THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA MUNICIPAL OFFICE 56169 Heritage Line, Straffordville, ON Council Chambers Thursday, May 17, 2018 6:00 p.m. – Lakeshore Line
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST & THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF
3. CHAIRMAN’S REMARKS ON THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING
4. PURPOSE
A. Overview of the municipal assessment of Lakeshore Line and proposed process going forward to provide abutting property owners on the subject portion of Lakeshore Line with private access to public roads through conveyance and easements
5. PRESENTATION
A. Robert Cascaden, P. Eng. IBI Group and Paul Riley, Planner IBI Group re Lakeshore Line Shoreline Erosion Response Strategy
6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
7. CORRESPONDENCE
A. Craig Newton, Regional Environmental Planner / EA Coordinator Ministry of the Environment & Climate Change Southwestern Region re Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Response to Municipality of Bayham’s Lakeshore Line Erosion Response Strategy
B. IBI Group re Lakeshore Line Shoreline Erosion Response Strategy; Lakeshore Line – Road Closure; Municipal Class Environmental Assessment
C. Tom Manley re proposed closure of Lakeshore Line east of Clarke Road
D. Andy & Donna Eveland re closure of Lakeshore Line from Clarke Rd. to Elgin Cty. Road 55
E. Bruce Bolin re Lakeshore Line Erosion Response Strategy
F. David Borbely re Lakeshore Line Erosion Response Strategy
G. Ron Allensen re Lakeshore Line Erosion Response
8. OTHER BUSINESS
9. ADJOURNMENT
From: Newton, Craig (MOECC) [mailto:Craig.Newton@ontario.ca] Sent: April-26-18 2:17 PM To: Paul Shipway
Mr. Shipway:
This e-mail acknowledges this ministry’s receipt, with thanks, of the Municipality of Bayham’s letter of April 20th, 2018 addressed to this ministry pertaining to the Municipality’s proposed Lakeshore Line Erosion Response Strategy. The aforementioned strategy proposes, in part, to permanently close Lakeshore Line from Clarke Road to Elgin County Road 55 due to significant shoreline erosion hazards, loss of tablelands and associated public safety risks.
In response, in case you are not already aware, this ministry draws to your attention that the Municipal Engineers Association Municipal Class Environmental Assessment has a series of Project Schedules pertaining to Municipal Road Projects. As per section “A.1.2.3 Responsibility for Compliance with the EA Act (page A-5)” of the MEA Municipal Class EA, the Class EA process is a self- assessment process. In all situations where the Class EA process is applicable to a project, it is the responsibility of the proponent, in this case, the Municipality of Bayham, to ensure that the planning process as set out in the Class EA document is undertaken. If a proponent incorrectly determines that the Class EA does not apply, or if a proponent selects the incorrect Schedule, it is the responsibility of the proponent to rectify the matter and meet the requirements of the Class EA process. This ministry urges the Municipality, in concert with its consultants for this project IBI Group and/or Shoreplan Engineering, to reference the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment parent document to determine its obligations under the Municipal Engineers Association Municipal Class Environmental Assessment for the permanent closure of Lakeshore Line from Clarke Road to Elgin County Road 55. .
Yours truly,
Craig Newton Regional Environmental Planner / EA Coordinator Ministry of the Environment & Climate Change Southwestern Region (519) 873-5014
IBI GROUP 203 – 350 Oxford Street West London ON N6H 1T3 Canada tel 519 472 7328 fax 519 472 9354 ibigroup.com
May 7, 2018
Mr. Paul Shipway CAO/Clerk Municipality of Bayham 56169 Heritage Line, PO Box 160 Straffordville, ON N0J 1Y0
Dear Mr. Shipway:
LAKESHORE LINE SHORELINE EROSION RESPONSE STRATEGY LAKESHORE LINE - ROAD CLOSURE MUNICIPAL CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IBI Group, in conjunction with other consultants, prepared a report for the Municipality of Bayham titled “Lakeshore Line Shoreline Erosion Response Strategy” dated April 16, 2018. This report provided a summary of the problem at hand and proposed a strategy to address this situation. The proposed strategy is to close portions of Lakeshore Line between Clarke Road and County Road 55 with these closed portions being conveyed to abutting registered property owners. It is our understanding that the Municipality has mailed notices to property owners abutting the portions of road proposed for closure and have posted the notice on line and published the notice in the local newspaper. The Municipality included the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change in the circulation of the notice. In response to comments provided by the MOECC, IBI Group has been requested by the Municipality to provide an opinion as to which Municipal Class EA schedule the permanent road closures would fall within. We have reviewed the scope of the project and the Municipal Class EA document and are of the opinion that this project is a Schedule A+ - Pre-Approved activity under the Municipal Road Projects Schedules, item #40 “Retirement of existing roads and road related facilities” with no financial limit. This opinion was discussed with Mr. Craig Newton of the MOECC by phone on April 30, 2018. Mr. Newton did not disagree with our determination of project schedule. It is noted that the Municipal Engineers Association (MEA) Municipal Class EA document provides sample notices in the document however these samples are all for mandatory notifications on Schedule ‘B’ and ‘C’ projects. The EA document states that the following for Schedule A+ projects: “the manner in which the public is advised is to be determined by the proponent.” IBI Group is of the opinion that adequate notice has been provided to the public given this project is a Schedule A+ - Pre-Approved activity.
IBI Group Professional Services (Canada) Inc. is a member of the IBI Group of companies
Paul Shipway, CAO/Clerk May 10, 2018 Municipality of Bayham consultations @bayham.on.ca
Attention Paul Shipway,
Please accept this letter of comment regarding the proposed closure of Lakeshore Line east of Clark Road. My wife Lorraine and I are owners of the woodlot at 55669 Lakeshore Line. Our main interest in this property is for recreation purposes and for the protection of a valuable natural space along the lake. We have been discouraged with the increased rate of erosion associated with high lake levels, and other factors, over the past few years. We want to voice our encouragement into the possibility of establishing a headland, or some other means of shoreline protection at the foot of Clark Road. If the Municipality choses to undertake any measures to mitigate the erosion problem, we support proper study along with a carefully measured economic response. We will look forward to learning more of the Municipalities plans on May 17th.
Sincerely, Tom Manley 519-532-2556 ATTENTION: Paul Shipway RE: Closure of Lakeshore Line from Clarke Rd. to Elgin Cty. Road 55
Questions regarding proposed closure: 1) What is plan B if and when Clarke Road intersection is not usable?
2) When and why was Csinos Road allowance to Glen Erie Line closed and was there public notice regarding this closure?
3) Are there plans to try and prevent erosion near Clarke Road?
Thank-you Andy & Donna Eveland 4690 Csinos Rd, Port Burwell
10 May 2018 Municipality of Bayham P. O. Box 160 56169 Heritage Line Straffordville, Ontario N0J 1Y0
Open Letter Regarding: Lakeshore Line Erosion Response Strategy
I have no major opposition to the closing of the addition portions of Lakeshore Line. However, I do have some related questions and concerns. 1. The signs that have been installed announcing the proposed closure are provoking curiosity and attracting sightseers who wish to see first-hand the erosion conditions that have provoked the proposed closure. They risk injury to themselves and first responders. Doubtless this is unintended additional risk, but it is real. On or about April 28 someone crashed into the ROAD CLOSED sign that was there before one of the new signs was installed, and in late winter had been installed about a foot into the westbound lane. Was the driver distracted by the newer, larger sign?
Damaged ROAD CLOSED sign and new sign on the north side of Lakeshore Line at the intersection with ECR 55.
2. Why does the sign say “TEMPORARY ROAD CLOSURE” instead of ‘Proposed Road Closure’? My understanding is it not proposed to be temporary, and the closure has not yet been approved.
3. Who will be responsible for insuring that the pavement does not enter the lake? After the 2002 closure (about 2005), equipment was brought in to remove and haul away the pavement from that section. I would hope Bayham will accept responsibility for this process and budget for it. I, for one, would not accept ownership of a portion of the closed road right-of-way if it comes with the liability of removing the pavement before the lake comes to it.
4. Will mail delivery still be provided by Canada Post?
5. Will trash and recycling pickup continue?
6. Will snowplowing services continue? This is not a major concern for me personally as the strong winter winds off the lake usually remove most of the snow, but for some, this may be an issue.
7. Why were only 21 days allowed for public responses. Clearly this proposal has been in the works for months. I first noticed a new survey stake on January 21 while confronting some trespassers. At the time, I had no idea who put it there or why. I don’t know when it first appeared. If it takes the professionals months to plan on the taxpayers’ dime, why it is assumed the residents should be extended less respect for their time? Surely the affected property owners could have been alerted at the beginning of the process.
8. After the road is officially closed, which portions will be offered to the adjoining landowners unencumbered with easements; and which portions will be offered to the adjoining landowners with servient tenement easements, or other encumbrances?
9. If this plan is implemented, will the Municipality of Bayham notify MPAC on behalf of all the affected property owners of the negative market value impacts?
10. It appears that part of the reasoning for not attempting to remediate the erosion which is underlying problem is the cost. Two costs have been put forth. a. $8,200 / metre for headland beach prevention b. $14,000 / metre for revetment prevention
The municipality of Bayham received these estimates from the IBI Group. The IBI Group received these estimates from Shoreplan Engineering Limited. How or where did Shoreplan come up with these estimates? What is the context of these estimates? Certainly, the costs per metre would be largely determined by how much was done, the design(s), and the quality of the RFP and price negotiations.
11. Why and how much taxpayer money was spent for the IBI Group report? I ask this because the very first point of their memorandum is misleading. They state, “Erosion rates inland from the lake range from 4 metres per year to 5 metres per year.” The rate from the lake’s edge is not the issue. It is the rate of recession at the crest of the bluff that is of importance for this purpose. Later in the memorandum it is acknowledged that this stated rate is an “estimated long term erosion rate … observed over many years” and that a “single failure event may result in a greater loss”. How many years were observed? This strikes me as pseudo science to provide not an average, not a median, and not a true range, but an estimated average range based upon no statistics. It seems numbers were pulled out of the air to provide an aura of precision.
My own experience is that the edge of the bluff recedes from about 1 metre per year to well over 50 metres per year. The top end of that range is from the west end of our property where the large ravine appeared just to the east of Godby Road. In other words, the rate of recession is extremely variable and independent of long term averages. It is much more a function of the soil types and the hydrostatic pressure, and the hydrostatic pressure is a function of the land’s surface height above lake level, precipitation totals, precipitation extremes, and the land use. Shallow rooted crops take up little of the precipitation before the water sinks through the sandy soil; irrigation increases the hydrostatic pressure beyond averages; and the removal of the deeply rooted forests has increased the hydrostatic pressure. The effects of the vibrations from wind turbines and traffic is unknown. Climate change may further test known extremes. The rate of recession is not just a natural process, has increased dramatically since the first maps of the area were made, and might yet exceed anything experienced in the past.
In summary, I am not opposed to the road closure, but have some concerns about how it is done. More importantly I am compelled to point out this is not a strategy for dealing with the erosion, but only a short-term tactic. I am an old man and therefore have only short term needs. However, democratic government has the mandate and the duty to plan for future generations.
Bruce Bolin [email protected] 57755 Lakeshore Line R.R. 2, Port Burwell N0J 1T0
May 10, 2018
Paul Shipway CAO/Clerk Municipality of Bayham P.O Box 160, 56169 Heritage Line Straffordville, ON, N0J 1Y0
Re: Lakeshore Line Erosion Response Strategy (supplement to Public meeting May 17, 2018)
Dear Mr. Shipway and Members of Bayham Municipality Council
I am a Landowner on Lakeshore Line at 55424 (West of Clarke Rd.) and have discussed present and future long term planning and concerns with other concerned members of LENSLA (Lake Erie North Shore Landowners Association) affected by the erosion on Lakeshore Line (Trans Canada Trail), we have also discussed the Municipality’s strategy for erosion control options and will point out a planning strategy we feel should be addressed
In regards to Lakeshore Line and the closing between Clarke Rd and County Rd 55 may this concern be addressed: Understanding that Clarke Road (Trans Canada Trail) will be reconstructed as an alternate route to Glenn Erie Line (graded, gravelled) that a more permanent solution of paving be considered. Clarke Road will likely become a major route for local, heavy agricultural, large trucks and seasonal traffic. The planning strategy for Clarke Road should be a road durable enough to withstand the increase in traffic and provide a reliable route of travel.
The Memorandum (IBI Group) attached to the Lakeshore Line Erosion Response Strategy discussing the future Land Erosion issues that concerns westerly of Clarke Road to the Little Otter Creek, consideration of long term erosion prevention plans should be addressed. A Committee should be formed with affected Property Owners, Trans Canada Trail Executives, Long Point Region Conservation Authority, Bayham Municipality/ Council and regulating Federal Provincial Bodies of Government representatives that can commence a plan and procure a solution for sustainable erosion control (headland beach, revetment etc.) to preserve Lakeshore Line (Trans Canada Trail).
There are measures that can reduce the speed of erosion considerably and planning should start immediately, even though a large investment may be required to such a project, a Committee can evaluate, decide on directions (Pilot project), and source funding, grants and donations on a cost share basis with the Municipality. (a good investment to the future development of Port Burwell, its Harbour and the surrounding Community).
The present affected lands within this area of Clarke Road and Lakeshore Line are routes of the Trans Canada Trail, they encompass a significant passage to Port Burwell and is part of unique Ecosystem of Wildlife, Birds and Plants (some endangered) and planning to preserve this natural area, route and land to the Village of Port Burwell has to be planned to prevent further erosion where the impact could be of a greater loss to more than the Ecosystem alone.
Please present this letter to the Council meeting on May 17th, 2018 in addition to future action on Lakeshore Line Erosion Response Strategy.
Sincerely,
David Borbely 55424 Lakeshore Line Port Burwell, ON N0J 1T0 May 11/18
Muicipality of Bayham 56169 Heritage Line, Straffordville,On. NoJ 1Y0
Re: Lakeshore Line Erosion Response
Dear: Mayor Ens, Members of council, and Mr. Paul Shipway
Many of you know me as the “caretaker” at Monarch Landing at 55751 Lakeshore line..I have been truely blessed to occupy this sacred piece of lakeshore to pursue my lifes interests, and work to create habitat, increase species diversity and relish the amazing abundance of wildlife at the lakeshore. I am a longterm resident of Bayham. I have no opposition to the closure of Lakeshore line from Clarke Rd to Stafford Rd.
I believe council needs to listen to and address all the concerns of those residents directly affected by this closure.
I would sincerely ask council to consider this closure an opportunity for a new beginning to finally address the problem of lakeshore erosion. This calls for proactive measures and real planning for a positive future, not reactive response to crisis.
I believe the mention of the creation of a headland beach at or near the terminus of Clarke Rd. (By the IBA group report),Must be very seriously considered, and efforts made to start the process towards that goal.
I would additionally request that council pass a motion at the council meeting, following the lakeshore meetig o May 17th 2018. that directs staff to strike a small committee, to look ernestly , into that possibility as a first step. This committee will explore funding possibilities, design and approval and all the necessary things that this entails. I am quite confident that funding can be found to that end. Provincially, federally, and from conservation minded citizens and organizations.
This route has been pursued with success by other lakeshore communities. Why not Bayham?
As a first step I will propose that the committee be composed of the mayor, and one additional member of council, and the Bayham CAO. Additionally not more than 3 concerned lakeshore landowners. The selection of these land owners to be selected by the mayor, the additional councillor and the CAO, from applications received at the municipal offices.
These applications to state the name and address of these lakeshore land owners, and their qualifications and reasons for requesting inclusion on the committee.
I would also request a direction from council to staff to immediately open an account to accept public donations for this project.
I will also add that , at this time I will not put my name forward for the suggested committee. But will offer my assistance in any way if requested.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of my proposal.
Sincerely, Ron Allensen