Loading...
Regular Council Agenda - 2020/11/19 The Corporation of the Township of Malahide A G E N D A November 19, 2020 7:30 p.m. Malahide Community Place 12105 Whittaker Road, Springfield. ** Note: Due to COVID-19 restrictions, this meeting will have limited seating capacity. The meeting will also be streamed live on YouTube.** (A) Roll Call (B) Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest (C) Approval of Previous Minutes RES 1 (Pages 10 - 32) (D) Presentations/Delegations/Petitions (i) Public Meeting Rezoning Application of Bill Reymer relating to property at Part Lots 85 and 86, Concession STR, Geographic Township of Malahide, municipally known as 140 Elk Street. RES 2 4 (Pages 33 - 40) (ii) Public Meeting Rezoning Application of Dohner Farm Ltd. relating to property at Part Lot 34, Concession 1, Geographic Township of Malahide, municipally known as 53233 Nova Scotia Line. RES 5 7 (Pages 41 - 52) (iii) Public Meeting Rezoning Application General Amendment Housekeeping By-law 2020. RES 8 - 10 (Pages 53 - 60) (iv) Presentation MEDA Engineering and Technical Services Bridge and Culvert Inspection. RES 11 (Pages 61 - 73) (v) Presentation County of Elgin Warden Dave Mennill and CAO Julie Gonyou Elgin County Update and Service Delivery Review. RES12(Pages 74 -95) (vi) Public Meeting Council Remuneration By-law. RES 13 14 (Page 96) (E) Reports of Departments (i) Director of Fire & Emergency Services - Emergency Services Activity Report October. RES 15 (Pages 97 - 102) (ii) Director of Public Works - Amendment to Off-Road Vehicle By-law No. 17-51. RES 16 (Pages 103 - 109) (iii) Director of Development Services (iv) Director of Financial Services/Treasurer (iv) CAO/Clerk - Occupational Health and Safety Act Bill 168 & Bill 132 Complaints & Training Initiatives. RES 17 (Pages 110 - 125) - Draft Anti-Idling By-law. RES 18 (Pages 126 - 132) (F) Reports of Committees/Outside Boards (i) Budget Committee Minutes of October 29 and November 12, 2020. RES 19 (Pages 133 - 146) Budget Committee Recommendations: (a) 2021 Priority Capital Projects RES 20 (b) Development Charges Update Study Service Contract. RES 21 (c) Rural Broadband Strategy. RES 22 (ii) Long Point Region Conservation Authority Minutes of October 7, 2020. RES 23 (Pages 147 - 154) (iii) Report of Aylmer Police Costing Ad Hoc Working Group - Results of Police Services Review and Public Consultation. RES 24 (Pages 155 - 158) (G) Correspondence RES 25 1. Association of Municipalities of Ontario - Watch File dated November 5 and 12, 2020. (Pages C3 - 8) 2. City of Hamilton Resolution requesting the amendment of AGCO Licensing and Application process for cannabis retail stores to consider radial separation from other cannabis locations. (Pages C9 -11) 3. Town of Grimsby Resolution requesting the Province to amend Schedule 11 of Bill 108 regarding changes to Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and return final decision authority to municipal councils. (Pages C12 - 25) 4. Municipality of St. Charles Resolution requesting the Province to champion the implementation of broadband in the under-served areas of the Municipality of St. Charles. (Page C26) 5. Town of Plympton-Wyoming Resolution supporting the Township of Loyalist regarding funding for community groups and service clubs affected by pandemic. (Page C27 - 29) 6. County of Prince Edward Resolution requesting the Province to respect Ontario municipalities ability to apply sound representative principles in their execution of elections. (Page C30 - 31) 7. Township of Amaranth, City of Brantford Resolution requesting the Province to rescind the proposed changes regarding ranked ballot voting and the nomination period included as part of Bill 218. (Pages C32 - 35) 8. Township of East Garafraxa Resolution requesting the Province to work with Municipal Property Assessment Corporation to address the assessment issue relating to aggregate resources. (Pages C36 - 37) 9. City of Belleville Resolution requesting the Province to provide funding support and training resources to municipalities to meet the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. (Pages C38 - 39) 10. Municipality of Central Elgin Planning notices for Zoning By-law Amendments related to the following properties: - 42025 McBain Line. (Page C40) - 220 Prospect Street. (Page C41) (H) Other Business (i) Long Point Region Conservation Authority 2021 Draft Budget. RES 26 (Pages 159 - 163) (I) By-laws (i) By-law No. 20-63 Third Reading of W. Shively Drain Branch 1 & 2. RES 27 (Pages 164 - 165) (ii) By-law No. 20-74 authorize the remuneration and expenses for members of Council commencing in 2020. RES 28 (Pages 166 - 167) (J) Closed Session RES 29 - 30 (i) Personal Matter about an Identifiable Individual and/or Labour Relations or Employee Negotiations Matter regarding Staff Performance Reviews. (ii) Personal Matter about an Identifiable Individual and/or Labour Relations or Employee Negotiations Matter regarding Malahide Fire Restructuring. (K) Confirmatory By-law RES 31 (Page 168) (L) Adjournment RES 32 **VIDEOCONFERENCE MEETING Note for Members of the Public: In order to respect the State of Emergency declared by the County of Elgin and Township of Malahide and not hold large public gatherings, please note that the Regular Council Meeting scheduled to be held on November 19, 2020 will have limited seating capacity as well as a videoconference option. Please note that, at this time, there is not an option for the public to call in to this meeting. However, we will be livestreaming the Council Meeting via YouTube. Please click the link below to watch the Council Meeting. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2WWxGHYoaNBixWD8viFlGw Written comments regarding the Council Agenda items are welcome please forward such to the Clerk at mcasavecchia@malahide.ca 5 PLEASE NOTE that the draft resolutions provided below DO NOT represent decisions already made by the Council. They are simply intended for the convenience of the Council to expedite the transaction of Council business. Members of Council will choose whether or not to move the proposed draft motions and the Council may also choose to amend or defeat them during the course of the Council meeting. 1.THAT the minutes of the regular meeting of the Councilheld on November 5, 2020 be adopted as printed and circulated. 2.THAT the Public Meeting concerning the Zoning By-law Amendment Application of Bill Reymerrelating to the property located at Lots 85 and 86, Concession South Talbot Road,be called to order at 7:3___ p.m. 3.THAT the Public Meeting relating to Zoning By-law Amendment Applicationof Bill Reymerrelating tothe property located at Lots 85 and 86, Concession South Talbot Road, be adjourned and the Council meeting reconvene at 7:____ p.m. 4.THAT By-law No. 20-72,being a By-law to amend Zoning By-law No. 18- 22 insofar as it relates to the property owned by Bill Reymer, located at Lots 84 and 85, Concession South Talbot Road, be given first, second and third readings, and properly signed and sealed. 5.THAT the Public Meeting concerning the Zoning By-law Amendment Application of Dohner Farm Ltd.relating to the property located at Lot 34, Concession 1, be called to order at 7:____ p.m. 6.THAT the Public Meeting relating to Zoning By-law Amendment Applicationof Dohner Farm Ltd.relating to the property located at Lot 34, Concession 1, be adjourned and the Council meeting reconvene at 7:____ p.m. 7.THAT By-law No.20-73,beinga By-law to amend Zoning By-law No. 18- 22 insofar as it relates to the property owned by Dohner Farm Ltd., located atLot 34, Concession 1, be given first, second and third readings, and properly signed and sealed. 8.THAT the Public Meeting concerning the Zoning By-law Amendment relating to various housekeeping amendments be called to order at 7:____ p.m. 6 9.THAT the Public Meeting relating to Zoning By-law Amendment relating to various housekeeping amendmentsbe adjourned and the Council meeting reconvene at 7:____ p.m. 10.THAT By-law No. 20-70,being a By-law to amend Zoning By-law No. 18- 22 insofar as it relates to housekeeping amendments affecting various properties located in the Township of Malahide,be given first, second and third readings, and properly signed and sealed. 11.THAT the presentation received from David Lawn, of MEDA Engineering & Technical Services, relating to the Consulting Services for Bridge and Culvert Inspection,be received. 12.THAT the presentation received from Elgin County Warden Dave Mennill andCounty CAO Julie Gonyouprovidingan update on County activities and the County Service Delivery Review be received. 13.THAT the Public Meeting concerning Council Remuneration be called to order at 7:____ p.m. 14.THAT the Public Meeting concerning Council Remunerationbe adjourned and the Council meeting reconvene at 7:____ p.m. 15.THAT Report No. F-20- 16.THAT Report No. PS-20--Road Vehicle BylawNo. 17- AND THAT the Clerk be directed to prepare the necessary amendment to By-law No. 17-51 to change the Off-Road Vehicle definition to include Extreme Terrain Vehicle and Off-Road Motorcycle as defined in O. Reg. 316/03; AND THAT theClerk be directed to prepare the necessary amendment to By-law No. 17-51 to allow year-round use of the Municipal road allowance -law No. 17-51, as amended on November 7, 2019; AND THAT the effective term of By-law No. 17-51 remain as a period of two (2) years or shorter for the purpose of evaluating the effects of and determining whether it is advisable to continue the operation of Off-road Vehicles, as amended, on specified highways within the Township. 17.THAT Report No. HS-20- 7 18.THAT Report No. CAO-20--Idling By- received; AND THAT the draft Anti-Idling By-law be supported as presented; AND THAT the Municipal Clerk be directed to finalize the draft by-law for submission to and approval by the Council at a future meeting. 19.THAT the Budget Committee minutes of October 29, 2020 and Draft Minutes of November 12, 2020be noted and filed. 20.THAT the Pier Parking Lot Design Project, in the budget amount of $10,000.00, be included in the 2021 Capital Budget; AND THAT, notwithstanding that the remainder of the 2021-2022 Budgets have not yet been approved, the Port Bruce Pier Parking Lot Design Project and the Hacienda Road Culvert Class EA and Design Projectbe approvedfor completion in 2021; AND THAT the Municipal Staff be authorized and directed to proceed with the Port Bruce Pier Parking Lot Design Project initiation and the Hacienda Road Culvert Class EA and Design Project initiation so that such projects can be pre-planned, tendered, and completed on time and within budget. 21.THAT the Municipal Council permit the contracting of professional consulting services to update the Development Charges Background Study and By-law as a single source procurement; AND THAT, notwithstanding that the remainder of the 2021-2022 Budgets have not yet been approved, theservice contract for the Update to the Development Charges Background Study and By-law to Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., in the amount of $12,500.00 plus applicable taxes, be approved; it being noted that such service contract will be funded from the Development Charge Reserve. 22.THAT, notwithstanding that the remainder of the 2021-2022 Budgets have not yet been approved, the Municipal Staff be authorized to issue a Request for Proposal for broadband consulting services to develop a strategy policy, design, and a phased implementation plan to expand broadband services in Malahide and surrounding area. 23.THAT the Long Point Region Conservation Authority minutes of October 7, 2020be noted and filed. 24.THAT the Report of the Aylmer Police Costing Ad Hoc Working Group 8 received; AND THAT no action be taken at this time to commence negotiations with the Town of Aylmer for a contract for service for the Aylmer Police Service to provide policing services to the Township of Malahide; it being noted that the results of public consultation held subsequent to the public meeting on September 30, 2020 did not support moving forward with any change to policing services for Malahide; AND THAT the Aylmer Police Costing Ad Hoc Working Group, having fulfilled its mandate, be disbanded. 25.THAT the following correspondence be noted and filed: 1.Association of Municipalities of Ontario -Watch Filedated November 5 and 12, 2020. 2.City of Hamilton Resolution requesting the amendment of AGCO Licensing and Application process for cannabis retail stores to consider radial separationfrom other cannabis locations. 3.Town of Grimsby Resolution requesting the Province to amend Schedule 11 of Bill 108 regarding changes to Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and return final decision authority to municipal councils. 4.Municipality of St. Charles Resolution requesting the Province to champion the implementation of broadband in the under-served areas of the Municipality of St. Charles. 5.Town of Plympton-Wyoming Resolution supporting the Township of Loyalist regarding funding for community groups and service clubs affected by pandemic. 6.County of Prince EdwardResolution requesting the Province to respect Ontario municipalities ability to apply sound representative principles in their execution of elections. 7.Township of Amaranth, City of BrantfordResolution requesting the Province to rescind the proposed changes regarding ranked ballot voting and the nomination period included as part of Bill 218. 8.Township of East Garafraxa Resolution requesting the Province to work with Municipal Property Assessment Corporation to address the assessment issue relating to aggregate resources. 9 9.City of Belleville Resolution requesting the Province to provide funding support and training resources to municipalities to meet the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. 10.Municipality of Central Elgin Planning notices for Zoning By-law Amendments related to the following properties: -42025 McBain Line. -220 Prospect Street. 26.THAT the correspondence received from the Long Point Region Conservation Authority (LPRCA), dated November 13, 2020, regarding the 2021 Draft LPRCA Budget be received; AND THAT the Draft 2021 LPRCA Budget be referred to the 2021 Budget deliberations. 27.THAT By-law No. 20-63,being a By-law to providefor Drainage works on the W. Shively Drain Branch 1 & 2, be read a third time, finally passed, and be properly signed and sealed. 28.THAT By-law No. 20-74, being a By-law to authorize the remuneration and expenses for members of Malahide Township Council commencing in 2020, be given first, second and third readings, and be properlysigned and sealed. 29.THAT Council move into Closed Session at _______p.m., pursuant to Section 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, to discussthe following: (i)Personal Matter about an Identifiable Individual and/orLabour Relations or Employee Negotiations Matter regarding Staff Performance Reviews. (ii)Personal Matter about an Identifiable Individual and/or Labour Relations or Employee Negotiations Matter regarding Malahide Fire Restructuring. 30.THAT Council move out of Closed Session and reconvene at ______ p.m. in order to continue with its deliberations. 31.THAT By-law No. 20-75, beinga Confirmatory By-law, be given first, second and third readings, and be properly signed and sealed. 32.THATtheCounciladjournits meetingat _______ p.m.to meet again on December 3, 2020, at 7:30 p.m. 10 ________________________________________________________________ Due to COVID 19 and Public Health concerns, the Malahide Township Council met at the Malahide Community Place, at 12105 Whittaker Road, Springfield,at 7:30 p.m. in order to allow for physical distancing and limited public attendance. The following were present: Council:Mayor D. Mennill, Deputy Mayor D. Giguère, Councillor M. Widner, Councillor S. Lewis, and Councillor C. Glinski. Council via Videoconference: Councillor R. Cerna and Councillor M. Moore. Staff:Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk M. Casavecchia-Somers, Information Technology Manager C. Coxen, Director ofPhysical Services M. Sweetland,and Deputy Clerk D. Wilson. Staff Members via Videoconference:Director of Fire and Emergency Services B. Smith, Director of Financial Services A. Mohile, and Manager of Water/Wastewater S. Gustavson. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mennill took the Chair and called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTERESTand the General Nature thereof. Councillor Widner disclosed a pecuniary interest with respect to Council Agenda Item (D)(iii) regarding the Court of Revision for the W. Shively Drain Branch 1 and 2; and Item E (ii) regarding the Dyck Drainage Petition. The nature of the conflict being that a Junior Partner at Spriet Associates is an immediate relative of his. MINUTES: No. 20-427 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Rick Cerna 11 THAT the minutes of the regular meeting of the Councilheld on October 15, 2020 be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. No. 20-428 Moved by:Dominique Giguère Seconded by:Max Moore THATthe minutes of the special meeting of the Council held on October 8, 2020, be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. No. 20-429 Moved by:Mark Widner Seconded by:Rick Cerna THAT the minutes of the special meeting of the Council held on October 26, 2020, be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. PRESENTATIONS/DELEGATIONS/PETITIONS: Meeting to Consider Leonard Jones Drain Drainage Engineer, Andrew Gilvesy, of CJDL Consulting Engineers, appeared before the Council to present the Drainag 21, 2020, regarding the Leonard Jones Drain and outlined the nature of the proposed work. Mayor Mennill inquired if any persons were in attendance that wished to comment or ask questions concerning the Drainage Report.Wesley Taylor,of 8423 Imperial Road, questioned the costs of maintenance and placement of a catchbasinon his property. The Engineer advised that Mr. Jones is responsible for the entire cost of the drain and the drain has already been installed. He noted that the drain is new and constructed properly with a warranty. TheEngineer would be any maintenance for quite some time. The Engineer suggested an onsite meeting with Mr. Taylor at his convenience to review the Engineers Report and placement of catchbasins. Mayor Mennill inquired if any persons, including Members of Council, would like to withdraw or add their names to the Petition and there were none. 12 No. 20-430 Moved by:Max Moore Seconded by:Chester Glinski CJDL Consulting Engineers and dated September 21, 2020, be accepted; AND THAT By-law No. 20-67,being a by-law to provide for the Leonard Jones Drain drainage works,be read a first and second time and provisionally adopted. Carried. No. 20-431 Moved by:Dominique Giguère Seconded by:Chester Glinski THAT the Court of Revision for the Leonard Jones Drain be scheduled to be held on December 3, 2020 at 7:30 p.m. Carried. Meeting to Consider Leonard Jones DrainExtension Drainage Engineer, Andrew Gilvesy, of CJDL Consulting Engineers, appeared before the dated September 30, 2020, regarding the Leonard Jones Drain Extension and outlined the nature of the proposed work. Mayor Mennill inquired if any persons were in attendance that wished to comment or ask questions concerning the Drainage Report and there were none. Mayor Mennill inquired if any persons, including Members of Council, would like to withdraw or add their names to the Petition and there were none. No. 20-432 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Mark Widner prepared by CJDL Consulting Engineers and dated September 30, 2020, be accepted; AND THAT By-law No. 20-68,being a by-law to provide for the Leonard Jones Drain Extension drainage works,be read a first and second time and provisionally adopted. 13 Carried. No. 20-433 Moved by:Dominique Giguère Seconded by:Chester Glinski THAT the Court of Revision for the Leonard Jones Drain Extension be scheduled to be held on December 3, 2020 at 7:30 p.m. Carried. The Mayor thanked the Engineer for his presentations and he retired from the meeting. Court of Revision Shively Drain Councillor Widner declared a conflict of interest with respect to Council Agenda Item D (iii) relating to the W. Shively Drain Branch 1 and 2, retired from the meeting and abstained from all discussions and voting on the matter No. 20-434 Moved by:Rick Cerna Seconded by:Scott Lewis THAT the Council of the Township of Malahide does hereby appoint the following members to sit on the Court of Revision for the W. Shively Drain Branch 1 & 2: Mayor Dave Mennill (Chair) Deputy Mayor Dominique Giguère Councillor Max Moore. Carried. No. 20-435 Moved by:Max Moore Seconded by:Dominique Giguère THAT the Court of Revision for the W. Shively Drain Branch 1 & 2 be called to order at 7:50p.m. AND THAT Dave Mennill be appointed Chairman. Carried. The Drainage Engineer, John M. Spriet,of Spriet Associates, briefly outlined the nature of the proposed drainage works and the related Assessment Schedule. 14 Chair Mennill inquired if any written comments/objections had been received and was advised that there were none. Chair Mennill asked if any of the Court of Revision Members had any questions or comments for the Engineer and there were none. No. 20-436 Moved by:Dominique Giguère Seconded by:Max Moore THAT the Court of Revision members for the W. Shively Drain Branch 1 & 2 do hereby accept the recommendations of Drainage Engineer John Spriet, Spriet Associates; and further, does hereby confirm the drainage assessments as outlined in the Report of the Drainage Engineer,dated September 3, 2020. Carried. No. 20-437 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Chester Glinski THATthe Court of Revision relating to the W. Shively Drain Branch 1 & 2 be adjourned and the Council Meeting reconvene at 7:53 p.m. Carried. No. 20-438 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Rick Cerna THAT the tender for the W. Shively Drain Branch 1 & 2 be awarded to Van Gorp Drainage,in the amount of $30,050 exclusive of HST; subject to the expiration of all appeal periods and subject to no appeals having been received related to the W. Shively DrainBranch 1 & 2. Carried. Councillor Widner resumed his seat in the Council Chamber. The Mayor thanked the Engineer for his presentation and he retired from the meeting. Minor Variance Application Daniel and Sherri Wiebe, relating to property at PartLot 4, Concession 1, Malahide. 15 No. 20-439 Moved by:Dominique Giguère Seconded by:Mark Widner THAT the Committee of Adjustment for the Township of Malahide be called to order at 7:58p.m. and that Mayor Dave Mennill be appointed Chairman Carried. Chair Mennill advised that the purpose of this Public Meeting is to consider an application for a Minor Variance as submitted by Daniel and Sherri Wiebe. Chair Mennill requested the Clerk to provide an overview of the application. The Clerk advised that the purpose and effect of this variance is to grant relief from the Village Residential Two (VR2) Zone and applicable regulations in the Township of MalahideZoning By-law No. 18-22, requiring that accessory buildings not be erected in a front yard and not be closer to the road than the dwelling is to that road (Section 6.3.2). The variance will permit the construction of a detached garage (measuring 5.18 metresx 7.62 metres) in a front yard, i.e. facing Rush Creek Line, closer to that road than the existing dwelling. Chair Mennill asked the Applicant and/or their agent to provide any additional Information and there was none. Chair Mennill asked the Deputy Clerk to provide any comments received from the circulated agencies and landowners. The Deputy Clerk advised correspondence was received from Catfish Creek Conservation Authority with no objections. Chair Mennill asked if any person in attendance wished to make any comments regarding the application and there were none. Chair Mennill inquired if any Committee Members had any questions regarding the application and there were none. Chair Mennill advised that the Committee will consider all comments received when making its final decision on the application No. 20-440 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Rick Cerna THAT Report No. DS-20-48249 Rush AND THAT, notwithstanding that Section 6.3.2 of Zoning By-law No. 18-22 states that accessory buildings not be erected in a front yard and not be 16 closer to the road than the dwelling is to that road, the Minor Variance Application of Daniel & Sherri Wiebe,relating to the property located at 48249 Rush Creek Line,to allow relief of an accessory building being built in a front yard and/or closer to the road than the dwelling is to the road, be granted. Carried. No. 20-441 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Mark Widner THAT the Committee of Adjustment for the Township of Malahide be adjourned and the Council meeting reconvene at 7:59p.m. Carried. Public Meeting Zoning By-law Amendment, as submitted by Thomas and Suzanne Pettit, relating to property at Part Lot 22, Concession 7, Geographic Township of Malahide. No. 20-442 Moved by:Dominique Giguère Seconded by:Chester Glinski THAT the Public Meeting concerning the Zoning By-law Amendment Application of Thomas and Suzanne Pettit relating to the property located at Lot 22, Concession 7, Geographic Township of South Dorchester, be called to order at 8:01p.m. Carried Mayor Mennill advised that the purpose of this Public Meeting is to consider an application to amend the zoning of the subject property located at 47060 Yorke Line, from an agricultural lot from the Special Agricultural (A2) Zone to a Site- Specific Special Agricultural (A2#). Mayor Mennill asked the Deputy Clerk to advise and confirm on the method and date of notice given for this meeting. The Clerk advised that this public meeting was advertised in the Aylmer Express on October 14 and 21, 2020. In addition, affected property owners within 120 meters were sent a notice by prepaid first class mail that was posted at least twenty days prior to this meeting. Mayor Mennill requested the Clerk to provide an overview of the application. The Clerk advised that the purpose of the proposed amendment isto change the - Special Agricultural (A2#) Zone. The rezoning would permit the 17 construction of a food processing plant, being a milk processing facility to produce yogurt, kefir, cheese curds and fluid milk (including on-farm retail sale of these products), operated and supported by an established dairy farm operation on the lands. The subject lands comprise an area of approximately 43.5 hectares (107 acres) with a frontage of approximately 608 metres (1,995 feet) on Yorke Line and a depth of approximately 715 metres (2,346 feet). Existing buildings and structures include a single detached dwelling and several buildings and structures associated with the active dairy operation and lands under cultivation. The proposed milk processing facility, comprising a floor area of approximately 278.5 squaremetres(2,998 squarefeet), would be situated toward the westerly portion of the area occupied by existing farm buildings and structures. Mayor Mennill asked the Deputy Clerk to provide any comments received and she advised that correspondence has been received from the Southwestern Public Health indicatingno objection to the application as it currently stands, but requesting notification if amendments are made to the application. Mayor Mennill asked if any persons were in attendance that wished to make any comments regarding the application and there were none. Councillor Widner noted his satisfaction with the new endeavor. In response to an inquiry from Councillor Glinski, the Clerk advised that the application submitted met all of the necessary Minimum Distance Separation regulations. Mayor Mennill advised that the Council will consider all comments received when making its final decision on the application. No. 20-443 Moved by:Mar Widner Seconded by:Dominque Giguère THAT the Public Meeting concerning theZoning By-law Amendment Application of Thomas and Suzanne Pettit relating to the property located at Lot 22, Concession 7, be adjourned and the Council meeting reconvene at 8:05p.m. Carried. No. 20-444 Moved by:Dominique Giguère Seconded by:Max Moore THAT By-law No. 20-69,being a By-law to amend Zoning By-law No. 18-22 insofar as it relates to the property owned by Thomas and Suzanne Pettit, 18 located at Lot 22, Concession 7, be given first, second and third readings, and properly signed and sealed. Carried. Public Meeting Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment, as submitted by 1111944 Ontario Limitedrelating to property at Part Lot 24, Concession 3, Geographic Township of Malahide. No. 20-445 Moved by:Rick Cerna Seconded by:Chester Glinski THAT the Public Meeting concerning the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment Application of 1111944 Ontario Limited (Creative Enterprises)relating to the property located at Lot 24, Concession 3, be called to order at 8:07p.m. Carried. Mayor Mennill advised that the purpose of this Public Meeting is to consider an application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law of the subject property located at 51631 and 51553 Calton Line, being Part of Lot 24, Concession 3, Amending Zoning Bylaw from General Agricultural (A2) and Farm Industrial (M3) - Mayor Mennill askedthe Deputy Clerk to advise and confirm on the method and date of notice given for this meeting. The Deputy Clerk advised that this public meeting was advertised in the Aylmer Express on October 14 and 21, 2020. In addition, affected property owners within 120 meters were sent a notice by prepaid first class mail that was posted at least twenty days prior to this meeting. Mayor Mennill requested the Clerk to provide an overview of the application. The Clerkadvised that the subject lands comprise, in total, an area of approximately 6.2 hectares(15.4 acres), a frontage of approximately 216 metres (709 feet) on Calton Line and a depth of approximately 243 metres (797 feet). The lands are occupied by various buildings and structures associated with an established industrial use (Creative Enterprises) engaged in the manufacturing of concrete mixer drums and agricultural processing equipment. The owners are proposing to construct a new manufacturing building and related open storage on a parcel of land to be added to the existing lot, as well as a new addition to the existing industrial building to increase its floor area to approximately 8,607 squaremetres (92,649 squarefeet). The Clerk advised that the proposed amendment to the Official Plan is to change 19 A corresponding amendment to the Zoning By-law would change the zoning of - m Industrial (M3#) to recognize and permit the proposed industrial expansion on the enlarged parcel. The proposed change in zoning would occur if and when the aforementioned enlargement of the existing operation is approved through the Official Plan amendment and a consent has been granted by the County of Elgin Land Division Committee to approve the enlarged lot. Mayor Mennill asked the Deputy Clerk to provide any comments received from the circulated agencies and landowners. The Deputy Clerk advised that correspondence has been received from the Catfish Creek Conservation Authority indicating no concerns. Mayor Mennill asked if any person in attendance wished to make any comments regarding the application and there were none. Mayor Mennill thanked those in attendance and advised that the Council will consider all comments received at a future date. No. 20-446 Moved by:Chester Glinski Seconded by:Mark Widner THAT the Public Meeting relating to the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment Application of 1111944 Ontario Limited (Creative Enterprises)relating to the property located at Lot 24, Concession 3, be adjourned and the Council meeting reconvene at 8:10 p.m. Carried. No. 20-447 Moved by:Dominique Giguère Seconded by:Max Moore THAT the Memorandum of Monteith Brown dated November 2, 2020, relating to the Official Plan Amendment for 1111944 Ontario Limited (Creative Enterprises) be received; ANDTHAT Monteith Brown be requestedto prepare the required amendments to the Township of Malahide Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit the proposed expansion of 1111944 Ontario Limited (Creative Enterprises) on part of Lot 24, Concession 3, in the Township of Malahide and known locally as 51631 and 51553 Calton Line. Carried. 20 Presentation Susan Morrell, on behalf of the Council Remuneration Review Committee. Susan Morrell, on behalf of the Council Remuneration Review Committee, appeared before the Council, to present the findings of the Committee. She advised that the Council Remuneration Review Committee members, Martin Baelde, Richard Robilliard, Kevin Morrell, and herselfmet virtually due to the COVID-19 restrictions. She advised that the Committee reviewed the background materials regarding Council remuneration as well as past salary increases, comparisons, feedback from Council, etc. Ms. Morrell noted that the roles of Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Councillor have changed and become more complex as well as the ability for ratepayers to contact a Councillor on a 24/7basis. Ms. Morrell further noted that the Committee considered that the compensation needed to be fair but fiscally responsible. She noted that each member looked at the compensation independently and then a joint meeting was held to put all their ideas together. Ms. Morrell thanked the members of her Committee, as well as the Council Members and Municipal Staff for their input. The Council Members thanked the Committee for their work on this review. No. 20-448 Moved by:Mark Widner Seconded by:Scott Lewis THAT the presentation received from Susan Morrell, on behalf of the Council Remuneration Review Committee, regarding the final reportand recommendations of therelating to the Council Remuneration Review Committee be received. Carried. No. 20-449 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Dominique Giguere THAT the Report of the Council Remuneration Review Committee entitled - AND THATthe Municipal Clerk be requested to prepare the necessary by- law to implement the following recommendations of the Council Remuneration Review Committee: 21 (i)Effective January 1, 2020, the annual salary for all Members of Council be established as follows: Mayor $24,247.43 ($600.00 increase) Deputy Mayor $18,079.48 ($800.00 increase) Councillor$12,520.78 ($1,000.00 increase); (ii)The preceding remuneration shall cover all regular Council and the Committee of the Whole Meetings conducted within the boundaries of the Township; (iii)As an inflationary safeguard, the Council's annual salary be automatically adjusted annually, commencing January 1, 2021; it being pointed out that such amounts will be adjusted by the percentage increase granted to the Municipal Staff Salary Grid once determined; (iv)Effective January 1, 2020, the Council per diem rate be increased from $165.00 to $180.00 per day for participation in work-related conferences and workshops as approved by Council Resolution; (v)Effective January 1, 2020, the annual mileage allowance for all Council Members be established as follows: Mayor$900.00 ($50.00 increase) Deputy Mayor$900.00 ($50.00 increase) Councillor$600.00 ($30.00 increase); (vi)Effective January 1, 2020, the mileage rate for the use of personal vehicles for attendance at conferences and workshops be increased from $0.45 per km to $0.52 per km; AND THAT, on or about May 1, 2022, the Council be requested to consider increasing all annual Council salaries by an additional $500.00 to come into effect on January 1, 2023; it being pointed out that the intent of such salary increase is to provide additional incentive for candidates to run for Council in the Fall of 2022; AND THAT the Council Remuneration Review Committee, having fulfilled its mandate, be disbanded. Carried. Presentation Bill MacIntyre, Resident of Springfield, regarding Service Delivery Review. Bill MacIntyre, resident of Springfield, appeared before the Council, regarding the Service Delivery Review Implementation Strategy. 22 Mr. MacIntyre voiced his concerns regarding the consideration of a potential waterline extension to service Springfield. He felt that it would be better for the Council to consider other ways to increase the tax base such as increasing commercial and industrial tax bases. He believedthat Springfield residents had adequatewater at thepresent timeand could not afford to hook up to a new waterline. He wanted to ensure that it was not mandatory for existing residents to hook up to a new waterline. Mr. MacIntyre noted his concerns that federal and provincial funding would not be available because of the tax burdensfrom COVID-19 and did not want the project to go forward if there was not 2/3 grant funding available. Mayor Mennill noted that a waterline to Springfield was one aspect of the Service Delivery Review and a lot more research would be completed to ensure that such a project would be a feasible and affordable endeavor. The CAO/Clerk advised a very detailed study was being considered as the consultants did not complete a deep dinto this recommendation. She noted that the next step would be to determine if there is merit to move to the next level,if there is a business caseto ensure that it is feasible. She noted that one of the considerations of the future research would be to determine if it was mandatory for existing residentsto connect to the potential new waterline. No. 20-450 Moved by:Dominique Giguere Seconded by:Rick Cerna THAT the presentation from Bill MacIntyre, Resident of Springfield, relating to the Service Delivery Report,be received. Carried. REPORTS: Director of Fire and Emergency Services -Emergency Services Activity Report -September No. 20-451 Moved by:Chester Glinski Seconded by:Max Moore THAT Report No. F20- 23 Carried. Director of Public Works -Petition for Drainage Dyck Petition Councillor Widner declared a conflict of interest with respect to Council Agenda Item E (ii) relating to the Dyck Drainage Petition, retired from the meeting and abstained from all discussions and voting on the matter No. 20-452 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Dominique Giguere THAT Report No. PS-20-Petition for Drainage Dyck Petition be received; AND THAT John M. Spriet, P. Eng., of Spriet Associates Ltd., be appointed being noted that the Petitioner is requesting that this petition be incorporated into the ction of a new branch of the Hiepleh-Dance Drain. Carried. Councillor Widner resumed his seat in the Council Chamber. -Malahide Water Distribution System 2020 First and Second Quarter Operations Report No. 20-453 Moved by:Chester Glinski Seconded by:Rick Cerna THAT Report No. PS-20-- 2020 First and Carried. Director of Development Services -Severance Application E42/20 -Report No. 20-454 Moved by:Max Moore Seconded by:Scott Lewis 24 THAT Report No. DS-20-30en received; AND THAT this report be forwarded to the Land Division Committee for its review and consideration. Carried. -Severance Application E42/20 -Conditions No. 20-455 Moved by:Max Moore Seconded by:Scott Lewis THAT the Malahide Township Council has no objection to the Land Severance No. E42/20,in the name of Gregory MaxUnderhill, relating to the property located at Part Lot 25, Concession 2, Geographic Township of Malahide, subject to the following conditions: (i)That the applicant initiate and assume, if required, all engineering costs associated with the preparation of a revised assessment schedule in accordance with the Drainage Act, RSO 1990,as amended, with a deposit to be paid in full to the township prior to the condition being deemedfulfilled. If the deposit does not cover the costs of the revised assessment schedule, the applicantwill be billed for any additional costs incurred. (ii)That all outstanding work orders or by-law enforcement issues be resolved to the satisfaction ofthe Chief Building Official prior to the condition being deemed fulfilled. (iii)That the applicants initiate and assume all planning costs associated with the required OfficialPlan Amendment, Zoning Amendment, Minor Variance or other land use planning process asrequired in accordance with the Ontario Planning Act, RSO 1990, with such cost to be paid in fullto the Township and that the required process be successfully completed prior to the conditionbeing deemed fulfilled. (iv)Confirmation that private sewage system be confined entirely within the boundaries of the newlycreated parcel. That system be in conformance with all required setbacks from lot lines prior tothe condition being deemed fulfilled. (v)That all applicable property taxes, municipal fees and charges be paid to the Municipality prior tothe stamping of the deeds. 25 (vi)That an electronic version of the reference plan be submitted to the satisfaction of theMunicipality. (vii)That the applicant is responsible to apply and pay all fees to the Townshipwith respect to CivicAddressing Numbers/Signage for the severed and retained portions of property prior to thecondition being deemed fulfilled. Carried. -Severance Application E44/20 Report No. 20-456 Moved by:Mark Widner Seconded by:Dominique Giguere THAT Report No. DS-20-31en received; AND THAT this report be forwarded to the Land Division Committee for its review and consideration. Carried. -Severance Application E44/20 -Conditions No. 20-457 Moved by:Mark Widner Seconded by:Dominique Giguere THAT the Malahide Township Council has no objection to the Land Severance No. E44/20,in the name of Dolores Slansky VonGroh, relating to theproperty located at Part Lot 7, Concession 7,Geographic Township of South Dorchester, subject to the following conditions: (i)That the applicant initiate and assume, if required, all engineering costs associated with thepreparation of a revised assessment schedule in accordance with the Drainage Act, RSO 1990,as amended, with a deposit to be paid in full to the township prior to the condition being deemedfulfilled. If the deposit does not cover the costs of the revised assessment schedule, the applicantwill be billed for any additional costs incurred. (ii)That the applicant initiate and assume, if required, all engineering and construction costsassociated with 26 construction of a new Municipal drain, or, the relocation of Municipal drain. To becommenced in accordance with the Drainage Act, RSO 1990. All costs to be paid in full to the township prior to the condition being deemed fulfilled. If a lot grading plan is required as acondition of severance, it should be done in conjunction with the new Municipal drain or relocation of Municipal Drain. (iii)Thatthe applicant be required to retain the services of a professional designer and have anengineered Lot grading development plan and ditch grading plan prepared in accordance withgood engineering practices, that are suitable to the Township prior to the condition being deemedfulfilled. (iv)The owner has the necessary review and lot assessment conducted to ensure that it is suitablefor the installation of a sewage disposal system and payment of necessary fees per lot. (v)That all applicable property taxes, municipal fees and charges be paid to the Municipality prior tothe stamping of the deeds. (vi)That an electronic version of the reference plan be submitted to the satisfaction of theMunicipality. (vii)That the applicant is responsible to apply and pay all fees to the Township with respect to CivicAddressing Numbers/ Signage for the severed and retained portions of property prior to thecondition being deemed fulfilled. Carried. Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk -Service Delivery Review Implementation Strategy Implementation Councillor Glinski indicated thathe did not want to spend $50,000.00 on a consultant report regarding a possible waterline to Springfield. He was also not in favour of the additional $15,000 -$20,000 in consultant fees for other matters. He would like these matters brought forward for to the Budget Committee for review. Deputy Mayor Giguère also indicated that she was not in favour of approving a Resolution that contained numerous ideas and recommendations. She 27 suggested removing those portions of the recommendation related to IT, Public Works, Aylmer Policing,and Broadband. Councillor Widner suggested deferralof the Resolution. The CAO/Clerk indicated that the Municipal Staff was looking for firm direction on the strategy in order to initiate dialogue with the neighbouring municipalities and determine if more research was required. No. 20-458 Moved by:Dominique Giguere Seconded by:Mark Widner THAT Report No. CAO-20- AND THAT the Municipal Staff be directed to proceed with the proposed implementation strategy for the Malahide Service Delivery and Organizational Review as presented; save and except those sections relating to Economic Growth, Information Technology/Broadband, Public Works Facility, and Aylmer Policing; it being noted that the implementation strategy for some projects are subject to the approval of the 2021 Budget. Carried. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES/OUTSIDE BOARDS: No. 20-459 Moved by:Mark Widner Seconded by:Dominique Giguere THAT the following Reports of Committees/Outside Boards be noted and filed: (i)Aylmer Police Costing Ad Hoc Working Group Draft Minutes October 26, 2020. Carried. CORRESPONDENCE: No. 20-460 Moved by: Mark Widner Seconded by: Chester Glinski 28 THAT the Township of Oro-Medonte resolution requesting the Province to consult the ski industry to review reopening policy considerations currently impacting the industry. Carried. No. 20-461 Moved by:Mark Widner Seconded by:Chester Glinski THAT the following correspondence be noted and filed: 1.Association of Municipalities of Ontario -Watch File dated October 15, 22 and 29, 2020. 2.Township of Blandford-Blenheim Resolution requesting Federal Government to amend legislation relating to unlicensed and unmonitored cannabis grow operations. 3.Township of Plympton-Wyoming and Township of Lincoln of Government to take action relating to medical cannabis licensing and to follow similar regulations and guidelines as all other pharmaceutical industries. 4.City of Clarence-Rockland Resolution requesting Province to modify regulations governing establishment of cannabis retail stores. 5.County of NorthumberlandResolution supporting Township of Asphodel Norwood requesting a governing body be created to regulate cannabis production. 6.County of Norfolk Resolution requesting Federal and Provincial Governments to provide better regulation and tracking of the prescription of cannabis by doctors, increased regulatory and enforcement presence by Health Canada, increased OPP resources, increased funding to municipalities to deal with complaints and by-law issues generated by illicit cannabis grow operations. 7.Township of Loyalist Resolution requesting Federal and Provincial Governments to provide funding to small charities, community groups and service clubs because of detrimental effects of the pandemic. 29 8.Township of Wellington North, County of Northumberland, Township of South-West Oxford Resolution requesting the Province to work with Municipal Property Assessment Corporation to address the assessment issue relating to aggregate resources. 9.Town of Plympton-Wyoming, County of Northumberland, and Township of Huron-Kinloss Support Township of Wollaston Resolution requesting the Province to review the Municipal Elections Act to provide clearer wording relating to adding voters 10.County of Northumberland Resolution supporting Wasaga Beach regarding unauthorized car rally. 11.Township of Huron-Kinloss -Support Resolution of the Town of Amherstburg requesting Province to amend Schedule 11 of Bill 108to remove the powers provided to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, retaining authority for hearing certain appeals by the Conservation Review Board; and recommending the return of representatives. 12.Town of Aylmer Press Release of October 27, 2020 regarding Unauthorized Eventin the Town of Aylmer. 13.Ministry of the Solicitor General Correspondence relating to Court Security and Prisoner Transportation Program Review. 14.Ombudsman Ontario Annual Report 2019-2020 Fiscal Year. 15.Ontario Energy Board -Notice to Customers of Epcor Gas and Enbridge Application for raise in Natural Gas Rates Application. (Additional Information available upon request). 16.Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Correspondence and Schedule of Blue Box Transition to new full producer responsibility regulation. 17.County of Elgin Land Division Committee Appeal period now expired for the following severance applications: -E22-20 David and Jacqueline Fehr relating to property at 53250 College Line. -E28-20 MacVicar Farms Ltd. relating to property at 46634 Ron McNeil Line. -E30-20 and E31-20 Robert, Jean and Jason Nicholson relating to property at 49542 John Wise Line. 30 18.County of Elgin Land Division Committee Amended Decision for Severance Application No. E55/19 John and Anita Peters relating to property at 51402 Pressey Line. 19.Municipality of Central Elgin Notice of Passing of Zoning By-law Amendments relating to the following properties: -Jacklin Farm Phase 4. -263 Frances Street, Port Stanley. -42057 Fruit Ridge Line. Carried. OTHER BUSINESS: -EECC Third Quarter Operating Update and COVID 19 Impacts Councillor Lewis retired from the meeting. No. 20-462 Moved by:Mark Widner Seconded by:Rick Cerna THAT Report No. Aylmer-CAO-80- Operating Update and Covid 19 Impacts AND THAT, subject to the concurrence of the Aylmer Town Council, the Malahide Township Council does hereby authorize extended hours of operation for ice rentals on Kinsmen arena at the East ElginCommunity Complex (EECC); AND THAT, subject to the concurrence of the Aylmer Town Council,the Malahide Township Council does herebyauthorize theEastLink ice surface to be installed at the EECC inJanuary,2021 provided that the current pandemic environment is the same or improved. Carried. Councillor Lewis resumed his seat in the Council Chamber. -Freedom March scheduled at the EECC on November7. Councillor Cerna requested further information relating to a proposed Freedom March scheduled to start at the East Elgin Community Complex on Saturday, was that a Freedom March (Anti-Mask Protest) was to begin at the EECC 31 parking lot on Saturday and travel easterly along Talbot to King Street, to Sydenham Street and end at the Aylmer Bandshell Park. She noted that Aylmer has declared a State of Emergency and was working with Provincial Operations Centre to determine a response plan. Aylmer Police are coordinating the response and the OPP are also involved. As the route is primarily in Aylmer, the Aylmer Council are coordinating the response. She noted that Mayor Mennill has issued a message to Malahide residents and placed on the Township website and Facebook page. The CAO also noted that the Malahide Emergency Response Group has met to ensure the Township residents are safeguarded. CLOSED SESSION: No. 20-463 Moved by:Chester Glinski Seconded by:Scott Lewis THAT the Council move into Closed Session at 9:20p.m., pursuant to Section 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, to discussthe following: (i)Labour Relations or Employee Negotiations Matterand/or Personal Matter about an Identifiable Individual, including municipal or local board employees, relating to staffing in the Corporate Services Department. (ii)Labour Relations or Employee Negotiations Matterand/or Personal Matter about an Identifiable Individual, including municipal or local board employees relating to vacation entitlement. Carried. No. 20-464 Moved by:Rick Cerna Seconded by:Chester Glinski THAT Council move out of Closed Session and reconvene at 9:35p.m. in order to continue with its deliberations. Carried. The Mayor advised that during the Closed Session the Municipal Staff was given direction regarding a Labour Relations or Employee Negotiations Matter and/or Personal Matter about an Identifiable Individual, including municipal or local board employees, relating to staffing in the Corporate Services Department. 32 The Mayor advised that during the Closed Session the Municipal Staff was given direction regarding a Labour Relations orEmployee Negotiations Matter and/or Personal Matter about an Identifiable Individual, including municipal or local board employees, relating to vacation entitlement. CONFIRMATORY: No. 20-465 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Max Moore THAT By-law No. 20-71, being a Confirmatory By-law, be given first, second and third readings, and be properly signed and sealed. Carried. ADJOURNMENT: No. 20-466 Moved by:Chester Glinski Seconded by:Mark Widner THATtheCounciladjournits meetingat 9:35p.m.to meet again on November 19, 2020, at 7:30 p.m. Carried. ______________________________ Mayor D. Mennill ______________________________ Clerk M. Casavecchia-Somers 33 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING CONCERNING A PROPOSED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT IN THE TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE TAKE NOTICEthat the Township of Malahide has received a complete application for a proposed Zoning By-law Amendment. APPLICANT:Civic Planning Solutions Inc. (David Roe)on behalf of Bill Reymer,owner of part of Lot 85 and Lot 86, Concession STR,Township of Malahide. The lands affected by the amendment, known municipally as 140Elk Street, are situated south of Elk Street (Town of Aylmer) and lie west of Talbot Line and Hacienda Road in the Township of Malahide. AND TAKE NOTICEthat the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide will hold a public meeting on Thursday, November 19th, 2020,at 7:30 p.m.at the Malahide Community Place, 12105 Whittaker Road,Springfield to consider a proposed Zoning By-law Amendment under Section 34 of the Planning Act. THE PURPOSE AND EFFECTof this amendment is to change the zoning on a remnant parcel of farmland occupied by two barns from the General Agricultural (A1) Zoneto the Large Lot Agricultural (A3) Zone. The landsto be retained, which comprise an area of approximately 15.7 hectares (38.7 ac) and a depth of 319 metres (1,047 ft), are proposed to be merged in name and title with an abutting agricultural parcel to the east owned by Bill Reymer (49639 Talbot Line). The re-zoning would permit the enlargement of lands for continuedagricultural purposes, with the enlarged parcel comprising an area of 88.1 hectares (217.7 ac) and frontage along Talbot Line. The lands being severed, being 140 Elk Street in the Town of Aylmer, are not affected by the proposed re-zoning and are instead governed by the provisions of the Town of Aylmer Zoning By-law.The change in zoning of the subject lands to A3would ensure that the enlarged parcel in its entirety is zoned consistently andis being requested to satisfy conditions ofApplication for Consent E 11-20granted by the County of Elgin Land Division Committee. ANY PERSONmay attend themeeting in person or virtually and/or makea written or verbal representation in support of or in opposition to the proposed amendment.The public meeting will be available by clicking on the You Tube icon on the homepage of www.malahide.ca. Persons wishing to make a verbal statement virtually during the meeting are required to pre-register with the undersigned. IF ANY PERSON OR PUBLIC BODYdoes not make oral submissions at a public meeting, or make written submissions to the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide before the by-lawis passed, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision of the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. If a person or public body does not make oral submission at a public meeting, or make written submissions to the Township of Malahide before the by-law is passed, the personor public body may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Local Planning Appeal Tribunalunless, in the opinion of the Tribunal, there are reasonable grounds to do so. IF YOU WISHto be notified of the adoption of the proposed amendment, or the refusal of a request to amend the Zoning By-law you must make a written request to the undersigned. ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONrelating to the proposed amendment may be obtained at the Township Office. th DATEDat the Township of Malahidethis 28day of October,2020. M. Casavecchia-Somers, CAO/Clerk Township of Malahide, 87 John Street, South, Aylmer, Ontario.N5H 2C3 519-773-5344 34 610 PRINCESS AVENUE LONDON, ON N6B 2B9 TEL: (519) 686-1300 FAX: (519) 681-1690 E-MAIL: mbpc@mbpc.ca Memorandum To/Attention: Township of Malahide Date: November 13, 2020 From: Jay McGuffin Project No: 2009-001 Subject: Application to Amend the Township of Malahide Zoning By-Law No. 18-22 Part of Lots 85 & 86,Concession STR,Township of Malahide, Ontario 140 Elk Street Agent: Civic Planning Solutions Inc. (David Roe) Registered Owner: Bill Reymer Purpose An application has been filed to amend the Township of Malahide Zoning By-Law No. 18-22tochange the zoning of the above-noted lands from General Agricultural (A1)toLarge Lot Agricultural (A3). The abutting farm parcel to the east (to which the subject lands is being conveyed) is also owned by Bill Reymer and is currently zoned A3. It is intended that the zoning of the enlarged parcel remains consistent throughout as A3. The change in zoning has been requested to satisfy conditions associated with Consent Application E 11-20 granted by the Land Division Committee of the County of Elgin. Subject Site The parcel proposed to be retained by Consent application E 11-20 and re-zoned to A3 is legally known as part of Lot 85 and Lot 86, Concession STR in the Township of Malahide,located on the south side of Elk Street (Town of Aylmer) and situated west of Talbot Line and Hacienda Road. The lands being severed in this instance are located within the Town of Aylmer (with frontage on Elk Street) and are not proposed to be re-zoned insofar as the lands are governed by the Town of Aylmer Zoning By-law. The parcel to be retained comprises approximately 15.7 hectares (38.7 ac) in area and is without frontage, having a depth of319 metres (1,047 ft).The parcel comprises cultivated agricultural land, is occupied by two barns and is proposed to be merged in name and title with the abutting lot to the east also owned by Bill Reymer (49639 Talbot Line). With the addition of the subject lands, the area of the re-sized lot would increase to approximately 88.1 hectares (217.7 acres). The enlarged parcel would continue being used for agricultural purposes with no new buildings or structures being proposed. The subject lands are designated on1. The lands are zoned large General Agricultural (A1) onMap 54of the Township of Malahide Zoning By-Law No. 18-22. The abutting lot the east being enlarged (49639 Talbot Line) is zoned Large Lot Agricultural (A3). Page Њ of Ќ 35 Township of Malahide MONTEITH BROWN PLANNING CONSULTANTS Part Lots 85 & 86, Con STR Bill Reymer November 13, 2020 Provincial Policy Statement With respect to lot additions and enlargements, the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) states as follows: Lot adjustments in prime agricultural areas may be permitted for legal or technical reasons. (Section 2.3.4.2) Legal or technical reasons: means severances for purposes such as easements, corrections of deeds, quit claims, and minor boundary adjustments, which do not result in the creation of a new lot. (page 43) When considered against the relative size of the parcel proposed to be enlarged and the reasons for the lot addition (i.e. to consolidate abutting agricultural parcels into one ownership and maintain consistent zoning on both), it is submitted that the application is in keeping with the intent of the PPS in this regard. The .As importantly, the lands being added are not being taken out of production, rather, the lands will serve to increase the size and viability of an existing agricultural parcel through the proposed consolidation. Further, the consolidation of parcels as one holding would eliminate the creation of an undersized agricultural parcel having no access to, or frontage along, an open public road. The boundary adjustment is contemplated and permitted in both the County of Elgin Official Plan and the Township of Malahide Official Plan (discussed below) and is consistent with the PPS. County of Elgin Official Plan Official Plan. Policies regarding lot additions/boundary adjustments are Boundary Adjustments A consent may be permitted for the purpose of modifying lot boundaries, provided no new building lot is created. In reviewing an application for such a boundary adjustment, the approval authority shall be satisfied that the boundary adjustment will not affect the viability of the use of the properties affected as intended by this Plan. In addition, the approval authority shall be satisfied that the boundary adjustment will not affect the viability of the agricultural parcels affected (Section E1.2.3.2). The proposed boundary adjustment appears justified and appropriate under the afore-mentioned policy direction and it is worthy to note that the County, being represented on the Land Division Committee, has reviewed the application for consent and has no objections to it of which we have been made aware. Based on the information provided,the proposed Zoning By-law amendment would be in conformity with the County of Elgin Official. Malahide Official Plan The subject site is located i1Township of Malahide Official Plan. Policies regarding lot enlargements and boundary adjustments are as follows: Consents for lot adjustments, lot additions, minor boundary changes, easements and rights- Page Ћ of Ќ 36 Township of Malahide MONTEITH BROWN PLANNING CONSULTANTS Part Lots 85 & 86, Con STR Bill Reymer November 13, 2020 of way, or correction of title are permitted in any land use designation, provided the severed and retained parcels comply with the other applicable requirements of this Plan, and the Zoning Bylaw. (Section 8.7.1.7) Similar to the County of Elgin Official Plan, the approach in the Malahide Official Plan has been not to The severance would have the effect of ensuring that all contiguously used land for agricultural purposes is under one ownership.The proposed enlargement would provide an opportunity to ensure that consistent zoning is appropriately applied to the entire parcel instead of just a portion of it.Based on the foregoing, the proposed zoning by-law amendment is considered to be in conformity with the Township of Malahide Official Plan. Zoning By-Law No. 18-22 The lands proposed to be retained and added to the abutting farm to the east are zoned General Agricultural (A1) in the Township of Malahide Zoning By-law. The lands to which the retained lands are proposed to be added are zoned Large Lot Agricultural (A3) A re-zoning to A3 has been requested consistent with the zoning applying to the lands to which they are being added. The re-sized farm parcel would readily satisfy the minimum lot area and lot frontage requirements (40 ha and 150 m respectively) of the A3 zone. Recommendation Based on the above analysis, the proposed zoning by-law amendment to rezone the subject lands from General Agricultural (A1) to Large Lot Agricultural (A3) is consistent with the PPS, conforms to the County of Elgin Official Plan and Township of Malahide Official Plan, and maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-Law. It is recommended: The subject lands be rezoned from General Agricultural (A1) to Large Lot Agricultural (A3) to permit the consolidation of abutting agricultural parcels and ensure that consistent zoning applies to the enlarged parcel; -law be considered for adoption. Yours very truly, MONTEITH BROWN PLANNING CONSULTANTS (digitally signed) Jay McGuffin, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Principal Planner JMC;ds Page Ќ of Ќ 37 APPLICATION FOR A ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT Township of David Roe, Civic Planning Solutions, agent for Bill Reymer MALAHIDE 140 Elk Street FIGURE 1 Part of Lot 85 and Lot 86, Concession STR Township of Malahide OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATION AGRICULTURAL ZONING A1 GENERAL AGRICULTURAL A3 LARGE LOT AGRICULTURAL HCW HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL I INSTITUTIONAL RR RURAL RESIDENTIAL E L K S TR E E T RR A1 HWC 15. 7 H a RR (38 .68 ac re s) HWC 1 96 m (6 4 3 ft ) RR 34 5 m ( 1,1 3 2 ft ) I A3 RR HWC-1 A3 A1 RR 72. 4 H a (1 79 ac res ) A3 10 5 m 30 0 m 14 0 m (3 44 ft ) (9 84 ft ) (4 59 ft ) RR 3 2 m 5 8 m (1 05 ft ) 2 6 m (1 90 ft ) (8 5 ft) 15. 7 H a (38 .68 ac re s) 1 96 m (6 43 f t) A1 3 45 m (1 ,13 2 ft) DETAIL LANDS TO BE REZONED FROM 'GENERAL AGRICULTURAL' ('A1') TO 'LARGE LOT AGRICULTURAL' ('A3') AND MERGED WITH o ABUTTING AGRICULTURAL PARCEL TO THE EAST Metres LANDS OWNED BY BILL REYMER (49639 TALBOT LINE) 075150300 TO BE ENLARGED 38 39 40 41 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING CONCERNING A PROPOSED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT IN THE TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE TAKE NOTICE that the Township of Malahide has received a complete application for a proposed Zoning By- law Amendment. APPLICANT: Civic Planning Solutions Inc. (David Roe) on behalf of Dohner Farm Ltd., owner of part of Lot 34, Concession 1, Township of Malahide. The lands affected by the amendment are known municipally as 53233 Nova Scotia Line,situated on thesouth side of Nova Scotia Line (County Road No. 42) west of Richmond Road. AND TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide will hold a public meeting onThursday, November 19th, 2020, at 7:30 p.m. at the Malahide Community Place, 12105 Whittaker Road, Springfield to consider a proposed Zoning By-law Amendment under Section 34 of the Planning Act. THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT of this amendment is to change the zoning onasurplus farm dwelling lot proposed to be severed, which contains a single detached dwelling, detached garage, carport and two portable structures (shipping container and mobile home), from theLarge Lot Agricultural (A3) zone to the Small Lot Agricultural (A4) zone, to permit the use of the proposed lot for residential purposes. The lot comprises an area of approximately 5,022 square metres (1.2 ac), a frontage of 62 metres (203 ft) and a depth of 81 metres (266 ft). The zoning of the retained farm parcel, comprising an area of approximately 53 hectares (131 ac), a frontage of 343 metres (1,125 ft) and irregular depth, is proposed to be changed to the Special Agricultural (A2)zone to prohibit the construction of any new dwelling on the lot. The change in zoning is being requested to fulfill conditions of Application for Consent E 23-20 granted by the County of Elgin Land Division Committee. ANY PERSON may attend the meeting in person or virtually and/or make a written or verbal representation in support of or in opposition to the proposed amendment. The public meeting will be available by clicking on the You Tube icon on the homepage of www.malahide.ca. Persons wishing to make a verbal statement virtually during the meeting are required to pre-register with the undersigned. IF ANY PERSON OR PUBLIC BODY does not make oral submissions at a public meeting, or make written submissions to the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide before the by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision of the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. If a person or public body does not make oral submission at a public meeting, or make written submissions to the Township of Malahide before the by-law is passed, the person or public body may not be added as a party 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 adoption of the proposed amendment, or the refusal of a request to amend the Zoning By-law you must make a written request to the undersigned. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION relating to the proposed amendment may be obtained at the Township Office. th DATED at the Township of Malahide this 28 day of October, 2020. M. Casavecchia-Somers, CAO/Clerk Township of Malahide, 87 John Street, South, Aylmer, Ontario.N5H 2C3 519-773-5344 42 610 PRINCESS AVENUE LONDON, ON N6B 2B9 TEL: (519) 686-1300 FAX: (519) 681-1690 E-MAIL: mbpc@mbpc.ca Memorandum To/Attention: Township of Malahide Date: November 13, 2020 From: Jay McGuffin Project No: 2007-001 Subject: Application to Amend the Township of Malahide Zoning By-Law No. 18-22 Part Lot 34 and part of Lot 35, Concession 1,Township of Malahide, Ontario 53233 Nova Scotia Line Applicant: Civic Planning Solutions Inc. (David Roe) Registered Owner: Dohner Farm Ltd. Purpose An application has been made to amend the Township of Malahide Zoning By-Law No. 18-22 to re-zone lands occupied by a single detached dwelling and accessory buildings from Large Lot Agricultural (A3) toSmall Lot Agricultural (A4). The remainder of the farm is proposed to be re-zoned to Special Agricultural (A2).There-zoning is required to satisfy conditions of approval for consent (E 23-20)to create a lot for a surplus farm dwelling as a result of a farm consolidation. Subject Site The subject lands are legally known as part of Lot 34 and part of Lot 35, Concession 1 in the Township of Malahide and municipally known as 53233 Nova Scotia Line, situated on the south side of Nova Scotia Line (County Road No. 42) west of Richmond Road. The lands in total comprise approximately 53.6 hectares (132.4 acres). The parcel to be severed comprises an area of approximately 5,022 square metres (1.2 acres) with approximately 62 metres (203 ft) of frontage and a depth of approximately 81 metres (266 ft).The parcel contains a single detached dwelling (circa 1900) and accessory buildings including a detached garage, carport and two portable structures (shipping container and mobile home).Services are provided by means of a private drilled well and individual septic system. Access to the parcel is provided by means of an existing driveway entrance toNova Scotia Line. The balance of the lands, being the remaining farmland to be retained, comprise an area of approximately 53.1 hectares (131.2 acres), a broken frontage of approximately 343 metres (1,125 ft) and an irregular depth.The parcel is devoid of buildings and structures and the majority of the lands have been cleared and are in use for agricultural purposes. Woodlands occupy portions of the parcel. Access to the farm is available from Nova Scotia Line. The subject lands are designated , with the aforementioned woodlots . The lands are designated The woodlot features Page Њ of Џ 43 Township of Malahide MONTEITH BROWN PLANNING CONSULTANTS 53233 Nova Scotia Line Dohner Farm Ltd. November 13, 2020 are on 1and - . The lands are zoned Large Lot Agricultural (A2) onMap104of the Township of Malahide Zoning By-Law No. 18-22. Provincial Policy Statement The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) discourages residential lot creation in prime agricultural areas except in the case of an existing residence declared surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation (Section 2.3.4.1c).Planning authorities are to ensure that residential dwellings are prohibited on the remnant parcel of farmland. The parcel to be severed is the result of a surplus dwelling from a farm consolidation as granted by the County of Elgin Land Division Committee (Application E 23- 20).The agricultural lands are operated as a bona fide farm operation and are to be consolidated with the home farm operation located at 52894 Nova Scotia Line in the Township of Malahide. Under Section 2.3.4.1 of the PPS, it is stated that: c) the new lot will be limited to a minimum size needed to accommodate the use and The County of Elgin Land Division Committee and the Township of Malahide have determined that the size of the severed lot is appropriate for its intended residential use. Policies in the PPS with respect to the natural heritage feature are relevant to the application: 2.1.5 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in: a) significant wetlands in the Canadian Shield north of Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E1; b) significant woodlands in Ecoregions 6E and 7E (excluding islands in Lake Huron and the St. Marys River); c) significant valleylands in Ecoregions 6E and 7E (excluding islands in Lake Huron and the St. Marys River); d) significant wildlife habitat; e) significant areas of natural and scientific interest; and f) coastal wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E1 that are not subject to policy 2.1.4(b) unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions. Fragmentation of the woodlot feature (which itself is limited to a small area adjacent to a natural watercourse) is not proposed. The lands being severed are removed from and beyond the 120 metre trigger distance associated with the preparation of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS). County of Elgin Official Plan The subject site County of Elgin Official Plan. farm dwellings are contained in Section E1.2.3.4 b) of the Official Plan as follows: a farming operation as a result of a farm consolidation provided that the development of a new residential use is prohibited on any retained parcel of farmland created by the consent Page Ћ of Џ 44 Township of Malahide MONTEITH BROWN PLANNING CONSULTANTS 53233 Nova Scotia Line Dohner Farm Ltd. November 13, 2020 to sever, unless the retained parcel is the product of the merging in title of two adjacent agricultural parcels in which case a dwelling unit would be permitted as part of the operation; The general consent policies of the Plan (Section E1.2.3.1) are as follows: Provisional consent may be granted subject to appropriate conditions of approval for the severed and/or retained lot. Prior to issuing provisional consent for a new lot for any purpose, the approval authority shall be satisfied that the lot to be retained and the lot to be severed: a) fronts on and will be directly accessed by a public road that is maintained on a year- round basis; b) does not have direct access to a Provincial Highway or County Road, unless the Province or the County permits a request for access; c) will not cause a traffic hazard; d) has adequate size and frontage for the proposed use in accordance with the local municipal Zoning By-law; e) notwithstanding d) above, where a zoning by-law amendment or minor variance is required, approval of such amendment or variance shall be included as a condition of the approval of the consent; f) can be serviced with an appropriate water supply and means of sewage disposal, provided there is confirmation of sufficient reserve sewage system capacity and reserve water system capacity within municipal sewage services and municipal water services; g) will not have a negative impact on the drainage patterns in the area; h) will not restrict the development of the retained lands or other parcels of land, particularly as it relates to the provision of access, if they are designated for development by this Plan; i) will not have a negative impact on the significant features and functions of any natural heritage feature; in this regard, lots should be restricted in size in order to conserve other lands in larger blocks for natural heritage purposes; j) will not have a negative impact on the quality and quantity of groundwater available for other uses in the area; k) will not have an adverse effect on natural hazard processes such as flooding and erosion; l) will conform with the local Official Plan; and, m) will conform to Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act, as amended. Based on a review of the information submitted, the proposed Zoning By-law amendment would be in conformity with the County of Elgin Official Plan. With respect to natural heritage features (Section D1.2.3), the preparation of an EIS is not required. Malahide Official Plan The subject site is located i1 Official Plan. Policies regarding severances of surplus farm dwellings are contained in Section 2.1.7 of the Official Plan. An analysis of these policies with regard to the application is contained below. 2.1.7 Farm Consolidation and Severance of Surplus Farm Dwellings 2.1.7.1 In accordance with the Provincial Policy Statement, farm consolidation shall mean the acquisition of additional farm parcels to be operated as one farm operation. Farm consolidation may result in the identification of existing farm dwellings which are rendered surplus to the Page Ќ of Џ 45 Township of Malahide MONTEITH BROWN PLANNING CONSULTANTS 53233 Nova Scotia Line Dohner Farm Ltd. November 13, 2020 consolidated farm operation. Consents to sever and convey existing farm dwellings which were built and occupied for a minimum of ten years,and which are surplus to a consolidated farm operation, may be permitted within the Agriculture designation in accordance with the following policies: a) In the opinion of Council, a land use conflict shall not be created with agricultural operations or other existing land uses in the immediate area of the subject lands. The surplus dwelling lo crop production. Residential development in the vicinity is limited.No intensive livestock operations have been identified by the applicant in close proximity to (i.e. within 750 m) the proposed residential lot. 2.1.7.2 The severed lot with the surplus farm dwelling shall: a) Be large enough to support a private sanitary sewage treatment and disposal system as determined by the appropriate approval authority, and be serviced by a potable water supply. The new lot measures 5,022 sq m (1.2 ac) in area, and the lands are associated with the existing single detached dwelling, accessory buildings and structures andsurrounding outdoor amenity area. No lands under cultivation are proposed to be removed (as indicated on the survey) and the Land Division Committee has accepted the dimensions and area of the proposed lot subject to the owners satisfying the usual conditions with respect to water supply and sanitary waste disposal. b) Be situated within approximately 100 metres of an opened travelled road and should not be positioned so as to require cultivatable farmland as part of the severed lot. The existing dwelling unit is situated approximately 26 metres (85 ft) from Nova Scotia Line and does not include any cultivatable farmland as part of the front yard. c) Meet the provisions of the applicable Minimum Distance Separation formula of OMAFRA. The application for consent (Section 19) indicates that there are no livestock buildings or structures within 750 metres (2,461 ft) of the proposed severed lands. d) Be rezoned in a Special Agricultural Zone in the Zoning By-law. The subject site is currently zoned Large Lot Agricultural (A3) and an application has been made to rezone the surplus farm dwelling to Small Lot Agricultural (A4) The proposed zone change is consistent with established practice in applying zoning to lots of this size (i.e. greater than 1 ac). 2.1.7.3 The severed lot with the surplus farm dwelling may: a) Include accessory buildings and structures if in the opinion of Township Council a land use conflict will not be created. Farm buildings which may be incompatible with the existing dwelling on the lot proposed to be severed may be required to be removed as a condition of the severance. Their location on the farm and the structural condition of such farm buildings will be evaluated as part of the planning process. The existing accessory buildings are modest in size and are considered ancillary to the residential use of the property. The applicant has confirmed that the mobile home situated on the parcel is being used for storage purposes and is not in habitable condition. 2.1.7.4 The parcel of property constituting the retained agricultural lands shall: a) Comprise a size appropriate for the type of agricultural use(s) common in the area and be Page Ѝ of Џ 46 Township of Malahide MONTEITH BROWN PLANNING CONSULTANTS 53233 Nova Scotia Line Dohner Farm Ltd. November 13, 2020 sufficiently large to maintain flexibility for future changes in the type or size of agricultural operation. The retained farm lot comprises an area of approximately 53 hectares (131 acres). Through the Application for Consent E 23-20, the County of Elgin Land Division Committee has reviewed and granted the lot size as proposed. b) Meet the provisions of the Agricultural (A1) or Special Agricultural (A2) Zone regulations of the Zoning By-law. The farm parcel is proposed to be re-zoned to Special Agricultural (A2) as noted in item c) below. c) Be rezoned to prohibit the placement, development, or establishment of any additional type or form of residential dwelling units thereon, regardless of changes in property boundary or ownership. The lands to be retained would be appropriately re-zoned to Special Agricultural (A2) to prohibit a dwelling from being erected thereon. Based on these considerations, the application maintains conformity with the Official Plan. With respect to natural heritage features and locally significant woodlands (Section 2.5.4.3), the preparation of an EIS is not required in this instance. Zoning By-Law No. 18-22 The subject lands are zoned Large Lot Agricultural (A3) onMap 104 of the Township of Malahide Zoning By-Law No. 18-22.This zone permits a range of uses including agricultural,agri- tourism, forestry use,market garden operations, plant nurseries and riding schools. Residential uses are also permitted. The severed lot is proposed to be zoned Small Lot Agricultural (A4). The lot would readily satisfy the minimum lot area and lot frontage requirements(2,000 sq m and 30 m respectively) of the A4 zone. Based on a survey provided with the application, all other requirements of the By-law are capable of being satisfied with the exception of the existing detached garage and mobile home, both of which have s- (A4-#) zoning is required to permit this setback deficiency. All other requirements of the By-law are capable of being satisfied. Theretained lot is proposed to be re-zoned to Special Agricultural (A2). The parcel would satisfy the minimum lot area and lot frontage requirements (20 ha and 150 m respectively)of the A2. Recommendation Based on the above analysis, the proposed zoning by-law amendment to rezone the lands to be severed from Large Lot Agricultural (A3) to Small Lot Agricultural (A4) and the lands to be retained from Large Lot Agricultural (A3) to Special Agricultural (A2) is consistent with the PPS, conforms to the County of Elgin Official Plan and Township of Malahide Official Plan,and maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-Law. It is recommended that: The parcel to be severed be rezoned from Large Lot Agricultural (A3) to Small Lot Agricultural (A4) to permit its size and use for residential purposes; Page Ў of Џ 47 Township of Malahide MONTEITH BROWN PLANNING CONSULTANTS 53233 Nova Scotia Line Dohner Farm Ltd. November 13, 2020 --#) to permit a reduced side yard width requirement for two accessory buildings on the parcel; The parcel to be retained be rezoned from Large Lot Agricultural (A3) to Special Agricultural (A2) to prohibit the erection of a dwelling thereon. The -law be considered for adoption. Yours very truly, MONTEITH BROWN PLANNING CONSULTANTS (digitally signed) Jay McGuffin, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Principal Planner JMC;ds Page Џ of Џ 48 APPLICATION FOR A ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT Township of David Roe, Civic Planning Solutions, agent for Dohner Farm Ltd. MALAHIDE 53233 Nova Scotia Line FIGURE 1 Part of Lot 34, Concession 1 Township of Malahide OFFICIAL PLAN DESIGNATION AGRICULTURAL NO VA SC OT IA L IN E 156 m 187 m (511 ft) (613 ft) ZONING 62 m A1 GENERAL AGRICULTURAL (203 ft) A3 LARGE LOT AGRICULTURAL A1 53 Ha A3 (131 ac) A3 62 m (203 ft) 0.50 Ha (1.24 ac) 38. 8 H a (95 .8 ac res ) CARPORT MOBILE HOME GARAGE 62 m (203 ft) DETAIL LANDS TO BE SEVERED AND REZONED FROM 'LARGE LOT AGRICULTURAL' ('A3') TO 'SMALL LOT AGRICULTURAL' ('A4') o LANDS TO BE RETAINED AND REZONED FROM 'LARGE LOT Metres AGRICULTURAL' ('A3') TO 'SPECIAL AGRICULTURAL' ('A2') 075150300 49 50 51 52 53 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING CONCERNING A PROPOSED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT IN THE TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE General Amendment Housekeeping By-law 2020 TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide will hold a public meeting onThursday, November 19th, 2020, at 7:30 p.m. at the Malahide Community Place, 12105 Whittaker Road, Springfield to consider a proposed Zoning By-law Amendment under Section 34 of the Planning Act. THE PURPOSE AND EFFECT of the amendment is to address matters of a general and 'housekeeping' nature. Since adoption of the Zoning By-law on April 5, 2018, various matters have been identified in the course of the day-to-day administration of the By-law that require attention. The proposed Zoning By-law amendment addresses these matters and provides greater clarification where necessary. Changes to the Zoning By-law being proposed include, and may not be limited to, the following: Part Lot 92, Concession STR re-zone from A2-3 to A2-4 Part Lot 31, Concession 6 re-zone from A4 to A4-20 Part Lot 31, Concession 6 re-zone from A1 to A2 Part Lot 28, Concession 3 re-zone from A1 to A4 Part Lot 1, Concession 1 re-zone from A1 to RR Part Lot 44, Registered Plan 226 (Port Bruce) re-zoned from GC to VR2 The above-noted mapping changes will be considered to reflect updated and corrected zoning and parcel information. A KEY MAP describing the lands which are the subject of the proposed Amendment is not provided insofar as multiple properties in the Township of Malahide are potentially affected. ANY PERSON may attend the meeting in person or virtually and/or make a written or verbal representation in support of or in opposition to the proposed amendment. The public meeting will be available by clicking on the You Tube icon on the homepage of www.malahide.ca. Persons wishing to make a verbal statement virtually during the meeting are required to pre-register with the undersigned. IF ANY PERSON OR PUBLIC BODY does not make oral submissions at a public meeting, or make written submissions to the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide before the by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision of the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. If a person or public body does not make oral submission at a public meeting, or make written submissions to the Township of Malahide before the by-law is passed, the person or public body may not be added as a party 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 adoption of the proposed amendment, or the refusal of a request to amend the Zoning By-law you must make a written request to the undersigned. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION relating to the proposed amendment may be obtained at the Township Office. th DATED at the Township of Malahide this 28 day of October, 2020. M. Casavecchia-Somers, CAO/Clerk Township of Malahide, 87 John Street, South, Aylmer, Ontario.N5H 2C3 519-773-5344 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 Report Submitted to: THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE Consulting Services for Bridge and Culvert Inspections Submitted by: Contact Person: Amirreza Bastani, Ph.D., P.Eng. 1575 Lauzon Road Windsor, ON N8S 3N4 P:519-944-7221 F: 519-944-6862 abastani@medagroup.com October05, 2020 62 October05, 2020 Corporation of the Township of Malahide 87 John St. S. Aylmer, ON N5H 2C3 Attention:Matt Sweetland, Township of Malahide, Reference: Municipal Bridge / Culvert Appraisal Rehabilitation / Replacement Needs Report The following is a submission of the final report to the Township of Malahide from MEDA Engineering. A complete set of bridge and culvert inspection reports can be found in these binders as well as online on the MDW database. The first binder contains the summary pages and the bridge inspection reports. The second binder contains the culvert inspection reports.MEDA completed the work to fulfill all of the deliverables of the proposal and contract signed by both parties. If any objectives or deliverables have not been met by MEDA please contact us as soon as possible to rectify theseissues immediately. Thank you for your business and we hope to work with the Township of Malahide in the future. If you have any questions or concerns regarding these reports Best regards, Amirreza Bastani, Ph.D., P.Eng. abastani@medagroup.com 1575 Lauzon Road -Windsor -Ontario -N8S 3N4 Website: www.medagroup.com Toll Free: 1-888-518-6332 Tel: 519-944-7221 Fax: 519-944-6862 Page 2 63 1.0INTRODUCTION MEDA Limited, Engineering and Technical Services wasselected to undertake and assess the condition of the Municipal bridge and culvert inventory as provided by the Corporation of the Township of Malahide.This work was to be completed per the guidelines outlined by the Ontario MTO (ONTARIO REGULATION 104/97 STANDARDS FOR BRIDGES). The intent of this report is to provide the Corporation of the Township of Malahide with a current state assessment of each identified structure, remedial work (vegetation removal etc.) to be performed aroundor in the vicinity of these structures along with any necessary construction to repair or if necessary, replace the structure in question. Using the standard method (BCI) to calculate projected value and replacement/repair we have assigned budgetary coststo assist the Township in developing a manageable maintenance/repair program where the Township may budget for future structures work as per a requested line item in the RFP. It should be noted that the BCI method does not directly correlate to real construction costs or take into account all elements typically found in a bridge structure. 2.0OBJECTIVES The purpose of this report is to provide the Corporation of the Township of Malahide a current state review and accurate condition assessment of the inventory of bridges and culverts (3 meters or greater in span) under their care, custody and control. This report can also be used, as noted to act as a tool to identify short term capital works whereby the Corporation of the Township of Malahide may then budget or build a reserve to undertake the works at a later date. To that end, any deficiencies identified will be noted in this report including recommended repairs, replacement etc. It should be noted that in the event work is to be undertaken to remediate an identified structure it may be necessary to conduct an engineering study and engage a qualified contractor to provide a quotation to determine how best to budget for repair/replacement. 3.0 METHOD For the purposes of this report, the Municipality requested inspections of 21 culverts and 12 bridges that fall within their care, custody, and control.MEDA Engineering attended each structure and completed a detailed visual review of the structure for accuracy and condition to the prior assessment of 2018. Each structure was identified and its physical attributes were noted namely: overall dimensional data, environmental factors, purpose/use and current condition. From these observations the data and images taken were input into the OSIM format and include BCI (Bridge Condition Index) calculationsalong with recommended short, and long-term actions (repair, maintenance or replacement) as required. Page 3 64 4.0INSPECTION OF INVENTORY Generally, there have been no significant changes to the most of bridges or culverts from the previous inspections completed by MEDA in 2018, although both structure types are mostly rated as fair to good conditions. Malahide has 12 bridges which have been identified in this report. Five (5) bridges havelittle to no deficiencies. Five (5) bridges are listed as replacement or major rehabilitation possible in 6-10 years depending on the developing condition. Two (2) bridges, B-5 (Pressey West) and B-7 (Carter) are listed as 1-5 years replacement or major rehabilitation and need to be monitored based on the condition noted during the inspection. The worst-case scenario is that both B-5 and B-7 bridgesneed to be replaced at the same time.It is our recommendation that the Township of Malahide establish a budget to plan for the replacement of these bridges in the near future. Malahide has 21culverts which have been identified in this report. Ten(10) culverts havelittle to no deficiencies. Six(6) culverts are listed as major rehabilitation or replacement possible in 6-10 years depending on developing conditions. Five(5) culverts, C-4 (Dorchester), C-7 (Pigram), C-12 (Glencolin), C-15 (Hacienda) and C-17 (Vienna) are constructed of CSP and listed as 1-5 years replacement or major rehabilitation and need to be monitored based on the condition noted during the inspections. Unfortunately, as environmental factors largely contribute to the life span, and there is no accurate prediction for a precise replacement date on these structures. The worst-casescenario is that all five(5)CSP culvertsneed to be replaced at the same time.It is our recommendation that the Township of Malahide establish a budget to plan for the replacement of 2-3 of these culverts in the near future. Final cost estimates for the rehabilitation of all components of the bridges and culverts and a full replacement with exactly the same components is presented in the report. Depending on preference, some costs may be higher if a different type of structure is suggested as well as availability of contractors to bid on the projects. Please utilize these values for budgetingpurposes only and not as an exact value for replacement costs. An issue that may be faced for some structures (such as C-17culvert)is the very deep locations of the culverts under large amounts of fill, including the possibility of structures nearby impeding the excavation of a large construction pit required to undertake the repair or replacement. Lastly, much of our inspection outcome notes that maintenance in and around almost all structures is a constant concern. We recommend that all scrub, vegetation and trees be removed 25-30 m on either side of the ingress and egress points. This will allow the water to flow unobstructed per the original design intent. This will not eliminate yearly maintenance;however,it will help extend the life of the structures. Page 4 65 BCI Summary Total Replacement Current Element Structure No.BCI-2020 ValueValue TRV ($)CEV ($) B-1 $ 243,271.22 $ 217,436.49 89.4 B-2 $ 73,532.94 $ 52,724.83 71.7 B-3 $ 176,313.23 $ 138,967.10 78.8 B-4 $ 148,826.53 $ 106,491.09 71.6 B-5 $ 107,337.00 $ 72,169.20 67.2 B-6 $ 271,166.56 $ 268,606.56 99.1 B-7 $ 270,637.22 $ 184,648.19 68.2 B-8 $ 344,345.72 $ 249,551.29 72.5 B-9 $ 249,423.40 $ 235,841.63 94.6 B-10 $ 225,387.15 $ 187,612.69 83.2 B-11 $ 301,244.00 $ 211,249.07 70.1 B-12 $ 429,229.16 $ 311,695.50 72.6 C-1 $ 47,545.11 $ 29,330.71 61.7 C-2 $ 65,832.00 $ 55,205.00 83.9 C-3 $ 101,814.68 $ 72,139.20 70.9 C-4 $ 331,140.60 $ 190,028.29 57.4 C-5 $ 69,199.96 $ 66,587.41 96.2 C-6 $ 456,185.80 $ 308,568.24 67.6 C-7 $ 39,555.13 $ 20,316.79 51.4 C-8 $ 132,535.20 $ 108,323.29 81.7 C-9 $ 235,742.00 $ 189,052.20 80.2 C-10 $ 181,687.15 $ 118,817.57 65.4 C-11 $ 29,019.65 $ 19,843.28 68.4 C-12 $ 57,215.70 $ 31,584.79 55.2 C-13 $ 146,330.81 $ 129,701.70 88.6 C-14 $ 110,881.82 $ 72,806.54 65.7 C-15 $ 247,336.65 $ 137,350.99 55.5 C-16 $ 229,541.84 $ 168,278.88 73.3 C-17 $ 209,730.00 $ 118,249.48 56.4 C-18 $ 97,809.72 $ 97,342.66 99.5 C-19 $ 82,716.83 $ 58,692.67 71.0 C-20 $ 119,625.72 $ 95,868.71 80.1 C-21 $ 76,496.60 $ 55,383.52 72.4 TOTALS$5,908,657.09$4,380,465.54 AVERAGE74.0 BCI Summary Page 1 66 BCI Summary- 2016, 2018 and 2020 Structure No.BCI - 2016BCI - 2018BCI - 2020 B-191.791.189.4 B-279.872.771.7 B-381.981.078.8 B-472.972.171.6 B-569.868.267.2 B-669.299.899.1 B-774.372.868.2 B-874.073.572.5 B-995.195.194.6 B-1084.484.283.2 B-1172.571.670.1 B-1275.274.572.6 C-166.765.061.7 C-286.185.383.9 C-372.871.970.9 C-464.261.057.4 C-5100.098.896.2 C-674.571.667.6 C-761.555.751.4 C-883.382.581.7 C-982.481.380.2 C-1067.367.065.4 C-1173.370.168.4 C-1258.556.255.2 C-1395.090.188.6 C-1468.566.665.7 C-1560.557.155.5 C-1682.074.973.3 C-1760.459.756.4 C-1839.999.899.5 C-1974.072.871.0 C-2083.781.680.1 C-2174.874.172.4 TOTALS AVERAGE74.975.7 BCI - 2016- 2018-2020 Page 2 67 Bridge Summary SpanReplacement Structure Year Structure NameStructure TypeLengths AADTBCIor Major No.Built (m)Rehab (years) B-1 Dorchester 2010Concrete Rigid Frame12.2010089.4>10 B-2 Helder 1925Concrete Rigid Frame6.802971.76-10 B-3 Crossley Hunter 2002Concrete Rigid Frame10.60078.8>10 B-4 Mapleton 1967Concrete Rigid Frame9.3018871.66-10 B-5 Pressey West 1950Concrete Rigid Frame5.4075767.21-5 B-6 Pressey East 2017Concrete Rigid Frame7.67121699.1>10 B-7 Carter 1965Concrete Rigid Frame12.3020668.21-5 B-8 College 1985Precast Concrete SS15.4050672.56-10 B-9 Walker 1990Concrete Rigid Frame13.704094.6>10 B-10 Dingle 1983Concrete Rigid Frame16.9040083.2>10 B-11 Hacienda 1967Concrete Rigid Frame18.40200070.16-10 B-12 Rogers South 1989Concrete Rigid Frame15.8047172.66-10 Bridge Summary Page 3 68 Culvert Summary SpanReplacement Structure Year Structure NameStructure TypeLengths AADTBCIor Major No.Built (m)Rehab (years) C-1 Whittaker Conc 7. (N) 1970C. Steel Plate Arch3.805361.76-10 C-2 Whittaker Con. 7 (S) unknownCorrugated Steel Pipe2.805383.9>10 C-3 Whittaker Con. 9 1970C. Steel Plate Arch4.808770.96-10 C-4 Dorchester 1970C. Steel Plate Twin Pipe5.2010057.41-5 C-5 Whittaker Con. 10 2012Corrugated Steel Pipe2.709096.2>10 Concrete Rigid Frame C-6 Mapleton 19605.0024167.6>10 Twin Barrels C-7 Pigram 1970C. Steel Plate Arch3.4060051.41-5 C-8 Pressey Line 1970C. Steel Plate Arch5.0075781.7>10 C-9 College West 1975C. Steel Plate Twin Pipes4.4037680.2>10 C-10 College Middle 1970C. Steel Plate Twin Pipes4.8045565.46-10 C-11 College East 1970C. Steel Plate Arch3.3045568.46-10 C. Steel Plate Ellipse C-12 Glencolin 19703.50117455.21-5 Pipe C-13 Rogers 1970C. Steel Plate Arch3.3088788.6>10 C. Steel Round Twin C-14 Conservation 19852.4045965.76-10 Pipes C-15 Hacienda 1965C. Steel Plate Pipe3.9040355.51-5 C-16 Calton 1950Concrete Box4.6069473.36-10 C. Steel Plate Ellipse C-17 Vienna 19804.6031156.41-5 Pipe C-18 Broadway 2017Concrete Rigid Frame6.1725099.5>10 C-19 Finney unknownConcrete Rigid Frame4.1020071.0>10 C-20 Ashton unknownConcrete Rigid Frame4.2020080.1>10 C. Steel Plate Ellipse C-21 Springwater unknown4.30072.4>10 Pipe Culvert Summary Page 4 Page 5 Bridge Estimates Notes- Additional mobilization costs may be warranted due to Malahide's remote location on all estimates- Approach guiderail replacement costs not included, depend on final geometry of site and preferred type (Cost estimate $75,000-100,000) Rehabilition of this structure would include jacking the deck Rehabilition of this structure would include jacking the deck. Rehabilition of this structure would include jacking the deck. Rehabilition of this structure would include jacking the deck. The approximate price of a new bridge with girders would be slightly higher, this one was quoted as replacement with a concrete rigid frame. Rehabilition of this structure would include jacking the deck. 447,739367,610 1,470,4421,253,9381,027,5012,881,2021,770,7572,406,0961,437,185 $$$$$$$$$ Cost estimate of a full replacement with exact same elements 96,28879,056 632,448539,328441,936619,613761,616618,144 1,034,880 $$$$$$$$$ Cost estimate of a full rehabilitation of all elements 69 73,533 243,271176,313148,827107,337271,167270,637344,346249,423 $$$$$$$$$ Total replacement value calculated from MTO BCI Replacement or Major 1-51-5 >10>10>10>10 6-106-106-10 Rehab (years) Total Deck Area (sq. m.) 40.1292.0732.94 131.76112.36258.17158.67215.60128.78 Approximate height (m) 3.53.73.72.62.83.04.02.35.4 Overall Structure Width (m) 5.99.36.17.7 10.810.612.314.013.7 Span Lengths (m) 6.809.305.407.67 12.2010.6012.3015.4013.70 Structure Type Precast Concrete Concrete Concrete Concrete Concrete Concrete Concrete Concrete Rigid FrameRigid FrameRigid FrameRigid FrameRigid FrameRigid FrameRigid FrameConcrete SSRigid Frame Year Built 201019252002196719502017196519851990 Structure Name East West Carter Hunter Helder Walker Pressey Pressey College Crossley Mapleton Dorchester Structure No. B-1B-2B-3B-4B-5B-6B-7B-8B-9 Page 6 Bridge Estimates Notes- Additional mobilization costs may be warranted due to Malahide's remote location on all estimates- Approach guiderail replacement costs not included, depend on final geometry of site and preferred type (Cost estimate $75,000-100,000) Rehabilition of this structure would include jacking the deck. Rehabilition of this structure would include jacking the deck. Rehabilition of this structure would include jacking the deck. 1,772,8782,012,3711,675,116 18,522,835 $$$$ Cost estimate of a full replacement with exact same elements 762,528865,536720,480 7,171,853 $$$$ Cost estimate of a full rehabilitation of all elements 70 225,387301,244429,229 2,840,714 $$$$ Total replacement value calculated from MTO BCI Replacement or Major >10 6-106-10 Rehab (years) TOTALS Total Deck Area (sq. m.) 158.86180.32150.10 Approximate height (m) 2.06.29.9 Overall Structure Width (m) 9.49.89.5 Span Lengths (m) 16.9018.4015.80 Structure Type Concrete Concrete Concrete Rigid FrameRigid FrameRigid Frame Year Built 198319671989 Structure Name South Dingle Rogers Hacienda Structure No. B-10B-11B-12 Page 7 Culvert Estimates Notes- Additional mobilization costs may be warranted due to Malahide's remote location on all estimates- Approach guiderail replacement costs not included, depend on final geometry of site and preferred type (Cost estimate $75,000-100,000)Replace GR with flex/thrie beamReplace GR with flex/thrie beamReplace GR with flex/thrie beamReplace GR with flex/thrie beam 401,940306,500484,526502,330326,766220,442479,795956,878235,626314,942 1,082,7181,007,589 $$$$$$$$$$$$ Full replacement with a galvanized CSP of same deck area 586,608448,800705,672731,148479,160322,080698,544344,916460,020 1,648,0461,454,6401,529,880 $$$$$$$$$$$$ Full replacement with a concrete box of same deck area 47,54565,83269,20039,55529,02057,216 101,815331,141456,186132,535235,742181,687 $$$$$$$$$$$$ 71 Total replacement value calculated from MTO BCI Replacement or Major 1-51-51-5 >10>10>10>10>10 6-106-106-106-10 Rehab (years) Fill on Structure (m) 1.30.71.01.50.81.01.01.00.81.60.50.8 111212112211 No. of barrels Total Deck Area (sq. m.) 88.968.072.648.852.369.7 106.9110.8249.7105.8220.4231.8 Approximate Height (m) 2.20.00.00.00.04.50.00.00.02.81.92.1 Total Culvert Length (m) 20.220.019.819.122.018.212.218.919.019.013.417.0 Span Lengths (m) 3.802.804.805.202.705.003.405.004.404.803.303.50 Structure Type ArchArchArchArchArch Concrete Steel PipeSteel Pipe Twin Pipe Corrugated Corrugated Twin PipesTwin Pipes Ellipse Pipe Rigid Frame Twin Barrels C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate Year Built own 1970unkn1970197020121960197019701975197019701970 Structure Name Line West Con. 9 Middle Pigram Con. 10 Pressey College College Mapleton Con. 7 (S) Glencolin Whittaker Whittaker Whittaker Whittaker Dorchester Conc 7. (N) College East Structure No. C-1C-2C-3C-4C-5C-6C-7C-8C-9 C-10C-11C-12 Page 8 Culvert Estimates Notes- Additional mobilization costs may be warranted due to Malahide's remote location on all estimates- Approach guiderail replacement costs not included, depend on final geometry of site and preferred type (Cost estimate $75,000-100,000)Replace GR with flex/thrie beamThis pipe is very deep and will require a significant trench dug to accommodate construction equipment to replace the culvert. Determination of the costing of relining the pipe using shotcrete technology can be examined, though premlinary estimates were higher than replacement.Replace GR with flex/thrie beamThis pipe is very deep and will require a significant trench dug to accommodate construction equipment to replace the culvert. Determination of the costing of relining the pipe using shotcrete technology can be examined, though premlinary estimates were higher than replacement. CSP is not recommended as a replacement option for this culvert. CSP is not recommended as a replacement option for this culvert. 223,317634,300296,806 1,033,0431,083,982 $$$$$ Full replacement with a galvanized CSP of same deck area 326,898968,880432,432946,933415,245 2,182,9502,285,712 $$$$$$$ Full replacement with a concrete box of same deck area 97,81082,717 146,331110,882247,337229,542209,730 $$$$$$$ 72 Total replacement value calculated from MTO BCI Replacement or Major 1-51-5 >10>10>10 6-106-10 Rehab (years) Fill on Structure (m) 1.21.55.12.58.50.00.0 1211111 No. of barrels Total Deck Area (sq. m.) 49.565.544.7 146.8220.5230.9101.8 Approximate Height (m) 0.02.44.34.02.82.53.3 Total Culvert Length (m) 9.5 12.720.049.012.644.415.0 Span Lengths (m) 3.302.403.904.604.606.174.10 Structure Type Pipe Arch Pipes C. Steel Concrete Concrete Ellipse Pipe Rigid FrameRigid Frame Round Twin C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate C. Steel Plate Concrete Box Year Built own 197019851965195019802017unkn Structure Name Calton Finney Rogers Vienna Hacienda Broadway Conservation Structure No. C-13C-14C-15C-16C-17C-18C-19 Page 9 Culvert Estimates Notes- Additional mobilization costs may be warranted due to Malahide's remote location on all estimates- Approach guiderail replacement costs not included, depend on final geometry of site and preferred type (Cost estimate $75,000-100,000)CSP is not recommended as a replacement option for this culvert. 421,496 10,012,994 $$ Full replacement with a galvanized CSP of same deck area 472,032614,460 18,055,057 $$$ Full replacement with a concrete box of same deck area 3 4 9 , 7 76,4976 119,6260 , 3 $$$ 73 Total replacement value calculated from MTO BCI Replacement or Major >10>10 Rehab (years) TOTALS Fill on Structure (m) 0.00.5 11 No. of barrels Total Deck Area (sq. m.) 71.593.1 Approximate Height (m) 1.82.7 Total Culvert Length (m) 14.919.0 Span Lengths (m) 4.204.30 Structure Type Concrete Ellipse Pipe Rigid Frame C. Steel Plate Year Built ownown unknunkn Structure Name Ashton Springwater Structure No. C-20C-21 74 ELGIN COUNTY UPDATE PRESENTATION TO TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 2020WARDEN DAVE MENNILL JULIE GONYOU, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 75 Collaboration 19 Response Partnerships and - COVID Design Principles for Service CoordinationDevelopment Services Human Resources Elgin County Strategic Plan What's New and Exciting?Road Maintenance AgreementCollaborative PurchasingQuestions Service Delivery Review 1 27811 36 49 5 10 AGENDA 76 Warden Dave Mennill Message from the Warden 19 - COVID RESPONSE - 77 Changes to Services Offices open by appointment only, Provincial Offences Administration open for inperson ticket payment, reliance on Virtual Meetings, Library Curbside Pick up, etc.Economic Development/ Business Support Economic Recovery Task Force in conjunction with St. Thomas EDC, the Small Business Enterprise Centre, St. Thomas Chamber of Commerce, and Workforce Development.Redeplo yed Staff Elgin County staff redeployed to LTCHs for screening and administration support. Rapid Pivot and Close Collaboration The County was able to rapidly pivot to continue providing fulsome services to residents. Close collaboration between the County, the City of St. Thomas and Elgin's Municipal Partners ensured a consistent approach to emergency response. design how we respond to - SERVING ELGIN To re community needs in a creative, sustainable way.GROWING ELGIN To be the place where people wantto live, work and play.INVESTING IN ELGIN To make responsible financialdecisions. 78 2022 - COUNCIL'S 2020STRATEGIC PLAN 79 STRATEGIC PLAN VIDEO AND PARTNERSHIPS COLLABORATION 80 Being Plan - Community Safety and Well Fire TrainingFocus on Enhanced Communication With internal stakeholders, partners and community. SWIFT NetworkOther Health Recruitment Partnership, Legal, Economic Development, Elgin Group Police Services Board, Accessibility, Libraries, EMS, Property Assessment, Archives, Museum Opportunities Service Delivery Review Recommendations WHAT'S NEW AND EXCITING? 81 + More Solving Elgin's Connectivity Issues Connectivity Committee, SWIFT Network Full Time Planner Elgin County has hired a full time planner and is reviewing the Land Division Committee. Budget Committee Modernizing the budget process and enhancing engagement.Ambulance Services, CEMC and Fire TrainerBuilding Bridges Port Bruce Bridge, King George Lift Bridge, Meeks Bridge.Terrace Lodge Redevelopment and Fundraising CommitteesEnvironmental Advisory Committee 82 ELGIN COUNTY SERVICE DELIVERY REVIEW term care. - oving the County’s impr Reviewing and improving the County’s human and community services with a focus on longExamining and internal operations.Reviewing, improving and potentially expanding shared municipal services and resources with the County’s seven local municipal partners and the City of St. Thomas. 83 PROJECT FOCUS term strategic issues. - 84 looking, nimble leadership with the desire to Term Care Homes and now is the - - term operational and long - The County has strong, forwardimplement strategic change.Governance and communications enhancements can improve theCounty's management of contracts.The County celebrates its Longtime to address short COUNTY CURRENT STATE & OPPORTUNITIES term debt. - 85 The time is right to embrace the increased use of moderntechnologies and digital tools to improve processes and realize efficiencies.Elgin's financial state is comparable to its comparators with similar operating and capital expenditures per capita and significantly lower long COUNTYOPPORTUNITIES 86 Consideration is being given to shared initiatives such as IT, planning, collaborative purchasing, HR, and engineering advice.The opportunity exists to rework the governance and administration of existing shared services to ensure that the needs of all parties are being met. Ensuring that a successful framework exists for continuing to deliver these existing shared services is a priority. SHAREDSERVICEOPPORTUNITIES respond to 87 wo library services have a strong history of collaboration. Formalize procurement and work together to County and City’s population growth and how it may affect service growth and facility needs. Focuses on improving the Economic Development, IT ServicesThe tthe collaboration to reduce costs and improve services. COUNTY/CITYOPPORTUNITIES DESIGN SERVICE COORDINATION PRINCIPLES FOR MP CAO meeting L - 88 aintenance agreement. Codify consultation processes for new shared services.Codify risk mitigation strategies into agreements.Undertake independent appraisals for the costs of delivery for shared services.Do not use a weighted County levy option for cost structuresAdd shared services as a standing item on the Countyagendas.Establish governing processes for the current advisory committee for the roads mConduct annual reviews of all shared services. ••••••• RECOMMENDATIONS Establishing codified processes on how shared services are designed, agreed upon, and governed can improve the relationship between the County and its Local Municipal Partners.Both Elgin County and the LMPs want to continue to improve the working relationship and have agreed that policies that balance responsibilities on both sides are needed.This will ensure interests are balanced, increase communication and transparency, provide predictability and offer opportunities for continued improvements. ROAD AGREEMENT MAINTENANCE 89 mmunications. aintenance agreement. cope of Services expectations. o improve the RMA. Add the RMA as a standing item on the CAO meeting agenda for enhanced coEstablish governing processes for the current advisory committee for the roads mCodify policies for working together to discuss, resolves issues on, and continue tDevelop service standards and best practices to further clarify the Schedule C SUndertake an independent review of the funding arrangement.Improve the financial reporting process.Improve and digitize the quarterly reporting process. ••••••• RECOMMENDATIONS The policies governing the Road Maintenance Agreement (RMA) need to be updated,and the funding arrangement needs an independent review. Both parties want to improve the working relationship surrounding the RMA, and improvements to the RMA will positively impact other shared services and future opportunities. SERVICES DEVELOPMENT articipating LMPs. p - 90 reate an RPP support model for interested LMPs that improves resident c - and Division Committee. annually. Improve the processes, technology, training, staffing, and skills development of the LExplore and coexperience.Launch model and demonstrate its benefits to nonReview need for other development services coordination in the County (building). •••• RECOMMENDATIONS The first focus of this initiative is to improve the functioning of the Land Division Committee. Improving the processes of the Land Division Committee is expected to cost $10,000 annually in software subscriptions but will result in $34,000 of productivity gains providing a net benefit of $24,000 Following these improvements, the County would explore offering Registered Professional Planning (RPP) support to participating LMPs. Exact financial benefit of RPP support will be determined by the number of participating LMPs. be uld PURCHASING COLLABORATIVE in potential 15% savings on - $75,000 to $85,000 91 $369,000 and $ 1,107,000 with the acknowledgment that each contract may find — salaries for these positions range from — LMPs achieve between — cost investment - The County would hire a procurement specialist whose salary would be paid for through a yearly contribution agreement with The County would hire a procurement specialist who would provide procurement support to LMPs on an hourly or project OPTIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION There are significant savings opportunities through more strategic sourcing and collaborative procurement of commodities and services. In particular, commonly purchased items like aggregates or services listed in the roads maintenance agreement that may be easily shared to find savings.Using the assumption that LMPs would generally expect to find, on average, 5%shared goods and services contractsmore or less actual savingsOption 1:basis and manage a centralized, online bids and tenders site for the County and LMPs. When not supporting LMPs, their time woused to support County procurement and contract managementneeds.Option 2:the LMPs. This resource would identify opportunities for collaborative procurement and develop shared tenders thatreflects LMP needs. LMPs would need to agree to a set of principles regarding opting out, service level standards, etc. savings per year through collaborative procurement.Hiring an additional resource at the County level to source and bid on goods and services on behalf of the County and LMPs would lead to a significant return on investment. This would require a a low HUMAN RESOURCES 92 house human resource professionals, this leaves room for potential large - Identify and promote consulting services to LMPs.Begin and manage consulting projects for LMPs.Begin exploring formalizing shared service with frequent LMP consulting clients.Attract more LMPs to formalized shared service. •••• RECOMMENDATIONS The goal of this initiative is to meet the LMP’s need for human resource services support. As many of Elgin’s LMPs lack professional inlabour risks. This initiative will formalize the County’s support for the LMPs through a phased approach. Thefirst phase will be offer consulting services to LMPs on a cost recovery basis. After processes are established and the County has a clear sense of the LMPs’ human resources structures, the County, and interested LMPs can exploring a more formalized shared service.Consulting services would benefit the LMPs as the County’s fees would be much cheaper than external consultants. SHARED SERVICES OTHER POTENTIAL 93 The County of Elgin currently provides IT Services to two (2) LMPs. After some capacity building and strategic digital transformation the County will be better positioned to offer this service to additional interested LMPs. Some of the smaller LMPs with no professional engineer on staff have expressed interest in receiving engineering advice from the County level. NEXT STEPS Ongoing Implementation & Partnership with LMPs Council decides which recommendations to prioritize. 94 aff investigate Stindividual recommendations and provide Council more information Elgin County Council receives the report in open session on November 10, 2020 95 QUESTIONS? 96 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING PROPOSED COUNCIL REMUNERATION BY-LAW TAKE NOTICE THAT the Council of The Corporation of the Township of Malahide will hold a public meeting on Thursday, November 19,2020at 7:30p.m., at Malahide Community Place 12105 Whittaker Road, Springfield,to consider a proposedby-law regarding remuneration and expenses for Members of Council pursuant to section 283(7) of the Municipal Act, 2001, c. 25, as amended. ANY PERSON may attend the public meeting and/or make written or verbalrepresentation either in support of or in opposition to the proposed by-law.Written comments may be submitted to the C.A.O./Clerkand the deadline for submitting such comments shall be 12:00 noonon Tuesday,November 17, 2020. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, including a copy of the proposed by-law,can be obtained at the Township Office, 87 John Street South, Aylmer, during regular office hours, Monday to Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. or on the Township website at www.malahide.ca. DATED at the Township of Malahideon this 10thday of November, 2020. Michelle Casavecchia-Somers,C.A.O./Clerk Township of Malahide 87 John Street South, Aylmer, ON N5H 2C3 Telephone: 519-773-5344, ext. 225 Facsimile: 519-773-5334 Email: mcasavecchia@malahide.ca. 97 Report toCouncil REPORT NO.:F20-12 DATE: November 3, 2020 ATTACHMENT:None SUBJECT:Emergency Services Activity Report -October Recommendation: THAT Report No. F20-12Emergency Services Activity Report October be received. Background: Department Incidents In October2020, Malahide Fire Services responded to thirty-two (32) incidents as compared to thirty-six (36)incidents in 2019, thirty-two (32) incidentsin 2018,thirty (30) incidents in 2017, thirty-two (32) incidents in 2016,and thirty-two (32) incidents in 2015. Medical incidents accounted for approximately fifty-six (56%) of all Octoberincidents in 2020. The average age of persons requiring medicalresponse in October2020 was 60with a 69/31female/male ratio. Of the thirty-two (32) incidents inOctober2020, South Stationresponded to twenty-one (21)incidents, Station #3 to twelve (12) incidents, and Station #4 to eleven (11) incidents. October Incidents by Type October Incidents by Station А Ў Џ Џ ЊВ Ѝ Џ Љ {ƚǒƷŷ {ƷğƷźƚƓ{ƷğƷźƚƓ ϔЌ{ƷğƷźƚƓ ϔЍ CźƩĻa/ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ wĻƭĭǒĻaĻķźĭğƌhƷŷĻƩ 98 October Yearly Incident Comparison ЌБ ЌЏ ЌЏ ЌЍ ЌЋЌЋЌЋЌЋ ЌЋ ЌЉ ЌЉ ЋБ ЋЏ ЋЉЋЉЋЉЊВЋЉЊБЋЉЊАЋЉЊЏЋЉЊЎ Department Responses Department protocols provide for response by additional Stations depending on the type of incident reported (e.g. MVC, structure fire, water rescue). Individual Station responses resulted in South Stationresponding to twenty-one(21) incidents, Station #3 to twelve(12)incidents, and Station #4 responding to eleven(11) incidents. OctoberResponses by Station OctoberResponses by Type Ў А ЊЊ ЋЊ ЊЊ ЋЊ ЊЋ Љ CźƩĻa/ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ wĻƭĭǒĻaĻķźĭğƌhƷŷĻƩ {ƚǒƷŷ {ƷğƷźƚƓ{ƷğƷźƚƓ ϔЌ{ƷğƷźƚƓ ϔЍ Responses Month to Month Comparison ЏЉ ЎЋ ЍБ ЍЍ ЍЌ ЍЋ ЌБ ЍЉ ЋЉ Љ ЋЉЋЉЋЉЊВЋЉЊБЋЉЊАЋЉЊЏЋЉЊЎ Fire Events Loss/Save There was onecombinefireinOctoberresulting in fire loss of $75,000. 99 Fire Prevention The Octoberfire safety message of the month was Service your wood burning appliance clean your chimney. During this time of physical distances and the inability to congregate, the Fire Prevention Committee has been preparing and posting videos to their Association Facebook page and the Township website. Fire Safety Inspections In October2020,the Staff conducted two (2)inspectionsand no orders for non- compliance wereissued. Station and Technical Training Station and monthly Technical Training has been reinstated. Topics for Octoberare LifeSafety Initiatives and Emergency Response Guide familiarization. Training Revenue No external DZ training was provided in October2020. Ontario Police College To date in 2020,the Staff hastrained489Police Cadets. The current agreement with the Ontario Police College is that they will reimburse MalahideFire Service $2,000.00 per session as well as cover the cost of any equipment that is damaged during any presentation. OPC has been billed $2,000.00 for 1 sessions so far in 2020.Fire training atOPC is currently suspended due to COVID-19. The training sessionsat OPCscheduled to be held inMayand September2020were cancelled and will notbe rescheduledthis year. To date in 2020, theStaff have not filled anybottles for the OPC. OPC Cadet Training -Year to OPC SCBA Cylinder Filling -Year Date Comparisonto Date БЉЉЉЌЉЉЉ υЏͲЉЉЉ͵ЉЉ υЏͲЉЉЉ͵ЉЉ υЋͲЉВВ͵ЉЉ ЏЉЉЉ ЋЉЉЉυЊͲЎЎЍ͵ЉЉ υЊͲЍЉА͵ЉЉ υЌͲЉБЏ͵ЉЉ ЍЉЉЉ υЋͲЉВЏ͵ЉЉ υЋͲЉЉЉ͵ЉЉ ЏЍА͵ЍВ ЊЉЉЉ ЊЍЊЉ υЌБЎ͵ЉЉ ЊЉЉЉ ЋЉЉЉ БЌЉ АЋЏ ЋЌЊ ЋЋЋ ЋЉЊ ЍБВ ЍАЎ АЊ ЎЎ ЉЉ υΏ Љ Љ ЋЉЋЉЋЉЊВЋЉЊБЋЉЊАЋЉЊЏЋЉЊЎ ЋЉЋЉЋЉЊВЋЉЊБЋЉЊАЋЉЊЏЋЉЊЎ Motor Vehicle Collision Revenues Malahide Fire Services responded to six (6)motor vehicle collisions(MVC) inOctober. To date in 2020,we have invoiced$25,024.67for services provided to the MTO andto non-residents of Malahide Township(September2020incidents). 100 Accident Invoices -Year υЏЉͲЉЉЉ͵ЉЉ υЎЌͲЎЋЍ͵ЍЏ υЎЉͲЉЉЉ͵ЉЉ υЌБͲЌЌБ͵ЉЉ υЌЋͲЏЋЊ͵ЉЉ υЍЉͲЉЉЉ͵ЉЉ υЌЉͲВЍЉ͵ЉЉ υЋЏͲАЋВ͵ЉЉ υЋЎͲЉЋЍ͵ЏА υЌЉͲЉЉЉ͵ЉЉ υЋЉͲЉЉЉ͵ЉЉ υЊЉͲЉЉЉ͵ЉЉ υΏ ЋЉЋЉЋЉЊВЋЉЊБЋЉЊАЋЉЊЏЋЉЊЎ Burn Permits To date in 2020,the Staff have issued fourhundred and sixteen(416) burn permits. Burn Permits Issued -Year ЎЉЉЍЍВ ЍЍЏ ЍЊЏЍЊА ЍЊЋ ЍЉЉ ЌЍБ ЌЉЉ ЋЉЉ ЊЉЉ Љ ЋЉЋЉЋЉЊВЋЉЊБЋЉЊАЋЉЊЏЋЉЊЎ General Automatic Aid Agreement(s) The Automatic Aid Agreement with Central Elgin was not activated inOctober2020. Mutual Aid Malahide Fire Services did not request Mutual Aid,butMutual Aid was provided to Bayham once (1) inOctober. Emergency Management Program Emergency Response The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has resultedinthe Municipality making a Declaration of Emergency on March 21, 2020.While the Province of Ontario declared that some non-essential businesses wereto close, municipal operations, with the exception of parks and recreation, are considered essential services and thus, were continued throughout the pandemic. Administrative staff are working from home on a revolving basis to ensure that there is minimal interaction in the municipal office. Road staff have adjusted their schedule and have been split between the north and south shop to reduce interaction. In addition, they have been instructed to limit the number of persons in a vehicle and to wear a face 101 covering when there is more than only have one person in a vehicle. Vehicles are being cleanedand disinfectedbefore and after each use. Staff are attending regular conference call updates from Southwest Public Health to receive updates on the status of the pandemic and to receive advice on municipal operations under the current health emergency. We continue to monitor the situation and make necessary adjustments as warranted. We continue to answer all inquiries from the public as well as communicating regularly with our Amish and Mennonite communities. Regular meetings of the MECG(Municipal Emergency Control Group) have taken place as required. Public Education/Awareness Public Educators have continued to deliver fire prevention messaging through social media and our various web sites. Videos with key messaging have been created and posted as well as print messages. Public education staff did fire truck parades to 3 schools as part of fire prevention week as well as posted a kick off video and daily messaging on the various social media sites for fire prevention week. Packages and lesson plans were delivered to all Malahide schools this year for teachers to deliver fire prevention week lessons. Training Recruit training has continued with our cooperativegroup fire departments with modifications being made to class sizes, increased cleaning, social distancing and masking. All other specialized training typically conducted on weekends has been cancelled for the remainder of 2020. Emergency Management Program Committee th Next meeting MECG/November 42020 2020Program Compliance Activities EMPC Meeting Not required in 2020 ERP Review Completed October2020 Annual Exercise Not required in 2020 Malahide Flood Plan Review Completed October2020 Annual CCG Training Not required in 2020 All Emergency Management training, exercises,and meetings have beencancelled for 2020 due to the ongoing declared emergency throughout the province. Relationship to Cultivating Malahide: The Cultivating Malahide Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP) is based upon four pillars of sustainability: Our Land, Our Economy, Our Community, and Our 102 Government. Community . By undertaking a long-range strategy, in consultation with the appropriate emergency services authorities, to identify resources required to optimize the provision of emergency services. Submitted by:Approved by: H. Brent Smith 103 Report toCouncil REPORT NO.:PS-20-51 DATE: November 9, 2020 ATTACHMENT:Off-Road Vehicle Use Map (1 page) Provincial Requirement Factsheet (2 pages) Talbot Trail ATV Club Correspondence (1 page) SUBJECT:AMENDMENT TO OFF-ROAD VEHICLE BYLAW NO. 17-51 Recommendation: THAT Report No. PS-20-51Amendment to Off-Road Vehicle Bylaw No. 17- 51 AND THAT theClerk be directed to prepare the necessary amendment toBy-law No. 17-51to change the Off-Road Vehicledefinition to include Extreme Terrain Vehicle and Off-Road Motorcycle as defined in O.Reg. 316/03; AND THAT the Clerk be directed to prepare the necessary amendment to By-law No. 17-51 to allow year-round use of the Municipal road allowance segments ide-law No. 17-51,as amended onNovember 7, 2019; AND THAT theeffective term of By-law No. 17-51 remain asa period of two (2) years or shorter for the purpose of evaluating the effects of and determining whetherit is advisable to continue the operation of Off-road Vehicles, as amended,on specified highways within the Township. Background: The Ministry of Transportation has amended the Highway Traffic Act (HTA)effective July 1, 2020 to add Extreme Terrain Vehicles(ETV)and Off-Road Motorcycles (ORM) to the existing list of Off-Road Vehicles(ORV)permitted on Municipal Highways. Further, as of January 1, 2021,those Municipalitieslisted in Regulation 8/03,where 80 kilometers per hour speed limits apply,will allow Off-road vehicles on all Municipal highways unless the Municipality restricts or prohibits the use of ORV by by-law. A guideline was provided by the Ministry of Transportation, enclosed with this report. -Road Vehicles By-lNo. 17-51,which took effect onJune 15,2017, standing with a Township Recognized Agency having signed a waiver of liability for use g with other restrictive criteria identified in the By-law. 104 Comments/Analysis: Amendment Required by January 1, 2021 Consistent with past consultation, the OPP do not supportORV use within the road allowance because of catastrophic concerns with speed and size variations compared with vehicular traffic, as well as enforcement issues. The Staff concur with OPP concernsand more specifically the capacity to enforce varying restrictions imposed(speed, time of day), while allowing use of all locations, and accordingly do not recommend a blanket permitting of ORV use on all Township Roads. Rather, the Staff recommend maintaining the existing restrictive by-law and only amending the definition of --law No. 17-51 to includeExtreme -Road Motorcycles (Dirt bikes) as defined in the HTA, which are now permitted under the HTA. Additional Request by Talbot Trail ATV Club The Talbot Trail ATV (TTATV) Club hasrequested that By-law No. 17-51 be extended for a further five (5) years, and additionallythe seasonal winter closure (November 30 April 15) provision of the By-law be removed to allow year round use of the identified roadways. The TTATV Club made a similar request to the Municipality of Central Elgin and Township of Southwold, both of whom permitted these requests. Item 11b) of By-law No. 17--By-law be passed for a period of two (2) years or shorter as the Council may deem it advisable to further allow/restrict ORV use on specified roadways within the Township. By-law No. 17-51 was amended on July6,2017 and onNovember 7, 2019 to extendthe allowable roadway segments for ORV use, which are identified in the enclosed Off-Road Vehicle Use Map. As identified in previous reports, road access hasbeen granted for the primary purpose of permitting the off-road vehicle clubs the ability to expand their trail network. Access to notintended to promote recreational off-road vehicle use on Township Roads. The by-law is structured to limit off-road vehicle use to site-specific roads under restricted conditions. The Staff concur that seasonal winter closure may be removed, and year round use of the subject sectionsbe permitted, as there have been no documented case for concern in these areas for the requested use in recent past and the TTATV Club regularly provides the Township with proof of insurance for their club membersand respects the terms of the By-law.The Staff however recommend to sustain the current By-law renewal period of two (2) years, in order to regularly review the continued operations and use of the subject road segments allowed for use by the By-law. The Staff feel compelled to note that during the development of the original program, the Township solicited the opinion of those residents who may be directlyaffected by the granting of the access. Such consultation has not been completed for this new program. 105 Summary: The Ministry of Transportation has amended the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) to add Extreme Terrain Vehicles (Argos) and Off-Road Motorcycles (Dirt Bikes) to the existing list of Off-Road Vehicles (ORV) permitted on Municipal Highways. T permitted for full use of Municipal Highways as of January 1, 2021 unless the Municipality passes a by-law restricting or prohibiting their use. The Townships current Off-Road Vehicle By- specific segments of roadway for the purpose of extending the trail network of organized clubs, who must comply with the terms of the by-law. The Staff recommend amending the he current by- identified road segments, prohibiting the use on all other Township roads. The TTATV Club has requested year-round access to the identified road network. The year-roundroad access as the Club has responsibly respected the terms of the by-law in the past. Additionally, the TTATV Club has requested the use of the road allowance to be extended a further five (5) years. The Staff recommend extending the use for a further two (2) years, consistent with the existing by-lawprovisions. This amendment will satisfy the Provincial requirement to enact a by-law to restrict ORV use on Municipal Roads, while still honoring the good relationships and responsible use of identified right-of-ways by Township Recognized Clubs. Financial Implications to Budget: None. Relationship to Cultivating Malahide: The Cultivating Malahide Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP) is based upon four pillars of sustainability: Our Land, Our Economy, Our Community, and Our Government. One of the goals that support CommunityPromote Community Development.Building the internal capacity of community-based organizations and the private sectorworks to achieve this goal. Submitted by:Approved for Council: Matt Sweetland, P.Eng. Director of Public Works 106 107 Effective July 1, 2020, the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is making changes to add off-road motorcycles (ORM) and extreme terrain vehicles (XTV) to the existing list of off-road vehicles (ORV) permitted on-road. These two new ORV types will be in addition to the currently permitted 4 wheeled ORV types. Municipalities will continue to have the authority and make decisions about ORVs by way of by-law to: Permit ORVs Only allow specific ORVs on road Only allow ORVs at specific hours of the day Impose additional speed limits ORV is a general term used to capture several different vehicles designed for off-road, however, only certain off-road vehicles that meet the requirements in Ontario Regulation 316/03 are permitted on-road: --terrain vehicle (ATV) is designed to travel on four low- pressure tires, having a seat designed to be straddled by the operator, handlebars for steering control and it must be designed by the manufacturer to carry a driver only and no passengers. A two-up ATV is designed and intended for use by an operator or an operator and a passenger. It is equipped with straddle-style seating and designed to carry only one passenger. A recreational off-highway vehicle (ROV) has two abreast seats, typically built with a hood, and uses a steering wheel instead of a motorcycle steering handlebar. A utility terrain vehicle (UTV) has similar characteristics to an ROV but typically also features a box bed. UTVs are generally designed for utility rather than for recreational purposes. Extreme Terrain Vehicles (XTVs), commonly referred to as Argos are 6+ wheeled off-road vehicles capable of riding in multiple terrains, including through water. These vehicles sometimes come with tracks, however, tracked versions are not being permitted on road and are restricted to off-road use only. Off-Road Motorcycles (ORMs) are 2 wheeled off-road vehicles that come in varying configurations such as, but not limited to: Recreational ORMs, Trail ORMs, Competition ORMs, Dual sport ORMs. Vehicles permitted on any municipal road where a by-law is created to enable their use will continue to be permitted. MUNICIPAL BY-LAWS: Effective July 1, 2020, additional types of ORVs can be permitted on municipal roads and provincial roadways where local municipalities create new by-laws to enable their use (existing ORV by-laws granting access will not automatically permit new types; a new by-law will need to be passed after July 1, 2020). LICENCE REQUIREMENT: will require at least a G2 or M2 licence, the same as other off-road vehicles. These vehicles do not come with lights so they are restricted from operating at night or when the weather is poor unless equipped with proper aftermarket lighting. Also, no passengers are allowed on ORMs. Proposed for January 1, 2021, in municipalities listed in Regulation 8/03, all ORV vehicle types, including new vehicle types, will be permitted on municipal roads. Municipalities must create a by-law to restrict or prohibit their use. With respect to the enforcement of these laws, the police act independently when carrying out their duties. Any issues with the day-to-day operations of police services and the actions of its officers should be raised with the local chief of police or his/her representative. All set fines can be found on the Ontario Court of Justice website. This document is a guide only. For official purposes, please refer to the Highway Traffic Act and regulations. For more information, please visit Ontario.ca/ATV. Ministry of Transportation | | (416) 235-3585 | SPEB@Ontario.ca 108 Existing Types permitted: ATVs, Two-Up ATVs, New Types: ROVs, UTVs ORMs and XTVs Rider safety requirements: Existing rider safety requirements: Must be at least 16 years old st hold at least a valid G2 or Must hold at least a valid G2 or M2 licence M2 licence (same as existing ORV types) Wear an approved motorcycle helmet Must be at least 16 years old Wear a seat belt, where provided Wear an approved motorcycle helmet Travel at speeds less than the posted Wear a seat belt, where provided speed limit Travel at speeds less than the posted speed limit Travel only on shoulder, and where Travel only on shoulder, and where unavailable, right most portion of the roadway unavailable, right most portion of the Be driven in the same direction as traffic Be driven in the same direction as traffic t Existing passenger safety requirements: Passenger safety requirements If the vehicle was manufactured with NEW No passengers are permitted on seat belts, everyone must buckle up ORMs while operating on-road If the vehicle has passenger foot rests, If the vehicle was manufactured with the passenger must be able to reach seat belts, everyone must buckle up these foot rests If the vehicle has passenger foot rests, The number of occupants is limited to the passenger must be able to reach the number of available seating positions these foot rests No passengers under the age of 8 are The number of occupants is limited to allowed and additional passenger the number of available seating positions restrictions apply if the driver is a young No passengers under the age of 8 are and novice driver with a minimum G2 or allowed and additional passenger M2 licence restrictions apply if the driver is a young All riders drivers and passengers and novice driver with a minimum G2 or must wear an approved motorcycle M2 licence helmet All riders drivers and passengers must wear an approved motorcycle helmet NEW Exempted from the standards listed Be registered and plated in s.10 Be insured NEW As an alternative to the standards Must have wheels in contact with the listed in s.10 of Ontario Regulation 316/03 ground XTVs must comply with sections 7.2, 7.3, Be compliant with one of the 7.4, 7.5 (other than section 7.5.1), 7.6, 7.7, ANSI/COHV standards listed in s.10 of 7.8 and 7.9 of the Society of Automotive Ontario Regulation 316/03 (certification label commonly found near footrest) Utility V (braking ability, lighting, Have headlights and taillights on at all rollover protection) times NEW XTVs that are tracked are not permitted on-road NEW Have headlights and taillights on between sunset and sunrise (nighttime riding) or when the weather is unfavourable NEW ORMs must have a minimum wheel rim diameter of 250 mm, and has a minimum wheelbase of 1 016 mm (to prevent pocket bikes) NEW ORMs may meet federal definition for Restricted Use Motorcycles, and would need to meet federal standards, or may be Competition Vehicles, for which no federal standards apply Be registered and plated Be insured Must have wheels in contact with the ground D AO R R ET RAD CAO R R ETR AC DAO R R ETR AC DA OR RE TRAC D AO R RE GN A D AO R R EK LA W DAO R LL IMW AS D AO R LL IM WAS DA OR LLI MWAS DA O R D LE IF GNI RP S 109 DA OR LLIH REGNI RPS DA OR D NOM HCIR DAOR RETRA C DA OR RETR AC DA OR RETR AC DAOR RETRAC D A O R Y E P M E DA OR REK LA W DA OR L LIM WAS D A O R M A N T U P DAO R DL EIFG NIRP S DA OR A DNEI CAH D AO R A DN EIC AH DA OR L AIR EPMI DA OR SRE GOR DA OR RET AW GNI RPS D A O R T N O M L E B 110 Report toCouncil REPORT NO.:HS-20-02 DATE: November 4, 2020 ATTACHMENT:Respect in the Workplace Policy SUBJECT:OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT BILL 168 & BILL 132 COMPLAINTS AND TRAINING INITIATIVES Recommendation: THAT Report No. HS-20-02Occupational Health and Safety Act Bill 168 and Bill 132 Complaints and Training Initiatives Background: In June of 2010,amendments were made to the Occupational Health and Safety Act under Bill 168 to enhance protections against workplace violence and address workplace harassment. Further in September of 2016 under Bill 132,additional enhancements to the Act were put in place to raise awareness and to prevent sexual violence or harassment in the community. This encompassed obligations on employers for more stringent policies and procedures, staff training,and address workplace harassment in relation to investigations. Effective January 1, 2017,acomprehensive WorkplaceViolence & Harassment Program was put in place. All Staff(union, non-union,and firefighters)were provided training on this program at that time. Anyone hired after January 1, 2017 has received training on the program during their employee orientationsession. The current Council Members receivedtraining on the WorkplaceViolence & Harassment Program in 2019. The Municipal Staff recently received an inquiry from a Member of Council asking for an update regarding our compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act specifically related to Violence and Harassment in the Workplaceand the potential for Council Members to be personally accountable if complaints are not handled properly. 111 Comments/Analysis: Inresponse to therecent inquiry from the Member of Council,personal liability only arises when a member acts in a manner that is, in and of itself, a breach of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. In other words, if the processes outlined (investigations,etc.) in our WorkplaceViolence & Harassment Program were found to be deficit in some material way, Members of Council would not be held personally liable. Alternatively,if the Staff were to raise anissue of discrimination,harassment, etc. and -that the direct action of the Council could result in personal liability. The following table summarizes the inquiries and complaints that have been brought forward under the Respect in the Workplace Policyfollowing the process set out in the 2017 Workplace Violence & Harassment Program.All complaints have beenresolved. For the purpose of clarity, concerns brought forward are categorizedas:inquiries, informal complaints,and formal complaints. Inquiries-are general questions pertaining to whether workplace conduct constitutes harassment and/or discrimination under the Policy and what procedures and training are available to address potential respect in the workplace issues. Requests for advice or assistance are received from employees and generally include requests for guidance in resolving allegations of harassment and/or discriminatory, and for training on how to interact with co-workers in a non-harassing, non-discriminatory manner. Such requests may require only a brief telephone discussion, others may require meetings with the parties involved,and provision of ongoing support and guidance before an issue is completely resolved. Informal complaints-are complaints alleging violations that may contravene the Policy that were resolvedthrough informal methods such as coaching and counselling or facilitated discussions between the parties. Formal Complaints-include complaints that are made that were resolved through a formal investigation. ActivityTotal NumberStatus 2017 Inquiries0 Informal Complaints0 Formal Complaints2Investigationscompleted instruction provided and disciplinary action taken 2018 Inquiries0 Informal Complaints0 Formal Complaints0 112 ActivityTotal NumberStatus 2019 Inquiries0 Informal Complaints0 Formal Complaints0 2020 Inquiries0 Informal Complaints1Investigation Completed instruction provided Formal Complaints1Investigation Completed - instruction provided and disciplinary action taken Since the implementation of the Workplace Violence and Harassment Program, the Municipal Staff have found that it provides the necessary guidance in order to resolve complaints. During 2021, the Human Resources Manager will be reviewing the Program in detail to ensure compliance with the appropriate legislation and to incorporate lessons learned and updated best practices that are now recommended based on cases that have moved through the court system since 2017. Financial Implications to Budget: N/A. Relationship to Cultivating Malahide: The Cultivating Malahide Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP) is based upon four pillars of sustainability: Our Land, Our Economy, Our Community, and Our Local Government. One of the goals that supportstheEmbody Financial Efficiency throughout DecisionMakingEnsuring that the Council is made aware of potential liability and policy issues works to achieve this goal. Submitted by:Approved by: Gwen Tracey Human Resources Manager 113 Section: Employee ManagementPolicy Number: B-4.2 Subsection: Human RightsEffective Date: Subject:Respect in the WorkplaceRevision Date: Page 1 of 2 RESPECT IN THE WORKPLACE (Harassment and Violence) Purpose: The Township of Malahide is committed to providing and maintaining a working environment that is based on respect for the dignity andtherights of everyone in the organizationand the public they serve.It is the Township healthy and safe work environment that is free of any form of harassment or violence. Scope: The Township will not tolerate ignore or condone any form of discrimination, harassment or violence. This policy applies to all employees, elected officials, volunteers, students, contractors and consultants. It applies in any location in which theyare engaged in work-related activities. This includes but is not limited to: -the workplace(office, facilities, works yard etc.) -during work-related travel -at restaurants, hotels or meeting facilities that are being used for business purposes -in municipally-owned or leased facilities -during telephone, email or other communications; and -at any work-related social event, whether or not it is municipally sponsored. This policy also applies to situations in which an employee isharassed or subjected to violence in the workplace from individuals who are not employees of the municipality, such as ratepayers and suppliers, although the available remedies may be constrained by the situation. Discrimination, harassment and violence are serious forms of employee misconduct which may result in disciplinary action up to and including discharge. 114 Definitions 1.Discrimination Workplace discrimination includes any distinction, exclusion or preference based on the protected grounds in the Ontario Human Rights Code, which nullifies or impairs equality of opportunity in employment or equality in the terms and conditions of employment. The protected grounds of discrimination are: -race, colour, ancestry, citizenship, ethnic origin,or place of origin, -creed, religion -age -sex (including pregnancy and gender identity) -sexual orientation -family, marital (including same-sex partnership) status -disability or perceived disability -arecord of offences for which a pardon has been granted under the Criminal Records Act (Canada) and has not been revoked, or an offence in respect of any provincial enactment. 2.Sexual Harassment Sexual harassment includes conduct or comments of a sexual nature that the recipient does not welcome or that offendshim or her. It also includes negative or inappropriate conduct or comments that are not necessarily sexual in nature, but which are directed at an individual because of his or her gender. Both men and women can be victims of sexual harassment, and someone of the same or opposite sex can harass someone. Some examples of sexual harassment are: -sexual advances or demands that the recipient does not welcome or want -threats, punishment or denial of a benefit for refusing a sexual advance -offering a benefit in exchange for a sexual favour -leering (persistent sexual staring) -displaying sexually offensive material such as posters, pictures, calendars, cartoons, screen savers, pornographic or erotic web sites or other electronic material -distributing sexually explicit e-mail messages or attachments such as pictures or video files -sexually suggestive or obscene comments or gestures 115 -unwelcome remarks, jokes, innuendoes, propositions or taunting about a persons body, clothing or sex -persistent, unwanted attention after a consensual relationship ends -physical contact of a sexual nature, such as touching or caressing; and -sexual assault 3.Discriminatory Harassment Discriminatory harassment includes comments or conduct based on the protected grounds in the Ontario Human Rights Code, which the recipient does not welcome or that offends him or her. Some examples of discriminatory harassment include: -offensive comments, jokes or behaviour that disparage or ridicule a religion or sexual orientation - -persistent or inappropriate questions about whether a person is pregnant, has children or plans to have children; or - orientation, personal appearance or weight. making it a hostile or uncomfortable place to work, even if the person is not being directly targeted. This is commonly referred to as a poisoned working environmentand it is also a form of harassment. Some examples of actions that can create a poisoned work environment include: -displaying offensive or sexual materials such as posters, pictures, calendars, web sites or screen savers -distributing offensive e-mail messages, or attachments such as pictures or video files -practical jokes that embarrass or insult someone; or -jokes or insults that are offensive, racist or discriminatory in nature. 4.Workplace Harassment and Bullying Workplace harassment is a health and safety issue that is covered under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The Occupational Health and Safety Actdefines workplace harassment as: 116 Engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct against a worker in a workplace that is know or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome. Workplace harassment may have some or all of the following components -it is generally repetitive, although a single serious incident may psychological or physical integrity and has a lasting harmful effect -it is hostile, abusive or inappropriate -it -it results in a poisoned work environment In addition, behaviour that intimidates, isolates,or discriminates against the recipient may also be included. Some examples of workplace harassment are: -verbally abusive behaviour such as yelling, insults, ridicule and name calling including remarks, jokes or innuendos that demean, ridicule, intimidate or offend -workplace pranks, vandalism, bullying and hazing -gossiping or spreading malicious rumors -excluding or ignoring someone, including persistent exclusion of a particular person from workplace-related social gatherings - short deadlines and deliberately withholding information thatwould enable a person to do their job -providing only demeaning or trivial tasks in place of normal job duties -humiliating someone - -displaying or circulating offensive pictures or materials -offensive or intimidating phone calls or emails - that are not legitimate; and -making false allegations about someone in memos or other work related documents. Workplace harassment should not be confused with legitimate, reasonable management actions that are part of the normal work function, including: -measures to correct performance deficiencies, such as placing someone on a performance improvement plan 117 -imposing discipline for workplace infractions; or -requesting medical documents in support of an absence from work. It also does not include normal workplace conflict that may occur between individuals or differences of opinion between co-workers. The Test of Harassment It does not matter whether you intended to offend someone. The test of harassment is whether you knew or should have knownthat the comments or conduct were unwelcome to the other person. For example, someone may make it clear through their conduct or body language that the behaviour is unwelcome, in which case you must immediately stop that behaviour. Although it is commonly the case, the harasser does not necessarily have to have power or authority over the victim. Harassment can occur from co-worker to co-worker, supervisor to employee and employee to supervisor. 5.Workplace and Domestic Violence Workplace and domestic violence that may occur in the workplace are health and safety issues, which are covered under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Workplace Violence Workplace violence is defined under the Occupational Health and Safety Act as: -the exercise of physical force by a person against a worker, in a workplace, that causes or could cause physical injury to the worker -an attempt to exercise physical force against a worker, in a workplace, that could cause physical injury to the worker -a statement or behaviour that is reasonable for a worker to interpret as a threat to exercise physical force against the worker, in a workplace, that could cause physical injury to the worker. It is defined broadly enough to include acts that may be considered criminal. Workplace violence includes: -physically threatening behaviour such as shaking a first at someone, finger pointing, destroying property, throwing objects -intimidating behaviour that causes the recipient to have a fear of physical violence -obscene or harassing telephone calls -verbal or written threats to physically attacka worker -leaving threatening notes or sending threatening emails 118 -wielding a weapon at work -stalking someone -physically aggressive behaviours including hitting, shoving, standing excessively close to someone in an aggressive manner, pushing, kicking, throwing an object at someone, physically restraining someone or any other form of physical of sexual assault; and -destruction of workplace or co-worker property. Violence that occurs outside the normal workplace butwhich has an impact on the working environment, including working relationships, may also be considered violence in the workplace. Domestic Violence If you are experiencing domestic violence that maylikely expose you, or other workers, to physical injury that may occur in the workplace, we will take every precaution reasonable to protect you and your co-workers in the circumstances. This may include some or all of the following: -creating a safety plan -contacting the police -establishing enhanced security measures such as a panic button, code words, and door and access security measures -screening calls and blocking certain email addresses -setting up priority parking or providing escorts to your vehicle or to public transportation, and -Facilitating your access to counseling through the Employee Assistance Program or other community support programs. Preventing Harassment and Violence Itis our mutual responsibility to ensure that we create and maintain a harassment and violence free workplace and address violence and/or the threat of violence from all possible sources (including ratepayers, clients, employers, supervisors, workers, strangers,and domestic/intimate partners). The Townshipwill do its part by not tolerating or condoning discrimination, harassment or violence in the workplace. Thisincludes making everyone in its organization aware of what behaviour is and is not appropriate, assessing the risk of workplace violence, investigating complaints,and imposing suitable corrective measures. 119 Duties of Supervisors Supervisors are expected to assist in creating a harassment-free workplace and to immediately contact the Human Resources Managerif they receive a complaint of workplace harassment or violence,or witness,or are aware of harassing or violent behaviour. Supervisors must also take every reasonable precaution to protect employees from workplace violence, including evaluating a employee poses a risk. In making this evaluation Supervisors should consider: - workplace or work; -whether thehistory of violence was directed at a particular employee or employees in general; and -how long ago the incidence of violence occurred. In certain circumstances, Supervisors may have a duty to provide information about a risk of workplace violence from a person with a history of violent behaviour if an employee can be expected to encounter that person during the course of his or her work,and the risk of workplace violence is likely to expose themto physical injury. Supervisors will only release as much personal information about the person with a history of violent behaviour as is reasonably necessary to protect anemployee from physical injury. Duties of All Employees You must do your part by ensuring that your behaviour does not violate this policy and by fostering a work environment that is based on respect and is free of harassment. You are also required to report to your Supervisor or the HR Manager, the existence of any workplace violence or threat of workplace violence. Procedure for Resolving and Investigating Harassment Complaints Informal Procedure If you believe that you are being harassed, the first thing to do is to tell the person to stop. Do so as soon as you receive any unwelcome comments or their actions is often enough to stop the behaviour. 120 Some of the things you can say that might stop the behaviour include: -I. -Please stop doing or saying . . . -It makes me uncomfortable when you . . . -I d If the harassment continues after you have confronted the individual, you may want to provide him or her with a written statement of the situation. Include specific details of the behaviours you consider to be harassing, your request to the harasser to stop and your expectations that he or she will stop. Provide details of the next steps you plan to take if the harassment does not stop e.g. filing a formal complaint. Make sure you keep a copy of this statement for yourself. It helps to keep a record of any incident(s) that you experience. This includes when the harassment started, what happened, whether there were any witnesses and what was your response. If you believe that someone who is not a member of our organization e.g. a ratepayer, supplier, etc., has harassed or discriminated against you, please report the harassment to your Supervisor or the HR Manager.Although the Township has limited control over third parties, we will do our best to address the issue and prevent further problems from arising. Formal Procedure If the complaint cannot be resolved informally or if it is too serious to handle on an informal basis, you may bring a formal complaint to the HRManagerand/or the Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk. If you bring a formal complaint we will need as much written information as possible, including the name of the person you believe is harassing you, the place, date and time of the incidents and the name of any possible witnesses. A copy of the Workplace Respect Complaint form is available from the HR Manager. It is important that the Townshipreceive your complaint as soon as possible so r happen again. Once your complaintis received, we will initiate a formal investigation, if it is necessary and appropriate to do so. Discrimination and harassment are serious matters. Therefore, if you decide not to make a formal complaint, the Townshipmay still need to investigate the matter 121 and take steps to prevent further harassment. For example, the Townshipmay need to continue with an investigation if the allegations are serious or if there have been previous complaints or incidents involving the respondent. policy not to investigate anonymous complaints unless there are extenuating circumstances. 122 Investigation Procedure The HR Managerwill commence an investigation as quickly as possible. They may choose to use either an internal or external investigator, depending on the nature of the complaint. The investigation will include: -interviewing the complainant and respondent to ascertain all of the facts and circumstances relevant to the complaint, including dates and locations. -interviewing witnesses, if any -reviewing any related documentation; and -making detailed notes of the investigation and maintaining them in a confidential file. Once the investigation is complete, the investigator(s) will prepare a detailed report of the findings to Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk. A summary of the findings will also be provided to the complainant and respondent. goal to complete any investigation and communicate the results to the complainant and the respondent within thirty days after a complaint is received, where possible. Corrective Action The Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk will determine what action should be taken as a result of the investigation. The HR Managerwill inform the complainant and respondent of the results of the investigation and whether (but not necessarily what) corrective measures were taken, if any were necessary. If a finding of harassment is made, the Townshipwill take appropriate corrective Corrective measures may include one or more of the following: -discipline, such as a verbal warning, written warning or suspension without pay -termination with or without cause -referral for counseling (sensitivity training), anger management training, supervisory skills training,or attendance at educational programs on workplace respect -a demotion or denial of a promotion 123 -reassignment or transfer -financial penalties such as the denial of a bonus or performance related salary increase, and -anyother disciplinary action deemed appropriate under the circumstances. If there is not enough evidence to substantiate the complaint, corrective measures will not be taken. If you make a complaint in good faith and without malice, regardless of the outcome of the investigation, you will not be subject to any form of discipline. The Townshipwill, however, discipline or terminate anyone who brings a false and malicious complaint. Procedure for Resolving and Investigating Workplace Violence Workplace Violence You have the right to refuse work if workplace violence is likely to endanger you. In that instance, please immediately contact your Supervisor at which point appropriate measures will be taken to protect you and investigate the situation. You will be moved to a safe place as near as reasonably possible to your normal work station and will need to be available for the purposes of investigating the incident. In some circumstances, subject to the provisions of any Collective Agreement, you may be provided with reasonable alternative work during normal working hours. In appropriate circumstances, the Townshipmay contact the police, or other emergency responders as appropriate, to assist, intervene or investigate workplace violence. Details ofmeasures and procedures for summoning immediate assistance will be provided and may include: -equipment tosummon assistance such as personal alarms, phones, cell phones, etc. -emergency telephone numbers and/or email addresses; -emergency procedures Provided the situation is dealt with quickly and the danger toworkers is removed, the necessity of work refusal may be alleviated. Investigation Procedure You are required to report the existence of any workplace violence or threatof workplace violence to your Supervisor or the HR Manager. The HR Managerwill commence an investigation as quickly as possible. Theymay choose to use 124 either an internal or external investigator, depending on the nature of the incident. The investigation will include: -conducting interviews of relevant individuals to ascertain all of the facts and circumstances relevant to the complaint, including dates and locations -reviewing any related documentation; and -makingdetailed notes of the investigation and maintaining them in a confidential file. Once the investigation is complete, the investigator(s) will prepare a detailed report of the findings. A copy of the report will be provided to the Joint Health and SafetyCommitteeand Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk. Corrective Action The Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk will determine what action should be taken as a result of the investigation. If a finding of workplace violence is made, the Township will take appropriate rity or position in the Township. Corrective measures may include one or more of the following: -discipline, such as a verbal warning, written warning of suspension without pay -termination with or without cause -referral for counseling (sensitivity training), anger management training, supervisory skills training,or attendance at educational programs on workplace respect -a demotion or denial of a promotion -reassignment or transfer -financial penalties such as the denial of a bonus or performance related salary increase;and -any other disciplinary action deemed appropriate under the circumstances. If you make a complaint in good faith and without malice, regardless of the outcome of the investigation, you will not be subject to any form of discipline. The Townshipwill, however, discipline or terminate anyone who brings a false and malicious complaint. 125 Procedures for Addressing Domestic Violence If you are experiencing domestic violence or believe domestic violence may occur that would expose you to physical injury in the workplace, you must advise your Supervisor.Your Supervisor or the HR Managerwill assist in preventing and responding to the situation, which may include seeking the assistance of the local police. Confidentiality of Complaints and Investigations The Townshiprecognizes the sensitivityof harassment and violence complaints andwill keep all complaints confidential, to the extent that the Townshipare able to do so. The Townshipwill only release as much information as is necessary to investigate and respond to the complaint or situation or if required to do so by law. Out of respect for the relevant individuals, it is essential that the complainant, respondent, witnesses and anyone else involved in the formal investigation of a complaint,maintain confidentiality throughout the investigation and afterwards. Protection from Retaliation The Townshipwill not tolerate retaliations, taunts or threats against anyone who complains about harassment or takes part in an investigation. Any person who taunts, retaliates against,or threatens anyone in relation to a harassment or violence complaint may be disciplined or terminated. 126 Report to Council REPORT NO.:CAO-20-18 DATE: November 10, 2020 ATTACHMENT:Draft By-law SUBJECT: DRAFT ANTI-IDLING BY-LAW Recommendation: THAT Report No. CAO-20-18Draft Anti-Idling By-law AND THATthe draft Anti-Idling By-law be supported as presented; AND THAT the Municipal Clerk be directed to finalize the draft by-law for submission to and approval by the Council at a future meeting. Background: Over the past few years, the Township has received complaints from residents regarding excessive idling of vehicles within Malahide. In response to those complaints, the Municipal Staff have worked with the Municipal Solicitor to prepare a draft Anti-Idling By- Comments/Analysis: The Municipal Act, 2001 provides that a local municipality may prohibit and regulate with respect to public nuisances, as well as authorizes a municipal council to pass a by- law respecting the health, safety and well-being of persons, and the economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality. Idling engines produce emissions that can cause health and air quality problems. In addition, excessive idling creates noise that may become a public nuisance. The proposed by-law prohibits vehicles from idling for more than three (3) consecutive minutes in a sixty (60) minute period. 127 The by-law does recognize that there are some instances when it is necessary or recommended that vehicles idle for a period of time longer than the prescribed 3 minutes. As such, the by-law also includes a number of exemptions, such as: vehicles assisting in an emergency activity, armoured vehicles, vehicles engaged in a normal farm practice, etc. The Municipal Staff are recommending that the draft Anti-Idling By-law besupportedby the Council and the Clerk be directed to finalize the draft by-law for approval by the Council at a future meeting. Financial Implications to Budget: N/A. Relationship to Cultivating Malahide: The Cultivating Malahide Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP) is based upon four pillars of sustainability: Our Land, Our Economy, Our Community, and Our Government. Our LandTarget Efficient Energy Production & ConsumptionEnacting by-laws that focus on reducing environmental impacts and greenhouse gas emissionsworks to support this goal. Submitted by: Michelle Casavecchia-Somers, Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk 128 THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE BY-LAW ____________________ BEING A BY-LAW TO PROHIBIT EXCESSIVE IDLING OF VEHICLES WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE WHEREAS Section 128 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended, provides that a local municipality may prohibit and regulate with respect to public nuisances, including matters that, in the opinion of council, are or could become or cause a public nuisances; AND WHEREAS Subsection 11(2) of the Municipal Act authorizes a municipal council to pass a by-law respecting the health, safety and well-being of persons, and the economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality; and, ANDWHEREAS Section 425 of the Municipal Act provides that a municipality may pass bylaws providing that a person who contravenes any by-law of the municipality is guilty of an offence; AND WHEREAS Section 435 of the Municipal Act provides for conditions governing the powers of entry of a municipality; AND WHEREAS Section 436 of the Municipal Act provides that a municipality has the power to pass by-laws providing that the municipality may enter on land at any reasonable time for the purpose of carrying out an inspection to determine compliance with a bylaw; AND WHEREAS vehicles are sources of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxides, volatile organic compounds, and fine particulate matter in theTownship of Malahide; AND WHEREAS theCouncil of the Corporation of the Township of Malahide desires to assist in the reduction of adverse health effects by reducing the unnecessary emissions of nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxides, volatile organic compounds, and fine particulate matter; AND WHEREAS the Township of Malahideis supportive of initiatives designed or intended to reduce harmful emissions from entering the environment. NOW THEREFOREthe Council of the Corporation of the Township of Malahideenacts as follows: Section 1 -Definitions 1.1In this by-law, 129 IdleVehiclewhile the Vehicleis not in motion and not being used to operate auxiliary equipment that is essential to the basic function of the Vehicle, a corresponding meaning; Mobile Workshop (a)aVehiclecontaining equipment that must be operated in association with the Vehicle; or (b)aVehicleserving as a facility for taking measurements or making observations which is operated by or on behalf of a municipal utility or a police, fire or ambulance service Vehicle; Normal Farm Practice (a)is conducted in a manner consistent with proper and acceptable customs and standards as established and followed by similar agricultural operations under similar circumstances; or (b)makes use of innovative technology in a manner consistent with proper advanced farm management practices; OfficerMunicipal Law Enforcement Officerappointed or authorized by By-law to Commented \[KS1\]: tƌĻğƭĻ ĭŷĻĭƉ ƷŷğƷ Ʒŷźƭ ĭƚƩƩĻĭƷƌǤ ķĻƭĭƩźĬĻƭ ƷŷĻ ƭźƷǒğƷźƚƓ͵ -laws; Private Transit Vehicles TownshipCorporation of the Township of Malahide; Vehicle as defined in the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, as amended, and any vehicle drawn, propelled or driven by any kind of non-muscular power but does not include cars of electric or diesel electric railways running on rails. Sections2and 3-General provisions Section 2 2.1No person shall cause or permit a Vehicleto Idlefor more than three (3) consecutive minutes in a sixty (60) minute period. Section 3 3.1Section 2 shall not apply to, (a)Vehicles assisting in an emergency activity; (b)Mobile Workshops while they are in the course of being used for their basic function; (c)Vehicles where idling is required to repair the Vehicleor prepare it for service; 130 (d)armoured Vehicles where a person remains inside the Vehiclewhile guarding the contents of the Vehicleor while the Vehicleis being loaded or unloaded; (e)Vehicles required to remain motionless because of any emergency, traffic, weather condition or mechanical difficulty over which the person driving the Vehiclehas no control; (f)Vehicles engaged in a parade or race or any other event authorized by Council; (g)Private Transit Vehicleswhile passengers are embarking or disembarking en route or in terminals; (h)Vehicles transporting a person where a medical doctor certifies in writing that for medical reasons a person in the Vehiclerequires that temperature or humidity be maintained within a certain range; (i)occupied Vehicles when the temperature outside the Vehicleis greater than twenty-seven degrees Celsius (27°C) including the humidex calculation or less than five degrees Celsius (5°C) including the windchill value as determined by the Environment Canada temperature readings; (j)Vehicles engaged in providing Township services; and/or (k)Vehicles engaged in a Normal Farm Practice. Section 4 -Administration and enforcement 4.1TheManager of Building and By-law Enforcement and others designated as Officers are responsible for the administrationand enforcement of this by-law. 4.2For the purposes of determining the outside temperature, an Officer may rely on the following information sources: (a)Environment Canada Weather Office; (b)The Weather Network. 4.3An Officer may, at all reasonable times, enter on land for the purpose of carrying out an inspection to determine compliance with this By-law. 4.4No person shall hinder or obstruct, or attempt to hinder or obstruct, any Officer exercising a power or performing a duty under this By-law. Any person who is alleged to have contravened any of the provisions of this By-law, shall identify themselves to the Officer upon request, failure to do so shall be deemed to have obstructed or hindered the Officer in the execution of his duties. Sections5,6, and 7-Offences and penalties 131 Section 5 5.1Every person who contravenes any of the provisions of this by-law is guilty of an offence. 5.2Every person who is convicted of an offence under this by-law is liable to a fine as provided for in the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O 1990, c. P.33, as amended. Section 6 6.1When a person has been convicted of an offence under this by-law, (a)theOntario Court of Justice, or (b)any court of competent jurisdiction thereafter may, in addition to any other penalty imposed on the person convicted, make an order prohibiting the continuation or repetition of the offence by the person convicted. Section7 7.1Where a Vehicle has been left stopped in contravention of this By-law, the owner of the vehicle, even if the owner was not the driver of the Vehicle a the time of the contravention of the By-law, is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine as provided in the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.33, as amended, unless at the time of the offence the Vehicle was in the possession of some person other than the owner without Section 8-Interpretation 8.1In this by-law, (a)words importing the singular number only include more persons, parties or things of the same kind than one (1) and the converse; and (b)a word interpreted in the singular number has a corresponding meaning when used in the plural. 8.2If a court of competent jurisdiction declares any provision or part of a provision of this bylaw to be invalid or of no force and effect, it is the intention of the Council in enacting this by-law that each and every provision of this by-law be applied and enforced in accordance with its terms to the extent possible according to law. Section 9-Effective date This by-law shall come into force and take effect on January1, 2021. 132 Section 10-Short title This by-- READ a FIRST and SECOND time this _________day of ____________, 2020. READ a THIRD time and FINALLY PASSED this ______________________day of _________________, 2020. ________________________________ Mayor, D. Mennill ________________________________ Clerk, M. Casavecchia-Somers 133 19-1 The Corporation of the Township of Malahide Budget Committee Meeting October 29, 20207:00 p.m. Due to COVID 19 and Public Health concerns,the Budget Committeemet at the Malahide Community Place, at 12105 Whittaker Road, Springfield,at 7:00 p.m. in order to allow for physical distancing and limited public attendance. The following were present: Council:Mayor D. Mennill, Deputy Mayor D. Giguère, Councillor M.Widner, Councillor M. Moore,and Councillor C. Glinski. Council via Videoconference: Councillor R. Cerna and Councillor S. Lewis. Staff:Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk M. Casavecchia-Somers,Information Technology Manager C. Coxen, Director of Financial Services A. Mohile,and Director of Physical Services M. Sweetland. Staff Members via Videoconference: Director of Fire and Emergency Services B. Smith. CALL TO ORDER: ChairMennill took the Chair and called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTERESTand the General Nature thereof: No disclosures of pecuniary interests were declared. MINUTES: No. B20-01 Moved by:Max Moore Seconded by:Rick Cerna THAT the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Budget Committee held on December 12, 2019be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. 134 19-2 PRESENTATIONS: No delegations or presentations were received. DRAFT 2020 BUDGETPRESENTATION: -Year 3of 2019-2022 Multi Year Budget The Director of Financial Services (Treasurer) presented Report No. FIN-20-18entitled of 2019-2022 Multi Year Budget-Capital. The Treasurerindicated that the focus of this meeting would beto review the proposed 2021 Capital Projects. She noted that she has infrastructure in an attempt to highlight the assets that the Township holds and how those assets should be maintained. She advised that the infrastructure lifecycle replacement identified through the Asset Management Plan needs continuous long term investment to maintain service levels and she reviewed the Asset Report Card with the Council. She noted that the assets set out on the Report Card included roads, bridges, culverts, streetlights, sidewalks, vehicles and equipment, pier and land improvements, facilities and guard rails. In response to an inquiry from Councillor Glinski regarding the Port Bruce Pier funding, the Treasurer advised that the project wascompleted on time in order to qualify for the grant funding. In response to an inquiry from Deputy Mayor Giguère regarding computer costs, the Treasurer advised that the IT Manager does provide a detailed plan containing the IT requirements for the year including software, hardware, licensing, warranties, etc. together with the estimated costs. In response to an inquiry from Councillor Widner regarding the trailer listed on the 2021 Capital Budget, the Director of Physical Services advised it was an emergency replacement of a trailer that recently failed its annual inspection. He noted that quotes had been obtained ranging from $8,000 -$11,000.00. The Director also noted that the wood chipperwas moved forward to the 2021 Capital Budget as the current wood chipper has required numerous repairs and it was necessary to replace it in order to minimize downtimeand additional costs for a rental unit. In response to an inquiry from Deputy Mayor Giguère regarding the estimated costfor the additional pier work in Port Bruce, the Director of Physical Services noted that this was a new project added to the budget for work that needed to be completed on the pier dueto the undermining fromwave action. The existing pier contractor is preparing additional information and acosting for a small scale, cost effective solution but at this time the Township does not have a budgetestimate. The Deputy Mayor questioned if this problem was a deficiency in the original pier work completed, and the Director advised it was not a deficiency, but has resulted becauseof thework completed. In 135 19-3 response to a further inquiry, the Director indicated that he was not aware of a grant being available for this restorationproject. In response to an inquiry from Deputy Mayor Giguère,the Treasurer advised that there are some capitalprojects that were not completed in 2019 and 2020 that will be carried forward and will be completed in 2021. Deputy MayorGiguèreadvised that she would like to see the entire 2021 Malahide budget, including the Operational Budget,before approving the Capital Budget. She suggested, however, that if some projectshad critical timelines, she was willing to consider approval of those at this time. The Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk (CAO)advised that the Municipal Staff will proceed to obtain a budget estimate for the required pier repairs and provide more details regarding the broadband tower project. She noted that the Municipal Staff is not asking forapproval to construct the broadband towers at this point, but only an agreement in principle recognizing that more information will be forthcoming and noting that the project will befully funded by grants/reserves. In response to an inquiry from Councillor Glinski regarding the number and size of trucksanticipated to be purchased, the Director of Physical Services advised that the trucks are replacement trucks andthat no new trucks are being added. In response to an inquiry from Councillor Cerna regarding the broadband towers and potential grants, the Treasurer advised it is standard to include all projects in the Capital Budget even if there is 100% grant funding. Councillor Cerna also questioned whether $50,000.00 budget estimate is for a new wood chipper. The Director of Physical Services advised that wouldbe a replacement wood chipper and that he is hoping to obtain a competitive price by tender. Councillor Moore noted that there were some projects that had not been completed in 2020 and asked for an update on the following: 1.Malahide Community Place and South Dorchester Community Hall line painting of parking lots; 2.Malahide Community Place lighting in the Sports Storage Building 3.Tracey Street Park Improvements 4.Flagpole in Cenotaph Park The Treasurer responded that all of these projects will be completed in 2021. NEXT BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING: The next Budget Committee Meeting will be on November 12, 2020at 7:00 p.m. 136 19-4 OPEN QUESTION PERIOD: Jim Crane, Malahide Resident, commentedthat he was pleased withthe recent purchase price of a new tractorfor about $100,000,which was much less than budgeted amount. The Mayor asked the CAO to provide some additional background relating to arecent th Letter to the Editor by Jim Crane in the October 28edition of the Aylmer Express. Such letter was expressing concerns regarding the proposed water servicing of Springfield. The CAO advised that,after reading the Letter to the Editor from Jim Crane in the Aylmer Express, it was the position of the MunicipalStaff that of the situationwas not accurate. She advised that the Staffwould be providingmore information to the Council at its next regular meeting on November 5, 2020 but, in the interim,provided the following information to the Committee: There is legislation in place that stipulates that all municipal water and sewer -What this means is that the costs associated municipal water and sewer systems are paid for by the users of the system. In system would initially be the developers.The developers would be required to pay development charges and impost fees to connect new homes to the water system. The Consultants have indicated that extending water servicing to Springfield will cost more than $15 million and will require an annual debt repayment of $290,000 over 25 years. As stated above, once development commences, it will generate development charges revenue and impost fees that can be used to pay the annual $290,000 debt payments resulting in no impact to the tax levy. For a brief period between when construction of thewater system is completed and the first homes are built, it may be necessary for the Township to pay the annual debt payment 'up front'.It would be the Staff's recommendation that the Townshiptemporarily borrow from our own reserves to pay the annual debt payment and then pay ourselves back using the development charges when they are received from the developers. For clarity, it is notanticipated that the annual debt repayment will result in a significant increase in the tax levy as has been suggested by Jim Crane.The above noted process will ensure that the cost of water servicing to Springfield is borne by the users of the water system, and notthe rest of the Malahide taxpayers. 137 19-5 The key message to take away is development will ultimately pay for .The Township may have to ($290,000 annually) for a brief period of time until development charge revenues and impost fees are received, and then we can recoup those costs from the development fees. M their water wells is not pertinent.The goal of extending water servicing to Springfield is to allow for significant growth/new development to secure financial sustainability. In response to an inquiry from Councillor Glinski on how 100 new houses could possibly pay for a $15 million dollar water system, the CAO advised that when Watson Associatescompleted the Development Charges background study,it was based on approximately 550600 homes. She noted that if Malahide proceeds to extendwater servicingto Springfield, other development can occur in addition to the proposed residentialdevelopment,including agri-industrial and commercialdevleopments,which will also contribute to the cost of the water system through development charges. Deputy Mayor Giguère clarified that the $15.4Mcost was the entire servicing cost without 2/3 grant funding from other governments. The $5Mfinancing takes into account the 2/3 grant funding which would be repaid by $290,000.00 annually over 25 years. Springfield Resident Bill Macintyre noted he had several questions regarding the proposed extension of waterservices to Springfield and would likedelegation status at the next Council meeting. No. B20-02 Moved by: Dominique Giguère Seconded by: Mark Widner THAT Report No. FIN 20--2022 Multi Year Budget - Carried. The Committee agreed to defer consideration of the remainder of the Municipal Staff recommendation to approve the 2021 Capital Projects until the next Budget Committee meetingon November 12, 2021. ADJOURNMENT: No. B20-03 Moved by:Chester Glinski Seconded by:Mark Widner 138 19-6 THAT the Budget Committee adjourn its meeting at8:00p.m. Carried. __________________________________ ChairD. Mennill __________________________________ Clerk M. Casavecchia-Somers 139 20-1 The Corporation of the Township of Malahide Budget Committee Meeting November 12, 20207:00 p.m. Due to COVID 19 and Public Health concerns,the Budget Committeemet at the Malahide Community Place, at 12105 Whittaker Road, Springfield,at 7:00 p.m. in order to allow for physical distancing and limited public attendance. The following were present: Council:Mayor D. Mennill, Deputy Mayor D. Giguère, Councillor M.Widner, Councillor M. Moore,Councillor S. Lewis,and Councillor C. Glinski. Council via Videoconference: Councillor R. Cerna. Staff:Chief Administrative Officer/Clerk M. Casavecchia-Somers,Information Technology Manager C. Coxen, Director of Financial Services A. Mohile,Director of Physical Services M. Sweetland, Director of Fire and Emergency Services B. Smith, and Deputy Treasurer T. Hoover. CALL TO ORDER: ChairMennill took the Chair and called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTERESTand the General Nature thereof: No disclosures of pecuniary interests were declared. MINUTES: No. B20-04 Moved by:Max Moore Seconded by:Rick Cerna THAT the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Budget Committee held on October 29, 2019be adopted as printed and circulated. Carried. 140 20-2 PRESENTATIONS: No delegations or presentations were received. DRAFT 2020 BUDGETPRESENTATION: Year 3of 2019-2022 Multi Year Budget The Director of Financial Services (Treasurer) presented Report No. FIN-20-22entitled of 2019-2022 Multi Year BudgetOperating and Capital. including the goals, long term planning, funding opportunities, economic outlookandfinancial sustainability. The Treasurer reviewed the attachments to Report No. FIN-20-22 including the 2021 Summary of Proposed Changes to the 2019-2022 Multi Year Budget. In response to an inquiry from Councillor Widner regarding rising insurance premiums, the CAO advised that premiums are up across the Province even if a municipalityhas hadfew or no claims. In response to an inquiry from Deputy Mayor Giguère regarding the inflationary increase, the Treasurer advised that the 3% increase is being put forward in response to Statistics Canada predictions for inflationary increases next year as well as there beinga smaller increase in tax revenues than previously predicted. No. B20-05 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by: Mark Widner THAT Report No. FIN 20-22en-2022 Multi Year Budget received; AND THAT the Draft 2021 & 2022 Budget Summary & Detail be received; AND THAT the Draft User Fee Schedules for 2021 and 2022 be received. Carried. Public Works2021 Priority Capital Projects The Director of Public WorkspresentedReport No. PS-20- Capital Projects. He reviewed the capital priority projects for the Public Works 141 20-3 Department including the pier rehabilitationproject, pier parking lotimprovements, wood chipperreplacement,and Calton Line and Hacienda Road culvertreplacements. In response to an inquiry from Deputy Mayor Giguère regarding thesafety of the pier parking lot, specifically in thiswinterbefore the necessary repairs can becompleted, the Director advised that the area will require special consideration during the winter season and maintenance will be completed as necessary. He indicated that an engineered solution isrequiredto ensure that the surface water is considered and the pier protected. The Director confirmed that if it does become a safety concern, the areawill be cordoned off to pedestrians. No. B20-06 Moved by:Dominique Giguère Seconded by:Max Moore THAT Report No. PS-20- AND THAT the Pier Parking Lot Design Project, in the budget amount of $10,000.00, be included in the 2021 Capital Budget; AND THAT, notwithstanding that the remainder of the 2021-2022 Budgets have not yet been approved, the Municipal Council be requested to approve the Port Bruce Pier Parking Lot Design Project and the Hacienda Road Culvert Class EA and Design Project, for completion in 2021; AND THAT, subject to Council approval of the 2021 Capital Projects, the Municipal Staff be authorized and directed to proceed with the Port Bruce Pier Parking Lot Design Project initiation and the Hacienda Road Culvert Class EA and Design Project initiation so that such projects can be pre-planned, tendered, and completed on time and within budget. Carried. 2021 Grant Requests from Community Groups The Deputy Treasurer presented Report No. FIN-20-21 relating to grant requests from Community Groups. She noted that some of the grant funds were not distributedto the community groups in 2020 because of events not taking place due to COVID-19 restrictions. No. B20-07 Moved by:Chester Glinski Seconded by:Mark Widner THAT Report No. FIN-20- 142 20-4 AND THAT the following 2021 grant requestsfrom Community Groups be includedin the Draft 2021 Budget: Community GroupAmount Aylmer Malahide Museum Grant5,000.00 Malahide Community Policing Committee1,500.00 Soccer Knights of Columbus1,200.00 Aylmer & East Elgin Agricultural Society (Aylmer Fair Board)1,000.00 Elgin County Farm Safety Council0 PAssociation500.00 EESS Environmental0 Springfield Family Fun Day1,350.00 Springfield Brewers Softball2,100.00 Springfield Lioness Club1,675.00 Springfield PS Parent Council500.00 SD Optimists including at MCP3,800.00 Corner Cupboard0 Family Fun Day -Donation325.00 Family Fun Day Insurance175.00 Kinsmen Santa Claus Parade0 Springfield Parade1,500.00 East Elgin Housing Initiative0 Aylmer Cemetery Board18,000.00 Springfield Cemetery Board5,000.00 Luton Cemetery Board2,250.00 Carried. Development Charges (DC) Update Study Service Contract. The Treasurer presented Report No. FIN-20-19 regarding Development Charges. In response to an inquiry from Deputy Mayor Giguère, the Treasurer advised that the timeline for next update to the Development Charges By-law will be extended 5 years from the most recent updateto 2026. No. B20-08 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Rick Cerna THAT Report No. FIN 20-19Development Charges (DC) Update Study Service Contract 143 20-5 AND THAT the Municipal Council be requested to permit the contracting of professional consulting services to update the Development Charges Background Study and By-law as a single source procurement; AND THAT, notwithstanding that the remainder of the 2021-2022 Budgets have not yet been approved, the Municipal Council be requested to award the service contract for the Update to the Development Charges Background Study and By- lawto Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.,in the amount of $12,500.00 plus applicable taxes; it being noted that such service contractwill be funded from the Development Charge Reserve. Carried. Rural Broadband Strategy The Information Technology (IT) Manager presented Report No. FIN-20-20 regarding the Rural Broadband Strategy. The IT Manager noted the COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized the need for rural high-speed solutions to address e-learning and work from home scenarios and Malahide is uniquely positioned to take the lead in providing local, high-speed, mesh- based Wi-Fi service across the municipality. The IT Manager reviewed the following 3 options to improve connectivity in the Township: Option 1 -County SWIFT Project and Connectivity Committee Option 2 -Enhanced Services from Existing Service Provider Option 3 -Develop Infrastructure and Become Broadband Provider. The IT Managerpresented a map showing the current availability of existing internet connection, as well as, amap showing the potential tower locations if the Council proceeded with the Broadband initiative. The Treasurer reviewed the connection and future costs for the broadband strategy, as well as the elimination of the current expenses to the Township for internet. She also noted grant availability for the projectand indicated that it would secure a future revenue stream for the Township. The Treasurer noted Option 2 was Enhanced Services from an Existing Service Provider.This option would allow the Township to rent out the towers to a third party to provide a revenue base. The Townshipwould not be the operator of this type of system and, therefore, there would be less risk, but also less revenue. In response to an inquiry from Councillor Widner regarding satellite technology, the IT Manager noted that satellite technology can be slow, expensive, andvulnerableto weather conditions. 144 20-6 Councillor Lewis noted that the public has indicated to him that they desire good reliable internet and that they would be pleased if the internet revenue went back to the Townshipto help manage future tax levy increases. Deputy Mayor Giguère noted that under the proposed tower placements many areas in Malahide would still not be serviced. She advised that she is a member of the Connectivity Committee and thatthey are moving as fast as they canto implement SWIFT. The CAO indicated that if the Council wished to proceed with developing the infrastructure and become a broadband provider,there would be opportunities in the future to increase the number of towers and increase the service available which in turn would also increase the revenue. Mayor Mennill advised he too was a member of the County Connectivity Committeeand thatit will be receiving funding in 2021 inthe amount of $6,000,000. This will improve about 30% of the Countybut that leaves 70% left without this improved internet access. The IT Manager proposed in Option 3that the Township develop/construct infrastructure that will enable it to become a broadband internet service provider. The preliminary estimates suggestthat there would be cost savings, even if the expanded services were limited to servicing its own municipal facilities. These funds could be enhanced if the next step was taken in revenue generation by leasing the infrastructure to a third party; and then finally higher revenues would be possible if the Township were to become a wireless internet service provider (WISP) for Malahide and surrounding area. In response to an inquiry from Councillor Widner regarding the costs for this type of endeavor, the Treasurer advised that it would be a separate entityandthat it would require additional effort, but that this proposal is expected to bring in a large amount of revenue to the Township and be self-funding. Deputy Mayor Giguère noted her concerns regarding the amount of anticipated revenue and the large operating costs involved in this project and wanted to ensure a full Business Plan would be available to the Council before proceeding. The Deputy Mayor also questioned if Port Bruce was covered as therehave been communication challenges with Port Bruce in the past. The Manager of IT responded that the Consultant would be asked to consider options to address such challenges. The Deputy Mayor also suggested that the Consultants look deeply into the proposed 10 year time frame regarding wireless capabilities compared to fibre. She also indicated her concerns regarding the use of the Unconditional Grant on this project which could be used on anything. She preferred to usespecific broadband money for this project. The CAO assured the Council that Municipal Staff would be applying for all available grants relating to broadband funding. The CAO noted the Municipal Staff is very confident with the broadband research completed to date but require the Cos 145 20-7 review to provide the last of the specifications needed.The CAO asked the Committee to approve moving forward with the RFP due to funding timelines. No. B20-09 Moved by:Scott Lewis Seconded by:Mark Widner THAT Report No. FIN-20-20 entitl AND THAT, notwithstanding that the remainder of the 2021-2022 Budgets have not yet been approved, the Municipal Council be requested to authorize the Municipal Staff toissue a Request for Proposal for broadband consulting services to develop a strategy policy, design, and a phased implementation plan to expand broadband services in Malahide and surrounding area. Carried. NEXT BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING: The next Budget Committee Meeting will be on December 10,2020at 7:00 p.m. The CAO requested the Members of the Committee to provide any specific questions or requests for information to the Municipal Staff prior to the next Budget meeting in order to ensure that such information is available. OPEN QUESTION PERIOD: The Committee received various comments/questions from the public concerning the Draft 2021Budget specifically with regard to: -Budget format and comparisons, proposed costing for water servicing to Springfield, proposed budget increaseas compared to tax levyincrease(Bill MacIntyre). -Broadband costs/feasibility (Martin Baelde). -Development opportunities for former railroad property (Jim Crane). ADJOURNMENT: No. B20-10 Moved by:Chester Glinski Seconded by:Mark Widner THAT the Budget Committee adjourn its meeting at8:50p.m. Carried. 146 20-8 __________________________________ ChairD. Mennill __________________________________ Clerk M. Casavecchia-Somers 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 Report toCouncil REPORT FROM:AYLMER POLICE COSTING AD HOC WORKING GROUP DATE: November19, 2020 ATTACHMENT:Aylmer Police Service Malahide Costing Proposal, Review of Police Services -Potential Change from Elgin OPP Policing To Aylmer Police Service-Executive Summary, Summary of Public Consultation SUBJECT:RESULTS OF POLICE SERVICES REVIEW AND PUBLIC CONSULTATION Recommendation: THAT the Reportof the Aylmer Police Costing Ad Hoc Working Group entitled Results of Police Services Reviewand Public Consultation; AND THATno action be taken at this time to commence negotiations with the Town of Aylmer for a contract for service for the Aylmer Police Service to provide policing services to the Township of Malahide; it being noted that the results of public consultation held subsequent to the public meeting on September 30, 2020 did not support moving forward with any change to policing services for Malahide; AND THAT the Aylmer Police Costing Ad Hoc Working Group,having fulfilled its mandate, be disbanded. Background: In April, 2016, Councildecided to explore the potential for cost savings and did formally ask the Town of Aylmer to provide a costing proposal to the Township for the provision of policing by the Aylmer Police. In late 2019, the Town did provide a costing proposal to Malahide(see attached). That proposal was then referred to an external consultant, Performance Concepts Consulting (PCC), consultants were asked to provide an opinion regarding the feasibility of the proposal. 156 Earlier this year, PCCsubmitted theirreport to Malahide. It concluded that the Aylmer Police Service is indeed capable, and well situated geographically, to provide policing to the Township that would meet or exceedcurrentadequacy standards. Further, that report suggestedthat there is potentially a significant financial benefit for Malahide if we were to moveforward with a10-yearcontract with the Aylmer Police. After receiving the additional questions which could not be answered by the Consultants or through the proposal.On June 18, 2020, Council passed the following resolutionto establish a Working Group to resolve any outstanding questions/issues related to the Malahide Costing Proposal; and to develop a strategy to obtain public input prior to the Council deciding whether or not to move forward with formal contract negotiations: THAT Report No. CAO-20-olice Service AND THAT the Malahide Township Council defer making any decisions at this time with regard to commencing negotiations with the Town of Aylmer for a contract for service for the Aylmer Police Serviceto provide policing services to the Township of Malahide; AND THAT an Ad-hoc Working Group, consisting of Mayor Mennill, Deputy Mayor Giguère, Councillor Widner, and Councillor Cerna (alternate), be established to work with the Municipal Staff to resolveany outstanding questions/issues related to the Malahide Costing Proposal; and to develop a strategy to obtain public input prior to the Council deciding whether or not to move forward with formal contract negotiations. Comments/Analysis: The Committeemet on five occasions. Those meetings included: Review of Malahide Costing Proposal received from the Aylmer Police Service Review of the Final Report from Performance Concepts Consulting regarding feasibility of the Aylmer Police Service providing policing for Malahide Township Review of Police Service delivery alternatives Review of applicable sections of the Police Services Act Receiving detailed presentations from representatives of the Elgin OPP and the Aylmer Police Serviceandreviewing and analyzing detailed comparisons of the two police forces Developing a strategy to obtain public input and reviewing such resident feedback. Resolve Outstanding Questions/Issues As stated above, the Working Grouphas obtainedadditional background information from both the Elgin OPP and the Aylmer Police Service in order to develop a detailed comparison of the two police services.This comparison s consideration. 157 Public Consultation The Working Group coordinated a public meeting that was held on September 30, 2020 and developed a brief survey to obtain feedback from the public regarding the possibility of a change in policing from the current OPP model to the Aylmer Police Service. Residents were asked to respond to the following question: Township of Malahide to deliver policing services to Malahide. Recognizing that no final decision has been made regarding the possibility of a change from the current OPP contract to a contract with the Aylmer Police Service, Are you in favour of the Malahide Township Council proceeding to negotiate a Attached to this report is a Summary of Public Consultation. Therewerea total of 137 responses received with 38 respondents indicating support for moving forward to negotiate a formal contract with the APS, while 92 were not supportive, and 7 were undecided. G that the proposal received from the Aylmer Police Servicewould result in better dedicated service to Malahide, quicker response times, and future cost savings. The generally indicated that their reasoning was that they were not confident that the Aylmer Police Servicehad sufficient resources/capacity/capabilityto deliver the same level of service that the OPP currently provides. T not have enough information to make a final decision. Conclusion and recommendation: The Working Group concurred that the results of public consultation held subsequent to the public meeting on September 30, 2020 did not support moving forward with any change to policing services for Malahide. As a result, the Working Group is proposing that no action be taken at this time to commence negotiations with the Town of Aylmer for a contract for service for the Aylmer Police Service to provide policing services to the Township of Malahide. Financial Implications to Budget: Subject to concurrence by the Council, there would be no implications to the Draft 2021 Budget as there wouldbe no change to the current policing services contact with the Elgin OPP. 158 Relationship to Cultivating Malahide: The Cultivating Malahide Integrated Community Sustainability Plan (ICSP) is based upon four pillars of sustainability: Our Land, Our Economy, Our Community, and Our Government. Our CommunityKeep Our Community SafeEnsuring that any provider of policing services to the Township is capable to meet or exceed adequacy standardsworks to achieve this goal. Submitted by: Aylmer Police Costing Ad Hoc Working Group 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE BY-LAW NO.20-74 Being a By-law to establish the rate of remuneration for the Members of Council and to establish an indexing provision to account for inflationary factors. WHEREASSection 5(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, c. 25, as amended, authorizes a municipality to pass by-laws to exercise its municipal powers; AND WHEREASSection 283 of the Municipal Act, 2001, c. 25, as amended, authorizes a municipality to pay remuneration and expenses to the members of its council; AND WHEREASthe Council of The Corporation of the Township of Malahide deems it appropriate to pass a by-law for paying remuneration to itsmembers of council; AND WHEREASthe Council of The Corporation of the Township of Malahide wishes to incorporate provisions that allow for indexing to offset inflationary factors as well as to provide for reimbursement of expenses for attending council meetings; NOW THEREFOREthe Council of The Corporation of the Township of Malahide HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1.THAT an annualsalary forthe year2020, for all Members of the Council be hereby established asfollows: Mayor$24,247.43 Deputy Mayor$18,079.48 Councillor $12,520.78 2.THAT the preceding remuneration shall cover allregular Council and the Committee of the Whole Meetings conducted within theboundaries of the Township. 3.THAT,in addition to the regularly scheduled Council and committee meetings, effective January 1, 2020,aper diem of $180.00 per day rate shall be paid to Members of Council for participation in work-related conferences and workshops as approved by Council Resolution. 4.THAT, as an inflationary safeguard, the Council's annual salary will be automatically adjusted annually, commencing January 1, 2021.The amounts will be adjusted by the percentage increase granted to the Municipal Staff Salary Grid once determined. 167 5.THAT the Director of Finance/Treasurer is hereby authorizedto automatically make these annual adjustments, when known, without the need of the Council confirming or debating the adjustment of. 6.THAT the payments of Council remuneration will be made monthly in twelve equal installments. 7.THAT,in recognition of the large geographical area of the municipality, and to ensure Council Members are not negatively impacted due to residential location, all members shall be paid mileage to reimburse members for attendance at all Council meetings, regularor special. Effective January 1, 2020,the annual mileage allowancebe hereby established asfollows: Mayor$900.00 Deputy Mayor$900.00 Councillor $600.00 8.That mileage for attendance at conferences and workshopswill be paid in addition to the annual mileage allowance.Effective January 1, 2020,the mileage rate for attendance at conferences and workshops shall be$0.52 per kilometer. 9.THAT the Director of Finance/Treasurer is hereby authorized to make these mileage and/or expense payments on a semi-annual basis, or as he/she determines as appropriate. 10.THAT any other by-laws or provisions in other by-laws found to be inconsistent with this By-law are hereby deemed to be repealed. 11.THAT this By-law shall come into force and take effect on the final passing thereof. th READaFIRSTandSECONDtime this19day of November, 2020. th READaTHIRDtime and FINALLY PASSEDthis 19day of November, 2020. __________________________ Mayor,D. Mennill __________________________ Clerk, M. Casavecchia-Somers 168 THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MALAHIDE BY-LAW NO.20-75 Being a By-law toadopt, confirm and ratify matters dealt with by resolution of the Township of Malahide. WHEREASSection 5(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, c. 25, as amended, provides that thepowers of every council are to be exercised by by-law; AND WHEREASin many cases, action which is taken or authorized to be taken by the Township of Malahidedoes not lend itself to the passage of an individual by-law; AND WHEREASit is deemed expedient that the proceedings of the Council of the Township of Malahideat this meeting be confirmed and adopted by by-law; NOW THEREFOREthe Council of The Corporation of the Township of Malahide HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1.THAT the actions of the Council of the Township of Malahide,atitsregular meeting held on November 19,2020,in respect of each motion, resolution and other action taken by the Council of the Township of Malahideat such meetingis, except where the prior approval of the Ontario Municipal Board or other authority is required by law, ishereby adopted, ratified and confirmed as if all such proceedings were expressly embodied in this By-law. 2.THAT the Mayorand the appropriate officials of the Township of Malahideare hereby authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to the action of the Council of the Township of Malahidereferred to in the proceeding section. 3.THATthe Mayorand the Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute all documents necessary in that behalf and to affix thereto the corporate seal of the Township of Malahide. 4.THAT this By-law shall come into force and take effect upon the final passing thereof. th READaFIRSTandSECONDtime this19day of November,2020. th READaTHIRDtime and FINALLY PASSEDthis19day of November, 2020. __________________________ Mayor, D. Mennill __________________________ Clerk, M. Casavecchia-Somers