For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now!

Transcription

1 For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! 1

2 Report PDR-PCD Committee Report To: Chair Wright and Members of the Planning and Community Development Committee From: Sarah Morrison, Intermediate Planner Meeting Date: May 19, 2015 Subject: Veveris Easement Request Status: Recommendation adopted by Committee as presented per Resolution PCD69-15; Endorsed by County Council June 2, 2015 per Resolution CC81-15; Recommendation(s) WHEREAS there are numerous properties that are bisected by the CP Rail Trail where residents require access over the CP Rail Trail to access their property; AND WHEREAS a request has been received from a property owner asking the County to grant an easement on title across the CP Rail Trail to access their landlocked property; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT staff be directed to complete an easement agreement with Juris and Christina Veveris for property located at Part of Lots 85 and 86, Concession 1 SWTSR, geographic Township of Glenelg, Municipality of West Grey to allow access to the landlocked property; AND THAT a By-Law be prepared for County Council s consideration to register this easement across County property; AND THAT all costs associated with registering the easement be borne by the landowner. Background Grey County took possession of the abandoned rail right of way in Since then it has been developed into a multi-use recreational trail. There are a number of properties that are bisected by the CP Rail Trail. Information from the County s solicitor in 2011 indicates that when farm properties were bisected, the railway agreed to a perpetual farm crossing. Usually there is nothing registered on title. He went on to state that if the crossing has occurred for in excess of 20 years without prior permission having been requested from the County, an easement by prescriptive rights is established PDR-PCD May 19, 2015

3 and can be relied upon by the owner and transferred to new owners. If the owners want to establish a more formal easement on title, the owner would need to request this from the County and provide information including a reference plan as part of this request. A request has now been received from Juris and Christina Veveris to have Grey County consider registering an easement on title for a portion of Lots 85 and 86, Concession 1 SWTSR, geographic Township of Glenelg, Municipality of West Grey for the purpose of accessing the parcel of landlocked property which is approximately 49.3 acres. A map has been included in the report for ease of reference. Map 1 Property Location The Veveris s indicate that at one point in time there was a legal easement established and registered on title, this occurred prior to their ownership and was indicated on the former owner s deeds; however, this legal easement is no longer registered on title, and with research completed by their solicitor they have been directed to seek this access again. A registered plan has been completed for this property and staff will determine if it can be used for this agreement and subsequent By-law that will be presented to County Council for consideration. Financial / Staffing / Legal / Information Technology Considerations There will be some costs associated with registering the easement. However, as noted in the resolution, these costs will be borne by the Veveris s and there will be no cost to the County. There will be a small amount of staff time required to draft the easement agreement. Once the easement is complete, it will be registered on title with the PDR-PCD May 19, 2015

4 property. Having an easement on title will not impact the trail itself as this is considered a crossing only and the trail will remain the property of the County in its entirety. There are no IT considerations related to this request. Link to Strategic Goals / Priorities 5.5 Collaborate with the public, stakeholders, and other governments to improve the delivery of county services. Respectfully submitted by, Sarah Morrison, Hons. BA, MCIP, RPP Intermediate Planner Director Sign Off: Randy Scherzer PDR-PCD May 19, 2015

5 County of Peterborough April 14, 2015 The Honourable Kathleen Wynne, Premier Legislative Bldg, Rm. 281 Queen s Park Toronto, ON M7A 1A1 Our History. Your Future. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Tammy Sikma Manager of GIS County Court House 470 Water Street Peterborough, Ontario K9H 3M3 Ph: (705) ext. 346 or Fax: (705) tsikma@ county.peterborough.on.ca The Honourable Bill Mauro Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry 99 Wellesley Street West Room 6630, Sixth Floor, Whitney Block Toronto, Ontario M7A 1W3 Paula Reid Assistant Deputy Minister Corporate Management & Information Division Whitney Block, 6 th Flr, Rm Wellesley St. W. Toronto, ON M7A 1W3 Dear Premier Wynne: Re: Ontario Imagery Strategy At the April 1, 2015 meeting of the Council of the County of Peterborough approved the attached staff report and passed the following resolution: Be it resolved that County Council has realized the value of aerial imagery projects collected under the leadership of Land Information Ontario (LIO), a program of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), in 2002, 2008, and 2013; Now therefore be it resolved that a letter be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), and the Assistant Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry Corporate Management and Information Division expressing the County s support for the Province to maintain and continue the current imagery update cycle and renew the Imagery Strategy beyond 2017; and, Further be it resolved that this report be sent to the member municipalities of the Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus (EOWC) and the Western Ontario Wardens Caucus (WOWC), and other rural Councils that have been involved in these projects requesting their endorsement of the same. 5

6 Thank you for considering this request. Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully, Tammy Sikma Manager of GIS Encl. (1) Cc: Andy Brown, CAO, United Counties of Leeds and Grenville Gary King, CAO, County of Peterborough James Hepburn, Acting CAO, Prince Edward County Jennifer Moore, Acting CAO, Northumberland County Jim Hutton, CAO, County of Renfrew Jim Pine, CAO, County of Hastings Jim Wilson, CAO, County of Haliburton Kelly Pender, CAO, Frontenac County Kurt Greaves, CAO, Lanark County Larry Keech, CAO, County of Lennox & Addington Mark Fisher, CAO, City of Kawartha Lakes Stephane Parisien, CAO, United Counties of Prescott and Russell Tim Simpson, CAO, United Counties of Stormont, Dundas, and Glengarry Don Shropshire, CAO, Municipality of Chatham-Kent Paul Emerson, CAO, County of Brant Kelley Coulter, CAO, Bruce County Sonya Pritchard, CAO, Dufferin County Mark McDonald, CAO, Elgin County Brian Gregg, CAO, County of Essex Derik Brandt, CAO, Grey County Brenda Orchard, CAO, Huron County Ron Van Horne, CAO, County of Lambton Bill Rayburn, CAO, Middlesex County Keith Robicheau, CAO, Norfolk County Peter Crockett, CAO, Oxford County Bill Arthur, CAO, Perth County Mark Aitken, CAO, Simcoe County Scott Wilson, CAO, Wellington County Michael Duben, CAO, District Municipality of Muskoka Stephen Kaegi, CAO, Township of the Archipelago Suzanne Klatt, CAO, Township of South Algonquin Donald Boyle, CAO, Haldimand County 6

7 The County of Peterborough County Council To: From: Warden and Members of Council Tammy Sikma, Manager of GIS Date: April 1, 2015 Subject: Ontario Imagery Strategy Recommendation: Whereas County Council has realized the value of aerial imagery projects collected under the leadership of Land Information Ontario (LIO), a program of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), in 2002, 2008, and 2013; Now therefore be it resolved that a letter be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), and the Assistant Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry Corporate Management and Information Division expressing the County s support for the Province to maintain and continue the current imagery update cycle and renew the Imagery Strategy beyond 2017; and, Further be it resolved that this report be sent to the member municipalities of the Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus (EOWC) and the Western Ontario Wardens Caucus (WOWC), and other rural Councils that have been involved in these projects requesting their endorsement of the same. Financial Impact: None Overview: Since 2002, the County has participated in three Province-led, multi-agency, public-private sector partnerships that have provided the County and Townships with complete recurring aerial photo coverage (2002, 2008, 2013). These images are available to all County and Township staff as well as the public as a backdrop to all of the mapping data available on the County s web-gis sites. Aerial photos can include any photographs taken from the air. Images used by municipalities are typically taken vertically (directly down from the plane) from a fixed-wing aircraft using a high-precision digital camera system flying low-level parallel grid patterns to ensure complete coverage across the landscape. Images are taken with a significant overlap between flight 7

8 Page 2 lines to create stereo imagery that can be viewed in 3D, used to generate elevation data, and required to create ortho photos or orthoimagery. Ortho photos are the raw aerial photos that have been processed to precise coordinates in order to remove distortion and register the final image (ortho-photo) directly on the ground, to an accuracy of 50 cm. In 2012, the Ontario Government committed to a 5-year Imagery Strategy to complete aerial photo projects across Southern and portions of Northern Ontario each year between , inclusive. Project areas are large (35,000 45,000 sq km) to take advantage of savings due to longer flight lines, processing contracts, multi-year contracts, etc. With this commitment half-completed, it is important to ensure that the Province is aware of the importance of continuing this valuable, costsharing program. Figure 1: Ontario Imagery Strategy Image Credit: Queens Printer In 2013, the County acquired 6,000 sq km of imagery through SCOOP (South Central Ontario Orthophotography Project, see Fig. 1), at a cost of $19,962. A blended funding model (Fig 2) calculated the sq km cost of imagery based on total orders to provide equally affordable pricing along the urban Hwy 401-corridor and remote rural portions of the Canadian Shield. Figure 2: Partner share of SCOOP 2013 imagery acquisition. 8

9 Page 3 The SCOOP costs for the County-acquired coverage without partner support were $157,592 (Table 1), providing the County with 87.3% in savings. It is also important to note that the cost to fly this area independent of any partnerships would be higher due to greater gas consumption from shorter flight lines / more frequent turning and full-cost administration, setup, and processing costs. The current market value for a County of Peterborough project is estimated at $250, ,000, or times what was spent through SCOOP. While each of the three public-private partnership projects led by the MNRF s Land Information Ontario (LIO) that the County has participated in since 2002 (Table 1) have used different funding models and have delivered different products and/or copyright entitlements, the savings in each has been substantial. The total spent to date for all three orthophoto projects combined is less than the cost of the least expensive project without partnership savings. Without these cost-saving programs, the County s ability to pay for imagery would be much more strained, possibly limiting the frequency of the update cycle. Table 1: Costs of Province-led, Multi-Sector Imagery Projects Involving the County of Peterborough Project County Shared Cost Without Partners Cost Partnership Savings Percent Saved GTA 2002 $49,927 $1,120,924 $1,070, % DRAPE 2008 $20,674 $145,635 $124, % SCOOP 2013 $19,962 $157,592 $137, % TOTAL $90,563 $1,424,151 $1,333, % The benefits of regularly acquiring high-resolution (20cm pixel) aerial imagery (Fig 3 & Fig 4) are varied and cover the interests of the County, local municipalities, and the general public. Examples include: - Change detection between imagery years - Review of land-use planning applications - By-Law enforcement - Identifying and/or realigning map features such as roads, bridges, storm sewer catchbasins, building footprints - Base mapping - Creation of elevation models - Municipal revenue from the sales of imagery - Providing a connection between planar mapping and real-world understanding 9

10 Page 4 See Fig 4 Figure 3: Imagery taken of Oak Orchard sub-division in 2002, 2008, Figure 4: Detailed view of 2013 imagery. Analysis: Rural municipalities in Eastern Ontario, such as the County of Peterborough and its local municipalities, have benefitted greatly from the Ontario government s leadership and partnership in multi-sector aerial imagery collection projects. Those municipalities cover large areas comprised of modest populations and would not be able to afford the costs on their own. The County of Peterborough shares the orthophotos collected through these projects with staff at the County and local municipalities, as well as the general public, via our web-gis. Imagery is often the first layer turned on when examining the lay of the land and regular updates are needed to show the current, and changing, state of land-use. 10

11 Page 5 Regardless of the project year, participating municipalities have realized significant costsavings, while retaining licensing permissions to use, sell, and share a full suite of imagery products. In the DRAPE (Digital Raster Acquisition Project East) projects that took place in 2008 & 2014, EOWC municipalities spent approximately $330,000 and realized partnership savings in excess of $2.5 million. Similarly, the 2006 & 2010 SWOOP (South Western Ontario Orthoimagery Project) partnerships cost participating WOWC municipalities approximately $1 million, while leveraging over $2.8 million in shared savings. Differences in spending were the result of the contract values, the number of partners, and the size/extent of each project. As the Province prepares to consider the future of funding this program, it is important that past-partners advocate for the benefits and express their ongoing need for such programs. Recommendation: Whereas County Council has realized the value of aerial imagery projects collected under the leadership of Land Information Ontario (LIO), a division of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), in 2002, 2008, and 2013, Now therefore be it resolved that a letter be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), and the Assistant Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry Corporate Management and Information Division expressing the County s support for the Province to maintain and continue the current imagery update cycle and renew the Imagery Strategy beyond 2017; and, Further be it resolved that this report be sent to the member municipalities of the Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus (EOWC) and the Western Ontario Wardens Caucus (WOWC), and other rural Councils that have been involved in these projects requesting their endorsement of the same. Respectfully submitted, Original signed by Tammy Sikma Manager of GIS 11

12 P.O. Box 159, OrillIa, Ontario, L3V 6J3 THE CORPORATION OF TIlE TOWNSHIP OF SEVERN Municipal OlTice: Telephone: (705) Fax: (705) Web Site: Huriwood Lane CARRIED Plan is adopted, amendments cannot be considered for two years; respectfully requested to remove this proposed policy in order to ensure that Association of Municipalities of Ontario for their consideration and support. Provincial Planning & Development Initiatives be received; the County of Simcoe, all Counties & Regions in the Province, and the THAT Planning Report No. P15-022, dated April 15, 2015, with respect to AND WHEREAS the Province is proposing that if a new Zoning By-law or Official AND FURTHER THAT this Resolution be forwarded to all municipalities within NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Province of Ontario be future development within municipalities is not delayed for a two year period; development of municipalities; with the Provincial Policies that are to be working documents for the future AND WHEREAS this Council has concerns that this new policy is not in keeping recommendation of the Committee which was adopted by Severn Township Council: presented to the Planning & Development Committee. The following is a copy of a Attached is a copy of Planning Report No. P15-022, dated April 15, 2015, which was RE: Provincial Planning Initiatives Dear Minister McMeekin: Toronto, Ontario 777 Bay Street, 7th Floor do Ted McMeekin, Minister Ministry of Municipal Affairs M5G 2E5 May 8,2015 TowNsHIP OF SEVERN 12

13 Your consideration of the Township s request and comments on the removal of this proposed initiative would be appreciated. Respectfully submitted, Sharon R. Goerke, CMO Clerk /srg End. c.c. Provincial Counties I Regions County of Simcoe Municipalities Association of Municipalities of Ontario Garfield Dunlop, M.P.P. 13 2

14 Planning & Development Committee TO: Chair & Members MO [IC Jt This review is looking at four policy documents: The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden hhttdthlthlffth an at. The discussion at the Barrie meeting was fairly wide-ranging and general, with the would be the subject of a review process in the near future. Ministry staff indicated that the functioning of the 0MB was not part of the review, but A number of concerns were also raised about the role of the Ontario Municipal Board. meetings. Staff attended the one held in Barrie on April 1st At this stage there are no The Province is at the initial stages of their review and are conducting Town Hall exception of the status of the Midhurst Secondary Plan which drew a lot of comments. Horseshoe, The Niagara Escarpment Plan, The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan concrete proposals, the Province is just seeking input into what they should be looking and The Greenbelt Plan. Only the first document applies to Severn Township. Co-ordinated Land Use Planninc Review to provide an overview of those processes and potential amendments. of documents which affect planning and development in Ontario. This report is intended The Province has being conducting consultations on potential amendments to a number Background Bill 73. Severn regarding some of the proposed amendments to the Planning Act contained in AND FURTHER THAT, the minister be advised of the concerns of the Township of Planning and Development Initiatives be received; THAT Planning Report No. P dated April 15, 2015 with respect to Provincial Recommendation RE: Provincial Planning and Development Initiatives DATE: April 15, 2015 Director of Planning and Development FROM: Andrew Fyfe REPORT P

15 Charges Act, 1997 and the Planning Act. If enacted, the Bill would: Bill 73 Lroposed Smart Growth for Our Communities Act The government has announced proposed legislative amendments to the Development - Similarly, - New - If - Modifications - Enable - Annual - Global - Timelines - Require - More - Increased - Minor - The - Municipalities - Increase new infrastructure into the existing asset management plan. Planning Act for the granting of zoning bonuses. Some municipalities seek extra control over other charges such as Section 37 collections under the adjustments to how service levels are to be calculated. This may provide consideration of area-specific Charges will be mandatory. The Township more room for collection, but the potential impact on Severn doesn t appear to be large. construction of infrastructure or to fund items that are not eligible for Development Charges funding. the preparation of a Parks Plan in advance of completing an Official this time diversion. This could result in the addition to the Charges at the County level. Plan update. Consultation with local school boards is required and the plan is to would be able to recover capital costs associated with waste to the development permit system. This system is used in limited not conform to an upper tier OP policy, it may refuse to approve the policy and Official Plans cannot be amended for two years after their approval. Even for two years. if a new zoning by-law is adopted, amendments cannot be considered the approval authority concludes that a policy in a lower tier official Plan does will be required. reports by the Treasurer on transactions through the Parkiand Reserve appeals of an entire new Official Plan will not be permitted. for notices and decisions will be refined expansion of a transit system. This would have no impact on the Township at already does this. detail in reporting requirements and requirements for incorporation of examine the need for additional parkiand in the community. the use of alternate dispute resolution to resolve certain types of have the required Official Plan policies to implement such a system. objections to planning approvals. applications for amendment are embargoed. payments (sometimes categorized as voluntary payments) to expedite the the potential amounts which could be collected to support the circumstances in a small number of Ontario municipalities. Severn does not that decision is non-appealable. implications. table, staff will be in a better position to advise the Committee of the potential 15

16 While most of the proposed changes to the Planning Act seem to represent minor tweaking of the planning process, the removal of the ability to appeal an upper-tier Devpment base and the local econoiy. Many of the above will have little or no impact on the Municipality. The additional Municipality to liability in its exercise of the planning function and it by diminishing the ability of the Municipality to respond to desirable proposals potentially weaken the tax requirement for a Parks Plan will add to the amount of background work required in support of an Official Plan update. The potential impact of restrictions on the ability to requirements for increased reporting will have some operational impacts. The amend planning documents appears to increase the potential exposure of the Financial Impact significantly delay the consideration of a proposal by the body appointed to do so. to a minor variance application prior to the submission of an application would Finally, the addition of a requirement for Council approval of a proposed minor variance to resolve matters outside of a full Hearing will be diminished. appealed. As the 0MB can only address what is specifically under appeal, the potential identified. Sometimes the solution is to amend a section of the document which was not When an Official Plan or zoning by-law is appealed, the exact provision must be to otherwise appropriate proposals simply because a planning document is too new. there is a significant change in circumstances, municipalities will be unable to respond work with the document to find errors and omissions which are addressed through a minor variances. When a new OP or zoning by-law is adopted, it is not unusual as you could potentially cause a significant harm to an affected property owner. The inability to municipality when it undertakes major planning exercises. Furthermore, no matter how amendments to new Official Plans and zoning by-laws and the additional limitations on The larger concern is the prosed prohibitions on the ability of Councils to consider appropriately address this harm would appear to increase the potential liability of the well-considered and well-prepared a document may be, it is not always possible to anticipate events. Should an opportunity come forward which was not anticipated or house-keeping amendment. The inability to correct these issues in a timely fashion no recourse. decision on Official Plan on conformity with upper-tier policies, does raise the spectre of a veto power being given to the upper-tier which if exercised leaves the lower-tier with without authorization by Council. may be made for two years after the adoption of the zoning by-law amendment - For site-specific zoning by-law amendments, no applications for a minor variance 16

17 Municipality of Trent Lakes Box 820, 701 County Road 36 Bobcaygeon, ON K0M 1A0 Phone: (705) Fax: (705) May 12, 2015 All Municipalities In the Province of Ontario Dear Municipal Representative: Re: Demonstrated Need for Aggregates At the Regular Council Meeting held on May 5, 2015 the Council of the Municipality of Trent Lakes passed the following resolution: Resolution No. R Moved by: Councillor Raymond Seconded by: Councillor Persson WHEREAS a primary concern for the Municipality of Trent Lakes is that due to our close proximity to the Greater Toronto Area there will be an increase in the demand for aggregates from this area resulting in an increase in the number and size of quarries in the Municipality; and WHEREAS it is widely acknowledged that extracting aggregates from the landscape is an intrusive activity that has the potential to cause long-term impacts on publicly important environmental resources and farmland; increases in traffic, road damage and greenhouse gas emissions; and degrades the quality of life in local communities; and WHEREAS in 2005 the Provincial Policy Statement was amended to allow aggregate producers to propose extraction sites without having to demonstrate the need for the additional supply of aggregate resources, thereby creating a barrier to comprehensive planning and favouring the protection of aggregate extraction at the expense of other provincial interests, and as a result encouraging the rapid and non-sustainable use of the resource; and WHEREAS applications for licences under the current Aggregate Resources Act do not require proponents to demonstrate need to extract aggregate resources in a particular area; /2 17

18 -2- THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Municipality of Trent Lakes request that the Ontario Government amend the Provincial Policy Statement and the Aggregate Resources Act to require aggregate extraction proponents to demonstrate need for the particular supply of resource proposed for extraction; and further THAT this resolution be forwarded to the Honourable Ted McMeekin, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Honourable Bill Mauro, Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry, the Honourable Glen Murray,Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, the Honourable Jeff Leal, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Provincial Opposition Party leaders, the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, Barry Devolin, MP, Laurie Scott, MPP, FCM and AMO; and further THAT through the circulation of this resolution to all municipalities in Ontario it be requested that they adopt a similar resolution in support of the requested changes to the Provincial Policy Statement and the Aggregate Resources Act. Carried. As per the resolution, it is requested that all municipalities in Ontario adopt a similar resolution in support of the requested changes to the Provincial Policy Statement and the Aggregate Resources Act. Sincerely Bob Angione Bob Angione, M.P.A., B.Admin. Municipal Clerk 18

19 19