000 8,000 29,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

10,000 5,000 6,000 8,000 29,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

10,000 170,000 66,000 30,000 32,000 308,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

10,000 125,325 73,710 30,000 32,000 271,035

$ 85,693 $ 20,000 $ 337,310 $ 305,675 $ 297,179 $ 222,148 $ 32,000 $ $ 1,300,004

$ 79,381 $ 20,000 $ 326,506 $ 304,618 $ 330,036 $ 234,537 $ 32,000 $ $ 1,327,078

$ 85,693 $ 20,000 $ 337,311 $ 305,675 $ 297,180 $ 222,148 $ 32,000 $ $ 1,300,007

$ 79,381 $ 20,000 $ 326,506 $ 304,618 $ 330,036 $ 234,537 $ 32,000 $ $ 1,327,078

$ 316,099 $ 424,338 $ 278,618 $ 92,736 $ 231,690 $ 167,023 $ 1,510,504

$ 326,755 $ 476,127 $ 282,933 $ 95,697 $ 218,244 $ 157,771 $ 1,557,527

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

40,000 1,800 41,800

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

50,000 1,000 51,000

$ 316,099 $ 464,338 $ 280,418 $ 92,736 $ 231,690 $ 167,023 $ 1,552,304

$ 326,755 $ 526,127 $ 283,933 $ 95,697 $ 218,244 $ 157,771 $ 1,608,527

$ 316,099 $ 464,336 $ 280,419 $ 92,736 $ 231,690 $ 167,023 $ 1,552,303

$ 326,755 $ 526,127 $ 283,933 $ 95,697 $ 218,244 $ 157,771 $ 1,608,527

169,488 43,800 213,288

Page 293 of 314

Corporate Services Management and Members Finance and Administration Communications Foundation GIS Headquarter Lease and Management

Special Levy

Internal Cost (Recoveries) Common Cost Vehicles and Equipment Amortization Contingency Gain on Disposal

Engineering Projects Water Control Structures/Engineering

Non Pension Post Retirement Benefit Obligation Non pension post retirement benefit obligation

OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)

$ $ $ $ $ $

$ $

400,000 400,000

$ $

50,000 50,000

$ $

400,000 400,000

$ $

50,000 50,000

$ $

21,034 21,034

$ $

7,684 7,684

$ $

21,034 21,034

$ $

7,684 7,684

$ 1,144,911

354,751

317,168

189,000

$ 5,559,161

$ 5,926,339

$ 1,144,911

$ 2,948,654

$ 2,536,697

$ 10,196,477

$ 10,114,115

$ $ $ $ $ $

0 0

$ $

400,000 400,000

$ $

50,000 50,000

$ $

21,034 21,034

$ $

7,684 7,684

$ 10,196,477

$ 10,114,115

Page 294 of 314

RVCA 2021 Proposed Capital Budget - Revenue Breakdown (December 22, 2020) REVENUE Municipal Levy

Corporate Services Management and Members

Province

Foundation

Other Revenue

TOTAL REVENUE

TOTAL EXPENSES

2020 Budget 2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

2020 Budget

2021 Budget

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

27,000 6,000 100,000 133,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

12,000 6,000 18,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

500,000 500,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

27,000 6,000 100,000 133,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

512,000 6,000 518,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

27,000 6,000 100,000 133,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

512,000 6,000 518,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

12,000 12,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

30,000 30,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

1,186,000 288,000 1,474,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

30,000 30,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

1,186,000 300,000 1,486,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

30,000 30,000

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

1,186,000 300,000 1,486,000

Page 295 of 314

Special Levy

EXPENSES

Finance and Administration Communications Foundation GIS Headquarter Lease and Management

$ $ $ $ $ $

13,000 325,568 338,568

$ $ $ $ $ $

13,000 272,704 285,704

$ $ $ $ $ $

140,000 140,000

$ $ $ $ $ $

13,000 325,568 338,568

$ $ $ $ $ $

153,000 272,704 425,704

$ $ $ $ $ $

13,000 325,568 338,568

$ $ $ $ $ $

153,000 272,704 425,704

Page 296 of 314

RVCA 2021 Proposed Municipal Levy Apportionment (December 22, 2020)

Current Value Assessment (modified) RVCA Member Municipality

Percentage in Watershed

For 2020

For 2021

Municipal Levy

Levy Portion

Difference

For 2020

For 2021

Difference

For 2020

For 2021

Difference

Athens*

4 $

12,857,817

13,224,228

366,410.95

0.0120

0.0119

-0.0001 $

1,600.00

1,700.00

$100.00

North Dundas*

1 $

16,359,627

17,363,671

1,004,044.31

0.0152

0.0156

0.0003 $

1,600.00

1,700.00

$100.00

Clarence-Rockland

3 $

94,381,892

98,067,766

3,685,874.49

0.0879

0.0000 $

5,305.75

5,490.36

$184.61

Westport

100 $

118,120,928

119,302,515

1,181,587.15

0.1100

0.1069

-0.0031 $

6,640.26

6,679.19

$38.94

Augusta

19 $

157,955,403

162,659,575

4,704,172.31

0.1471

0.1458

-0.0013 $

8,879.58

9,106.56

$226.97

Central Frontenac

22 $

207,003,784

213,932,414

6,928,629.42

0.1928

0.1917

-0.0011 $

11,636.87

11,977.08

$340.21

Merrickville-Wolford

100 $

393,570,010

408,942,923

15,372,912.50

0.3666

0.3665

-0.0001 $

22,124.83

22,894.82

$769.98

Montague

100 $

404,161,141

422,910,555

18,749,413.75

0.3764

0.3790

0.0026 $

22,720.22

23,676.80

$956.58

South Frontenac

13 $

433,431,737

445,772,331

12,340,594.31

0.4037

0.3995

-0.0042 $

24,365.69

24,956.73

$591.04

Elizabethtown - Kitley

61 $

702,302,839

722,797,734

20,494,895.72

0.6541

0.6478

-0.0063 $

39,480.48

40,466.10

$985.61

Beckwith

64 $

785,659,419

823,887,491

38,228,071.80

0.7317

0.7383

0.0066 $

44,166.44

46,125.64

$1,959.21

Drummond/North Elmsley

70 $

788,293,037

812,715,113

24,422,075.37

0.7342

0.7283

-0.0058 $

44,314.49

45,500.15

$1,185.67

Tay Valley

65 $

829,004,474

847,750,328

18,745,854.66

0.7721

0.7597

-0.0124 $

46,603.11

47,461.61

$858.50

Smiths Falls

100 $

886,651,308

918,215,451

31,564,142.85

0.8258

0.8229

-0.0029 $

49,843.77

51,406.63

$1,562.86

Perth

100 $

907,156,260

935,582,918

28,426,658.10

0.8449

0.8384

-0.0064 $

50,996.47

52,378.95

$1,382.48

Rideau Lakes

51 $

1,194,637,120

1,234,205,476

39,568,356.20

1.1126

1.1061

-0.0066 $

67,157.43

69,097.45

$1,940.02

North Grenville

67 $

1,778,421,344

1,863,462,203

85,040,858.51

1.6563

1.6700

0.0137 $

99,975.29

104,326.61

$4,351.32

Ottawa

46 $

97,661,448,790

$101,524,586,910

90.9567 90.9838

0.0271 $

5,490,111.87

5,683,891.16

$193,779.29

$3,863,138,119.67

TOTALS: $ 107,371,416,930 $111,585,379,603 *Athens and North Dundas are charged our minimum levy amount which is $1,700 for 2021.

4,213,962,672

100

6,037,523 $ 6,248,836 Levy Increase:

211,313 3.5%

Page 297 of 314

Page 298 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

2021 Budget & Workplan

Page 299 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

ince our formation in 1966, the RVCA has worked with our municipal partners to deliver programs and services that protect the Rideau watershed for the benefit of everyone. Our goal is to ensure actions upstream don’t have detrimental impacts downstream. Municipalities understand that it takes a healthy watershed to support local economies, protect public health, reduce flooding, droughts and erosion and make communities resilient to climate change. In 2021, we continue on this path as we work to conserve our shared watershed and ensure our future.

Our Legislative Mandate

To provide programs and services designed to further the conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources in the Rideau watershed (Conservation Authorities Act).

Our Vision

A thriving watershed with clean abundant water, natural shorelines, rich forests and wetlands, diverse habitats and sustainable land use that is valued and protected by all.

Our Mission

To understand, manage, protect, restore and enhance the Rideau watershed through science, stewardship, education, policy and leadership.

Our Priorities

Our Strategic Plan outlines a number of key priorities. Many are now complete, while others will be achieved this year and are highlighted in our “Special for 2021” boxes.

Page 300 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

2021 Budget The RVCA’s proposed budget for 2021 is $12.58 million and will enable the RVCA to continue making progress on a number of critical priorities outlined in our fiveyear Strategic Plan. In the following pages of this work plan, you will see priority projects for next year highlighted in “Special for 2021” boxes. These boxes highlight both capital projects and operational priorities. Our proposed budget for 2021 can be broken down into three main expenditures: • $0.95 million for Rideau River Ice Management • $2.47 million for capital projects • $9.17 million for operations to deliver all programs and services

Expenditures

• Staff time has been reallocated among programs and departments for 2021 to support the completion of strategic priorities, better reflect program costs and better serve our municipalities and watershed residents. • A new position has been created to support our natural hazards program, focusing on unstable soils and steep slopes. This position will play a critical role in development review, hazard mapping and water and erosion control infrastructure. This position can be accommodated within our operating budget as our 2018 corporate restructuring resulted in an overall reduction of 2 FTE positions. • A significant number of capital projects are planned for 2021 to take advantage of external funding opportunities which enables us to leverage our

Where does the money come from?

existing resources. RVCA’s contributions will be taken from reserves and will not put additional pressure on the 2021 municipal levy. • Like our member municipalities, salary costs increase annually. While benefit and OMERS contribution rates as well as payroll taxes remained relatively steady over last year, RVCA’s budget accommodates a costof-living increase of 0.5 percent for 2021 as well as grid movement for any staff not yet at their job rate.

Revenues

• Provincial funding is expected to remain steady over last year and is projected to be $317,168 for 2021. • Special levies to the City of Ottawa will also remain consistent with last year and are set at $1.17 million for 2021. • Self-generated revenue such as program and user fees, fundraising and grants is budgeted to increase by 45 percent over last year due in large part to external funding that is being pursued for capital projects. Other revenue (exclusive ofRevenue……………..$3,951,697 transfers from Other reserves) is projected to be $3,951,697 2021. Provincial in Funding …………. $317,168 • The municipal levy will also increase by $211,313 in Levies ………………..$1,176,411 2021. This 3.5 percent increase isSpecial a 2 percent tax increase for municipalities as 1.5 percent will come from new assessment growth in Capital the watershed. Reserves……………. $888,000 This proposed increase reflects budget direction we received from member municipalities was Municipalwhich Levy…………….$6,248,836 Total — $12,582,112 to remain within a 2 percent tax increase, it is also below the City of Ottawa’s budget direction which was a 2.5% tax increase.

Where does the investment go?

Other Revenue……………..$3,951,697

Watershed Science & Engineering Services ….. $3,224,311

Provincial Funding …………. $317,168

Stewardship Services….. $1,632,313

Special Levies ………………..$1,176,411 Planning Advisory & Regulatory Services……..$2,314,202 Capital Reserves……………. $888,000

Total — $12,582,112

Municipal Levy…………….$6,248,836

Total — $12,582,112

Conservation Land Management Services… $1,327,078 Corporate Services……….$1,616,211 Capital Projects ……………$2,467,997

Page 301 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Municipal Levy Being a municipally-based organization, the foundation of our budget is the municipal levy. However, we are committed to minimizing pressure on the levy and for the seventh consecutive year, the RVCA has kept its municipal levy increase to a two percent tax increase by reducing costs, finding efficiencies and maximizing other revenue sources. While the levy remains the foundation of our budget, other sources make up over half our revenue. This means that for every dollar invested through the municipal levy, the RVCA is able to double that investment to deliver a variety of programs and services in the Rideau watershed. Our other revenue sources include: • Charging fees for education programs, conservation areas, permits and planning comments

• Getting grants for special projects, students and interns • Fundraising through our Foundation • Special levies for specific projects that benefit a particular municipality • Joint programming and staff sharing with neighbouring conservation authorities • Landowner contributions for services they receive

Municipal Levy Apportionment

Based on assessment value, the City of Ottawa will pay almost 91 percent of RVCA’s levy in 2021. This amounts to $5.68 million leaving our other 17 municipalities to share the remaining $564,945. Levy costs for these municipalities range from $1,700 to $104,326 depending on their assessment.

RVCA Services

Serving our Municipalities and Residents

RVCA staff work closely with municipal staff because our work is so interconnected. In fact, it’s hard to find a municipal service that our programs don’t support either directly or indirectly! For example, our work supports municipal development review, emergency management, water and sewage services, tourism and recreation and of course economic development. And the benefit of a conservation authority is that these programs are delivered consistently across the watershed at a fraction of the cost because our staff are shared among 18 municipalities and sometimes neighbouring Conservation Authorities. This saves money and avoids duplication. RVCA’s programs also serve a wide range of public interests and needs benefiting local watershed residents from lake country to agricultural areas to urban communities. Through the RVCA, municipalities and residents have access to expert staff who develop a strong understanding of our local watershed and share 4

their knowledge, expertise and skills with our partners. In the following pages, you will find information about all of RVCA’s programs and services organized into five key areas:

Watershed Science and Engineering Services
Planning Advisory & Regulatory Services
Stewardship Services
Conservation Land Management Services
Corporate Services

Page 302 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Watershed Science & Engineering Services RVCA collects, monitors and analyses watershed data to gain a better understand of natural hazards and the health of our watershed. This includes understanding local flood, erosion and slope stability hazards as well as the condition of local lakes and streams, forest and wetland cover as well as fish and aquatic communities. This knowledge enables RVCA, municipalities and other partners to make informed decisions about how best to manage our shared natural resources, protect people and property from natural hazards and tailor programs and services to meet the evolving needs of our watershed. This information and data are shared with municipalities, partners and the public through online tools, maps, reports, presentations and other accessible means.

Watershed Science and Engineering Services include: • • • • • • • • • •

Watershed Reporting Drinking Water Source Protection Surface Water Quality Monitoring Hydrometric Monitoring and Forecasting Flood and Hazard Mapping Groundwater Monitoring Aquatic & Terrestrial Habitat Monitoring Habitat and Wetland Restoration City Stream Watch Water, Flood and Erosion Control Structures

Special for 2021 • Acquire watershed-wide LiDAR elevation data • Complete ongoing hazard mapping projects • Implement an updated watershed model • Create a Natural Resources Engineering position • Conclude review of hydrometric monitoring program • Implement enhanced hydrometric monitoring network • Complete review of aquatic and surface water quality monitoring program

• Target poor water quality sites to better understand causes and develop mitigation plans • Conduct post-effectiveness monitoring on recent habitat creation and improvement projects • Initiate review of groundwater monitoring program • Initiate a climate change assessment of impacts on the watershed and RVCA programs and services • Support municipalities with their climate change priorities

Page 303 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Watershed Science & Engineering Services include: Watershed Reporting • Report on the health of the watershed through user-friendly, accessible analysis of the RVCA’s extensive monitoring programs. • Identify concerns, trends and priority areas for action at both a subwatershed and catchment scale. • Engage with municipalities, watershed residents, NGOs and government agencies to focus watershed management actions where they are needed most. Drinking Water Source Protection • Administer the province’s Drinking Water Source Protection Program under the Clean Water Act in the Mississippi and Rideau watersheds. • Help protect present and future sources of municipal drinking water from contamination and overuse. • Work with municipalities, provincial ministries, property owners, businesses, health units and others to implement source protection policies. Surface Water Quality Monitoring • Provide a consistent baseline dataset that can give a general indication of water quality in the watershed. • Assess the contribution of tributary streams to loadings in the Rideau River and upper watershed lakes. • Monitor ambient water quality conditions at locations on major tributary streams and watershed lakes. • Involve local lake residents in monitoring to increase the extent of monitoring activities and provide training to develop consistent methods to ensure data integrity. • Sample bottom dwelling bugs (benthic invertebrates) to determine water quality and habitat conditions using a biological method which compliments water chemistry sampling programs. Hydrometric Monitoring and Forecasting • Collect, manage, analyze and disseminate data and information about the abundance or scarcity of surface water resources within the watershed. • Issue flood and drought advisories and warnings as needed. • Expand data availability through the RVCA website. 6

Page 304 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Flood and Hazard Mapping • Study and map hazard lands as defined by the MNRF such as floodplain, steep slopes and unstable soils for effective administration and enforcement of regulations under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. • Support municipalities with up-to-date mapping of hazard lands for Official Plan and Zoning By-law schedules. • Refine RVCA’s numerical watershed modeling system for use in floodplain hydrology and hydraulic analyses for ungauged watersheds and for investigating the potential impacts of land use and climate change on a watershed scale. Groundwater Monitoring • Monitor groundwater conditions as part of the Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network. • Collect data from 16 groundwater monitoring wells at 13 different locations. • House and share hydrogeological information with watershed partners. Aquatic & Terrestrial Habitat Monitoring • Collect information on the physical and biological attributes of surveyed creeks and streams (habitat surveys, fish sampling, thermal regime) through the Stream Characterization program. • Inventory detailed land cover information to help facilitate land use planning and regulations, ecosystem management and conservation objectives for the RVCA and member municipalities. • Collect field survey information to assist landowners and municipalities when attempting to understand flooding issues as a result of beaver dam activity. • Collect information on headwater drainage features through a rapid assessment method characterizing

the amount of water, sediment transport, and storage capacity within headwater drainage features. • Undertake Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol at special Habitat Restoration project sites as a tool for post effective monitoring. Habitat and Wetland Restoration • Create, restore and/or enhance fish and wildlife habitats in the watershed. • Use watershed monitoring data to identify opportunities and at-risk areas. • Partner with like-minded organizations to secure funds and complete restoration work. • Conduct post-construction monitoring for five years to measure project success. City Stream Watch • Monitor, record and report on the health of 25 creeks and streams within the City of Ottawa. • Gather information using a robust network of trained volunteers. • Collect information about the physical and biological characteristics of creeks and streams following rigorous protocol. • Use data to guide rehabilitation and enhancement projects. Water, Flood and Erosion Control Structures • Operate and maintain water, flood and erosion control structures (berms, dams and weirs). • Determine whether to maintain, rehabilitate or decommission existing structures. • Work with municipalities interested in constructing or replacing structures to alleviate flooding or erosion concerns.

Page 305 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Planning Advisory & Regulatory Services RVCA plays a key role in development review to help municipalities and the province meet their legislative responsibilities of providing safe drinking water, protecting people from natural hazards and protecting important natural features. Our role includes providing comments to municipalities on Planning Act applications and municipal planning documents; issuing permits for development in areas vulnerable to flooding, erosion or unstable slopes or near wetlands, shorelines or watercourses; issuing approvals for septic systems and re-inspecting lakefront septic systems in some municipalities; and regulating activities near sources of municipal drinking water. Staff provide a comprehensive streamlined service to municipalities

and applicants that brings together local watershed knowledge and provincial policies to reduce municipal liability, avoid delays and unnecessary expenses for applicants, and create safe sustainable communities. Planning Advisory & Regulatory Services include: • • • • • •

Site-Specific Plan Review Non Site-Specific Plan Input Section 28 Regulations Septic Approvals Septic Re-Inspection Source Water Regulations

Special for 2021 • Update Planning MOUs with Lanark County and the United Counties of Leeds and Grenville • Work with municipalities to further improve and integrate development review processes

• Approve new planning policies • Update Section 28 policies and hearing guidelines • Approve new enforcement policy

Page 306 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Planning Advisory & Regulatory Services include: Site-Specific Plan Review • Review planning applications on behalf of the Province and municipalities. • Provide comments to municipalities on natural hazards (floodplains, steep slopes, unstable soils), natural heritage (wetlands, significant woodlands, significant valley lands) and surface and ground water quality and quantity. • Staff work closely with applicants to discuss concerns and alternatives and prepare recommendations to the municipal approval authority. • RVCA’s review and recommendations brings local watershed science, provincial policies and guidelines, and individual municipality needs together to ensure sustainable development. Non Site-Specific Plan Input • Provide input to municipalities on official plans, comprehensive zoning by-laws, environmental assessments and other special studies in an effort to identify natural hazards and protect and enhance surface and groundwater quality and quantity, wetlands and other natural features. • Participate on technical advisory committees that oversee the preparation of master servicing studies, community design plans, subwatershed studies and environmental management plans. • Sharing watershed knowledge and expertise with municipalities through these processes helps build sustainable communities. Section 28 Regulations • Regulate development, interference with wetlands and alterations to shorelines and watercourses as mandated by the Conservation Authorities Act. • Mapping is prepared to show where development is regulated including hazard lands such as floodplains, steep slopes and unstable soils. • Staff work closely with property owners to

guide them through the permitting process and encourage pre-consultation to avoid unnecessary costs and delays. • Staff also work with property owners to resolve issues of non-compliance and violations outside of the legal system wherever possible. Septic Approvals • Provide full review and approval services for private septic systems under Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. • This service is available to interested municipalities and is currently provided in the City of Ottawa and Tay Valley Township in partnership with our neighbouring Conservation Authorities. • Staff work closely with local septic designers and installers as well as property owners when delivering this service. Septic Re-Inspection • Provide mandatory and discretionary inspection programs for existing private septic systems under the Ontario Building Code. • This service is available to interested municipalities and is currently provided in the Township of Central Frontenac, Township of North Frontenac, Township of Rideau Lakes and Tay Valley Township. • Staff work closely with property owners, lake associations and other local partners when delivering this service. Source Water Regulations • Act as Risk Management Inspectors and Officials on behalf of 12 municipalities in the Mississippi and Rideau watersheds. This service implements policies in the Mississippi-Rideau Source Protection Plan under Part IV of the Clean Water Act. • Screen development applications within vulnerable drinking water areas on behalf of municipalities.

Page 307 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Stewardship Services RVCA provides technical and financial support to landowners and other partners to help them undertake projects on private and public property that will improve watershed health. Projects include tree planting, naturalizing shorelines, managing runoff, enhancing habitat and upgrading wells and septic systems. Staff work closely with private landowners, municipalities, lake associations, NGOs, community groups, businesses, government agencies and the public to complete these important on-the-ground projects. Information from RVCA’s science and monitoring programs help target areas and projects that provide the most benefit. Completing landowner

stewardship projects across the watershed helps improve water quality, increase forest and wetland cover, reduce flooding and erosion and increase climate change resiliency. Stewardship Services include: • • • • • •

Tree Planting Butternut Recovery Rural Clean Water Shoreline Naturalization Beaver Management Ontario Rural Wastewater Centre

Special for 2021 • Work with partners to develop a green infrastructure calculator • Explore forest certification on RVCA properties • Continue tree planting compensation project for Hydro Ottawa along the Jock River • Assist with the Bilberry Creek Shoreline Restoration Project • Promote small-scale runoff reduction projects, invasive species management and pollinator/ wildlife habitat enhancement • Work with municipalities to promote and implement shoreline buffer conditions as part of site plan control

• Work with municipalities to naturalize their shoreline properties • Provide Species at Risk compensation projects for developers under the Province’s proposed Species at Risk Conservation Fund. • Plant another 250,000 trees through the forestry program • Plant another 10,000 trees and shrubs through the Shoreline Naturalization Program • Develop a new butternut planting area at Foley Mountain Conservation Area

Page 308 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Stewardship Services include: Tree Planting • Deliver a quality, full-service tree planting program to rural landowners that plants 200,000 trees a year on private land. • Provide significant cost subsidies through external funding. • Provide technical advice on woodlot management and best practices for landowners • Review Conservation Areas coniferous plantations for thinning opportunities and potential revenue generation. Butternut Recovery • Help repopulate the endangered butternut tree through the development of healthy, disease-tolerant seedlings. • Locate healthy, disease-tolerant butternuts on private lands. • Collect seeds to grow seedlings for distribution to landowners free of charge. Rural Clean Water • Provide financial and technical assistance to farmers and rural landowners undertaking projects to protect and improve water quality in the watershed. • Address erosion control and reduce the amount of nutrients, bacteria and microorganisms entering groundwater and surface water. • Provide financial support through cost-share grants. • Promote and support best management practices that address both surface and groundwater issues. Shoreline Naturalization • Increase the amount of natural shoreline cover across the watershed.

• Provide a simple and affordable option for landowners to complete naturalization projects on their shoreline by providing free advisory site visits, customized planting plans, subsidized native trees and shrubs, project management and monitoring and assistance with planting installation. • Work closely with municipalities, Parks Canada and RVCA regulatory staff to facilitate planting requirements for planning and permit applications when needed. • Fundraise for special large-scale projects and stewardship targeting. Beaver Management • Track nuisance beaver calls, distribute beaver management information to landowners and municipalities and assist with advice on managing beavers and dams • In certain circumstances, provide monitoring and coordinate trapping and dam breaching for municipalities addressing wide-spread beaver activity causing flood damage. Ontario Rural Wastewater Centre • Develop and teach courses for septic installers, designers and regulators looking to advance their knowledge of design, inspection, and repairing on-site systems. • Ensure best practices, technology and innovations are being used across the industry. • Manage and maintain a demonstration site at Baxter Conservation Area that provides hands-on learning through displays of a wide variety of wastewater treatment technologies.

Page 309 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Conservation Land Management Services RVCA accepts land donations to protect valuable features like forests, wetlands and shorelines in perpetuity. Staff manage these properties so natural features are left to perform natural functions like slowing runoff, filtering pollutants, reducing flooding and erosion and providing habitat. Some properties are developed into public conservation areas to encourage residents to spend time outdoors and develop an appreciation for nature. Two conservation areas also offer outdoor education programs to get children outside and teach them about the importance of our

natural environment and the need to protect it for future generations. RVCA’s conservation areas are valued by local communities and municipalities as they provide affordable recreation, tourism and education for local residents and visitors. Conservation Land Management Services include: • Conservation Lands • Conservation Areas • Outdoor Education

Special for 2021 • Continue to increase visitor numbers at conservation areas and enhance the visitor experience • Install trail counters at additional conservation areas • Develop a plan to improve accessibility at conservation areas • Upgrade trails and retrofit washrooms at Baxter Conservation Area to improve accessibility

• Replace pedestrian bridge at Chapman Mills Conservation Area • Replace pedestrian bridge at Baxter Conservation Area • Continue to expand RVCA’s Forest School • Investigate interactive interpretive program for certain conservation areas

Page 310 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Conservation Land Management Services include: Conservation Lands • Accept land donations to protect high-quality natural areas in perpetuity for their invaluable environmental and ecological services and public benefits. • Manage 59 properties (3,000+ hectares) of critical green infrastructure. • Develop management plans for each property to ensure strategic land use planning and efficient use of resources. Conservation Areas • Welcome more than 200,000 visitors annually to 11 public conservation areas. • Provide nature-based recreation and visitor experiences through trails, picnic shelters, beaches, boat launches, docks and lookout points.

• Connect people to nature and ensure people of all backgrounds, abilities and circumstances can access natural areas and the Rideau River system. Outdoor Education • Deliver high quality, curriculum-based education programs, day camps and group programs that promote the values of conservation and environmental stewardship. • Maintain quality facilities and interpretive centres at Baxter and Foley Mountain Conservation Areas where these programs and camps are offered. • Incorporate new technology into education programs to enhance learning experiences. • Encourage families and children to be active in outdoor play all-year-round.

Page 311 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Corporate Services The RVCA is a public sector body committed to operating in an open, accountable and transparent manner. Working with all levels of government, residents, businesses and community partners the RVCA delivers programs and services that conserve, restore and responsibly manage land and water resources while balancing human, environmental and economic interests. As the needs of our watershed change, RVCA remains agile in the face of increasing growth pressure, fiscal constraints and climate change impacts. Through strategic planning, program reviews

and consultation with partners and stakeholders, the RVCA is focused on modernizing our programs to ensure they are effective and cost-efficient at meeting the current and future needs of our watershed. Corporate Services include: • • • •

Management, Finance & Human Resources Communications and Outreach GIS and Information Management Rideau Valley Conservation Foundation

Special for 2021 • Work with municipalities to implement provincial changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and its regulations • Approve a new records retention policy • Launch an open data platform for GIS data • Implement online payment • Create field apps for planning and regulations staff • Enhance client satisfaction surveys and address results

• Administer a Board Member survey and address feedback • Develop a stakeholder engagement strategy • Work with the Rideau Valley Conservation Foundation to increase the Steve Simmering Conservation Land Endowment Fund which protects our conservation lands and enables the acceptance of new land donations

Page 312 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Corporate Services include: Management, Finance & Human Resources • Provide overall management of the RVCA through work planning, budgeting, financial reporting, policy development, issues management, municipal and government relations, partnership development, employee management and payroll. • Serve the needs of the Board of Directors (training, meetings, agendas and minutes). • Operate the RVCA efficiently, effectively and safely for staff and patrons while providing excellent customer service. Communications and Outreach • Increase awareness, knowledge, and understanding of RVCA services, programs and initiatives. • Build effective relationships with municipal, provincial and federal levels of government as well as other stakeholders and partners. • Maintain a positive, proactive relationship with watershed media to ensure a high level of accurate, comprehensive regional media coverage. • Provide communication support through communication planning, media relations and plain language services.

• Distribute corporate information through annual reports, Around the Rideau newsletter, municipal information sheets, program brochures, displays, media releases, website, social media and public events/workshops. GIS and Information Management • Create and manage high-quality databases of watershed data and provide high-quality technical mapping to help staff make sound and informed watershed decisions. • Support flood and hazard mapping studies, analysis and delineation as well as the development of catchment and subwatershed reports. • Create tools to ensure the data is readily accessible to staff, consultants and the public. Rideau Valley Conservation Foundation • Support the RVCA in its conservation efforts by raising much-needed funds for conservation programs and services. • Solicit donations from corporate and private donors, manage multiple special fundraising campaigns, apply for grants and administer compensation projects. • Focus efforts on raising funds for land care, river care and conservation education.

Page 313 of 314 2021 RVCA Budget & Work Plan

Questions? Sommer Casgrain-Robertson, General Manager Rideau Valley Conservation Authority 3889 Rideau Valley Drive, P.O. Box 599, Manotick, ON K4M 1A5 613-692-3571, ext. 1214 | sommer.casgrain-robertson@rvca.ca

Page 314 of 314

TOWNSHIP OF SOUTH FRONTENAC BY-LAW 2021-01 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 special Council Meeting of January 12, 2021 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 12 day of January 2021. Read a first and second time this 12 day of January, 2021. Read a third time and finally passed this 12 day of January, 2021.

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.