CJI0008049
TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD
COUNCIL AGENDA
November 26, 2012
"Inspire confidence, wonder and a sense of possibility - deliver today's services and realize tomorrow's promise."
A meeting of Council will be held Monday November 26, 2012 in the Council Chambers, Town Hall, Collingwood commencing at 5:00pm.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
1. CALL OF COUNCIL TO ORDER
2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA • THATthe content of the Council Agenda for November 26th, 2012 be adopted as presented.
3. DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND/OR RECEIPT OF GIFT (over $200)
4. a) ADOPTION OF MINUTES, for the regular meeting of Council held November 51h, 2012 (p.4) and the Council Planning and Development meeting held November 19th, 2012 (p.10). (errors & omissions)
b) BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE PREVIOUS MINUTES
5. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS • Curling Club Cheque Presentation (8th and final payment for the Equipment Replacement Loan)
6. DEPUTATION • Elvis Festival Presentation, Peter Devries, Chair and Rosemarie O'Brien, General Manager
7. CONSENT AGENDA
General Consent Items A.1 Dr. Kellie Leitch MP re : National Health and Fitness Day Act (p.13) Receive for Information A.2 Georgian Triangle Humane Society re: Concerns with the control of the cat Receive for population in Collingwood and review of the rescinded Cat By-law (p. 14) Information A.3 Simcoe County re: Notice to the proposed modified County of Simcoe Official Receive for Plan (p.15) Information A.4 Minister Bob Chiarelli re: Proposed Amendments 2 (2012) to the Growth Plan Receive for for the Greater Golden Horseshoe - comments due February 8, 2012 (document Information available in Clerk Services) (p.16) A.5 Veterans Affairs Canada re: Update to the Veterans Affairs Canada's Cenotaph Receive for Monument Restoration Program (guidelines provided to PRC) (p.18) Information A.6 Stephen Rioux re : Request for Council to consider the effects of Comprehensive Receive for Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) (p.19) Information A.7 County of Simcoe re: Confirmation of County of Simcoe Transit Funding Receive for Assistance Collingwood-Wasaga Beach Transit Link Bus (p. 73) Information
8. MOVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE (Staff Reports/By-laws if deemed expedient)
9. REPORTS/MINUTES OF COMMITTEES/BOARDS
November 26, 2012 Council Agenda - Page 1 of 3 1 of 157 CJI0008049
THATthe following minutes be hereby received: • Elvis Festival Services Board Minutes, October 23, 2012 (p.74) • Collingwood Heritage Committee Minutes, October 13, 2012 (p.77)
THATthe following Minutes be hereby received and the recommendations therein be approved: • BIA Board of Management Minutes, October 25, 2012 (p.80) • BIA Board of Management Minutes, November 14, 2012 (p.85) Recommendation: THAT Council maintain paid parking downtown during the holiday season and institute a Toys for Tickets Program from December 10th, 2012 through January 1st, 2013.
10. STAFF REPORTS
P2012-37 Zoning By-law Amendment and Plan of Subdivision ; Town Files: Z-2006-07 and DC-2006-18; Municipal Address: 400 Maple Street; Applicant: The Victoria Annex Group (p.90)
RECOMMENDING THAT the proposed Victoria Annex subdivision be given draft approval by Council subject to the conditions as generally set out in Appendix "G", including that draft approval lapse after three (3) years, being November 25, 2015, in the event that a subdivision is not registered within that period. (400 Maple Street)
AND FURTHER THAT the proposed Common Element Condominium for the Victoria Annex development be given draft approval by Council subject to the conditions as generally set out in Appendix "H", including that draft approval lapse after three (3) years, being November 25, 2015, in the event that the condominium is not registered within that period. (400 Maple Street)
AND FURTHER THAT Council enact and pass amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-117 in order to support the redevelopment proposal for the property. (400 Maple Street)
• THAT By-law No. 2012-117, being a By-law under the provision of Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990. C.P.13, as amended, be enacted and passed this 25th day of November, 2012. (p.119)
P2012-38 Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-120; Town Files: D14712; Municipal Address: 182 & 186 Erie Street; Owner: Healthcare Properties Holdings Ltd.; Agent: Lakeshore Group (p .123)
RECOMMENDING THAT Council enact and pass amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-120.
• THAT By-law No. 2012-120, being a By-law under the provision of Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990. C.P.13, as amended, be enacted and passed this 25th day of November, 2012. (p.128)
P2012-39 Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116; Town File: 014612; Municipal Address: 154 Maple Street; Applicant: Scott Williams; Zoning By-law Amendment- 154 Maple Street (p.131)
RECOMMENDING THAT Council enact and pass amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-115 for a Temporary Use.
• THAT By-law No. 2012-116, being a by-law under Sections 34 and 39 of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990. C.P.13, as amended, be enacted and passed this 25th day of November, 2012. (p. 137)
November 26, 2012 Council Agenda - Page 2 of 3 2 of 157 CJI0008049
P2012-40 Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118; Removal of the Holding "H" symbol Project Name: Lotco II (Mountaincroft); Location: 7508 Poplar Sideroad, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe (p.141)
RECOMMENDING THAT Council enact and pass amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118 to remove the Holding "H" symbol from a portion of the residential zones of the Mountaincroft Plan of Subdivision and thus permit construction of single detached dwelling units.
• THAT By-law No. 2012-118, being a by-law under the provision of Sections 34 and 36 of the Planning Act, R.S .O. 1990, C. P 13, as amended, be enacted and passed this 26th day of November, 2012. (p.147)
P2012-42 Deeming By-law No. 2012-119, File No. D1207312, Municipal Address: 182 & 186 Erie Street, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe (p .149)
RECOMMENDING THAT Council enact and pass Deeming By-law No. 2012-119, to deem the lots owned by Healthcare Properties Holdings Incorporated at 182 & 186 Erie Street, a single parcel.
• THAT By-law No. 2012-119, being a by-law to designate a Plan of Subdivision, or part thereof, not to be a registered Plan of Subdivision for the purposes of Subsection 50(3) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. P 13, as amended be enacted and passed this 26th day of November, 2012 (p.153)
11. MOTIONS
• THAT the Accounts Payable Revenue Vouchers for the month of October, 2012 in the amount of $2,519,059.96 be approved as presented.
• THAT the Supplementary Accounts Payable Revenue Vouchers for the month of October, 2012 in the amount of $211 .84 to Smarts Flowers be approved as presented. (Arts & Culture)
• WHEREAS the Town of Collingwood is considering the sale of the Collingwood Terminals, located at 1 Heritage Drive;
AND WHEREAS in addition to the Terminal building lands, Council is considering disposal of water lots including the parcel of land used by the Collingwood Yacht Club and that the potential purchaser will be required to assume or renegotiate the current lease with the CYC;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Town of Collingwood herein declare the approximate lands as identified on the attached as surplus to the needs of the municipality and commence the land sale process for the subject property. (p.156)
12. BY-LAWS
13. NOTICE OF MOTION
14. OLD or DEFERRED BUSINESS
15. OTHER BUSINESS
16. CONFIRMATORY BY-LAW • THAT By-law No. 2012-121, being a by-law to confirm the proceedings of the regular meeting of Council held November 25th, 2012 and the Council Planning and Development meeting held November 19th, 2012 be enacted and passed this 261h day of November, 2012. (p. 157)
17. ADJOURNMENT
November 26, 2012 Council Agenda - Page 3 of 3 3 of 157 CJI0008049
TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD
COUNCIL MINUTES
November 5, 2012
"Inspire confidence, wonder and a sense of possibility- deliver today's services and realize tomorrow's promise."
A meeting of Council was held Monday November 5, 2012 in the Council Chambers, Town Hall, Collingwood commencing at 5:00pm.
MAYOR COOPER CALLED COUNCIL TO ORDER
Members of Council Present: Mayor Cooper Deputy Mayor Lloyd Councillor Edwards Councillor Lloyd Councillor Chadwick Councillor Hull Councillor West Councillor Cunningham Councillor Gardhouse
Staff Present: Ed Houghton, Acting Chief Administrative Officer Sara Almas, Clerk Larry Irwin, Director of Information Technology (regrets) Marta Proctor, Director of Leisure Services Marjory Leonard, Treasurer Nancy Farrer, Director of Planning Services
ADOPTION OF AGENDA No. 466 Moved by Deputy Mayor Lloyd Seconded by Councillor Edwards
THATthe content of the Council Agenda and Addendum for November 5th, 2012 be adopted as presented.
CARRIED
DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND/OR RECEIPT OF GIFT (over $200) - Nil
ADOPTION OF MINUTES No. 467 Moved by Councillor Edwards Seconded by Deputy Mayor Lloyd
THATthe minutes of the regular meetings of Council held October 22nd, 2012 and October 29th, 2012, be approved as presented.
CARRIED
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS • Council reported on various community events they had attended and announced upcoming events.
November 5, 2012 Council Minutes - Page 1 of 6 4 of 157 CJI0008049
PUBLIC MEETING
Mayor Cooper welcomed those in attendance and introduced the Public Meeting format. Clerk Sara Almas confirmed that notice has been provided with respect to the proposed development charges for the Black Ash Creek Watershed Special Policy Area being heard this evening, in accordance with the Development Charges Act. Notice was provided beginning October 5, 2012 in the Enterprise Bulletin for five consecutive weeks.
Black Ash Creek - Development Charges, Nancy Neale, Watson & Associates
Marjory Leonard, Treasurer, introduced Nancy Neale, Watson & Associates who reviewed the report and proposed development charges.
Proposed Black Ash Creek Watershed Special Policy Area Development Charges By-l aw Pursuant to Section 12 of the Development Charges Act, 1997, the purpose of the public meeting is to enable the public to understand generally the area-specific development charge proposal and to solicit public input. The area covered by the area-specific development charge is shown below
The purpose and effect of the proposed by-law is to allow the Town to recover a portion of the costs of the Black Ash Creek (BAC) channelization project. This project was undertaken to permit residential and non-residential development to take place in locations within the BAC Special Policy Area. The benefiting area includes both the watershed area located to the west of BAC, and the Special Policy area located to the east of BAC. Storm water drains into the Black Ash Creek primarily from lands located in the watershed (to the west) causing potential flooding to occur on lands located in the Special Policy Area (to the east). The channelization works are designed, in part, to prevent future flooding in the Special Policy Area.
Mayor Cooper called for the first time for comments from the public.
Mr. Jim Hartman, Greenland Consulting on behalf of Eden Oak Homes requested clarification with respect to Part 4 of the By-law regarding exemption, ensuring the Eden Oak lands remain exempt from the by-law. Treasurer Marjory Leonard confirmed that they would remain exempt.
Mayor Cooper called for the second, third and final time for comments from the public. No further comments were made thus closing the public portion of the public meeting at 5:28pm.
No. 468 Moved by Deputy Mayor Lloyd Seconded by Councillor Lloyd
THAT Council approve the Development Charges Background Study dated September 27 , 2012;
AND FURTHER THAT Council has determined that no further public meeting is required.
CARRIED
No. 469 Moved by Deputy Mayor Lloyd Seconded by Councillor Lloyd
THAT By-law No. 2012-114, being a by-law to establish area-specific development charges for the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood, be enacted and passed this 5th day of November 2012.
CARRIED
November 5, 2012 Council Minutes - Page 2 of 6 5 of 157 CJI0008049
DEPUTA T/ONS
• Friends of Central Park Update Dr. Mike Lewin, spokesperson for the Friends of Central Park, reported on the input received to date, their public meeting held October 3 and other important facts pertaining to the current recreation project. He expressed concerns with the process undertaken, communications with the community, adherence to town procedures, costs of the project and Council's decision.
Council requested clarification be provided to the items within the documents submitted by Friends of Central Park.
• Proposed Collingwood Clippers Trillium Grant Collaboration Sharon McFarlane, president of Clippers and founder, advised Council of their recent submission for funds through the Ontario Trillium Foundation and requested Councils support for a collaborative business plan that would permit their club to providing swim school programming.
Moved by Councillor Hull Seconded by Councillor West
THAT Council request staff prepare a report to clarify the request from the Collingwood Clippers to meet the Trillium Grant collaboration proposal and determine how this will meet the current funding proposal.
CARRIED
CONSENT AGENDA No. 470 Moved by Councillor Lloyd Seconded by Councillor Chadwick
THA Tthe General Consent Agenda, having been given due consideration by Council, be received.
General Consent Items A.1 R. Dolan, Pulmonary Hypertension Association re: Request to Proclaim Receive for November Pulmonary Hypertension Month (response from Office of the Mayor Information attached) A.2 Jacques Cote, Canada Post re: Community Mail boxes in new developments Receive for Information A.3 B. Chiarelli, Minister, Ministry of Infrastructure/Ministry of Transportation re: Receive for Investment in infrastructure and meeting infrastructure responsibilities Information A.4 L. Politano, Regional Director, Ministry of Transportation re : Funding for the Receive for construction of Highway 26 widening between Sixth Line and Pretty River Information Pkwy beinq deferred A.5 Township of Essa re: Public Information Centre regarding the Nottawasaga Receive for River Erosion Hazard Study (Tuesday November 61h) Information A.6 M. Macintyre, Huronia Community Foundation re: Extending services into Receive for Collingwood Information
CARRIED
REPORTS/MINUTES OF COMMITTEES/BOARDS No. 471 Moved by Councillor Chadwick Seconded by Councillor Gardhouse
THAT the following minutes be hereby received: • BIA Board of Management Minutes, October 3, 2012 • Parks, Recreation and Culture Advisory Committee Minutes, October 17, 2012
CARRIED November 5, 2012 Council Minutes - Page 3 of 6 6 of 157 CJI0008049
BIA Presentation: Board of Management Update on Initiatives and Projects (completed and upcoming) Joe Saunders, Chair, BIA; Susan Nicholson, General Manager BIA; Paula Lehr, Downtown Revitalization Coordinator, Town of Collingwood addressed Council outlining the initiatives and projects the BIA have completed this year and projects they are actively undertaking.
Moved by Councillor Chadwick Seconded by Councillor Edwards
THAT Council waive the notice of motion requirement of the procedural by-law to consider a motion to allow free parking in the Downtown to commemorate Random Act of Kindness Day.
CARRIED
Moved by Councillor Chadwick Seconded by Councillor Cunningham
THAT free parking be permitted in the Downtown on Friday, November 9, 2012 to commemorate Random Act of Kindness Day.
CARRIED
STAFF REPORTS T2012-17 Hospice Georgian Triangle No. 472 Moved by Deputy Mayor Lloyd Seconded by Councillor Chadwick
THAT Council receive Staff Report T2012-17 for information;
AND FURTHER THAT Council herein authorize the waiving of fees and charges as noted in Staff Report T2012-17 applicable to the Hospice Georgian Triangle Residential Hospice project;
AND FURTHER THAT Council provide a grant to Hospice Georgian Triangle in an amount equal to the Town-wide Development Charges applicable to the development.
CARRIED
PW2012-15 Automatic Weather Observation Station for the Collingwood Airport No. 473 Moved by Deputy Mayor Lloyd Seconded by Councillor Edwards
THAT Staff Report PW2012-15, recommending Council authorize the transfer of $21 ,400 from the Airport Reserve to finance the balance owing on the purchase of the Automatic Weather Observation System, be approved.
CARRIED
MOTIONS No. 474 Moved by Councillor Gardhouse Seconded by Councillor West
WHEREAS Council of the Town of Collingwood is considering the Ontario Lottery Gaming's (OLG) request for proposals to host the proposed C-7 gaming facility expansion within the Town of Collingwood;
AND WHEREAS concerns regarding potential increased local medical and social costs have been expressed by members of the public; November 5, 2012 Council Minutes - Page 4 of 6 7 of 157 CJI0008049
AND WHEREAS the potential annual municipal revenue from the proposed gaming facility operation is approximately $3 ,000,000.00, and dispersed at the discretion and direction of the host municipality;
AND WHEREAS it is desirable and proactive for COUNCIL Yea Nay Collingwood Council to enhance the social assistance ,/ programs currently offered by OLG and provide a Cooper R. Lloyd ,/ commitment to the community to address potential local Edwards ,/ challenges of a gaming facility; K. Lloyd ,/ Chadwick ,/ THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Corporation of Hull ,/ the Town of Collingwood informs the OLG of Collingwood's West ,/ interest to host a gaming site within the Municipality; Cunninqham ,/ Gardhouse ,/ DEFEATED (recorded vote) TOTAL 4 5
No. 475 Moved by Councillor West Seconded by Councillor Chadwick
THAT this Council proceeds in Camera in order to address a matter pertaining to: 0 security of the property of the municipality or local board; and 0 personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees. Items for Discussion: a) Personnel Matter; b) Development Charges Request
CARRIED
COUNTY REPORT • Deputy Mayor Lloyd provided a County update to the review of waste management tax levy from the County and whether to keep it out of the general tax levy.
OTHER BUSINESS • Pending List Review, update provided by Mayor Cooper and Acting CAO Houghton. Mayor Cooper confirmed the Town of the Blue Mountains, Blue Mountain Vi llage and Collingwood would be getting together to meet on the transit link in the near future.
• Councillor West informed Council of the OHA's interest in establishing an OHA Junior B franchise in Collingwood.
• Councillor Chadwick request for Staff Report:
No. 476 Moved by Councillor Chadwick Seconded by Councillor Lloyd
THAT Council herein direct staff to prepare a report to considering implementing a Parking Program in the Downtown that will include a possible cost sharing initiative with the BIA or other potential charity organizations, ensuring a sustainable parking operation that would include establishing a Parking Reserve Fund, as previously recommended by the BIA Board of Management.
CARRIED
Council proceeded to in-camera session as previously resolved. (7:52pm)
November 5. 2012 Council Minutes - Page 5 of 6 8 of 157 CJI0008049
Moved by Councillor Hull Seconded by Councillor Lloyd
THAT Council rise from in-camera and return to public session. (9:15pm)
CARRIED
CONFIRMATORY BY-LAW No. 477 Moved by Councillor Hull Seconded by Councillor Lloyd
THAT By-law No. 2012-115, being a by-law to confirm the proceedings of the regular meeting of Council held October 29th, 2012 and the regular meeting of Council held November 5th, 2012 be enacted and passed this 5th day of November, 2012.
CARRIED
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Councillor Hull
THAT the meeting of Council be hereby adjourned at 9: 16pm.
CARRIED
MAYOR
CLERK
November 5, 2012 Council Minutes - Page 6 of 6 9 of 157 CJI0008049
TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD
COUNCIL MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
November 19, 2012
"Inspire confidence, wonder and a sense of possibility- deliver today's services and realize tomorrow's promise."
A meeting of Council with regard to planning and development matters was held Monday, November 19, 2012 in the Council Chambers, Town Hall, Collingwood commencing at 5:00pm.
MAYOR COOPER CALLED COUNCIL TO ORDER
Members of Council Present: Mayor Cooper Deputy Mayor Lloyd (regrets) Councillor Edwards Councillor Lloyd Councillor Chadwick Councillor Hull Councillor West Councillor Cunningham Councillor Gardhouse (regrets)
Staff Present: Ed Houghton, Acting Chief Administrative Officer Sara Almas, Clerk Larry Irwin, Director of Information Technology Marta Proctor, Director of Leisure Services (regrets) Marjory Leonard, Treasurer Nancy Farrer, Director of Planning Services Trent Elyea, Fire Chief (regrets) Marcus Firman, Manager Water Services
ADOPTION OF AGENDA No. 478 Moved by Councillor Edwards Seconded by Councillor Chadwick
THAT the content of the Council - Planning and Development Agenda for November 19, 2012 be adopted as amended: - removal of in-camera item pettaining to the security of the properly of the municipality or local board to discuss a development charges request.
CARRIED
DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND/OR RECEIPT OF GIFT (over $200) - Nil
PUBLIC MEETING Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment - Hospice
Mayor Cooper welcomed those in attendance and introduced the Public Meeting format.
Clerk Sara Almas confirmed that notice has been provided with respect to the planning application being heard this evening, in accordance with the Planning Act. Notice was provided October 26, 2012 in the Enterprise Bulletin. November 19, 2012 Council Planning and Development Minutes - Page 1 of 3 10of157 CJI0008049
Ms. Nancy Farrer, Director of Planning Services provided a brief introduction of the application and planner assigned to this file. Mr. Trevor Houghton, Senior Planner, reviewed the application and comments received to date.
The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (Town File No. 0141112) pertains to a parcel of land located behind the Sunset Manor and Georgian Gables buildings and is legally described as Lots 36 & 37, Part of Albert Street and Part of the 6.10 Lane, Register Plan 282, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe. The property subject to the proposed rezoning is located at the rear portion of the Sunset Manor land located at 49 Raglan Street.
The purpose and effect of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is to rezone a portion of the subject land to permit a main building or use to be constructed on a lot without frontage onto a street. The subject lands are proposed to be developed as the site of the Hospice Georgian Triangle building.
Mr. Bruce West, Chair of Hospice Georgian Triangle addressed Council to review the development and funding for the project.
Mayor Cooper called for the first, second, third and final time for comments from the public. No further comments were made thus closing the public portion of the public meeting at 5:17pm.
Council requested clarification with the amount of beds being provided , and connectivity to the trail system. Mr. West confirmed that six beds are proposed at this time with the opportunity to expand to ten in the future. The Board noted the benefits of being located in close proximity to public transit as opposed to trail access at this time.
PRESENTATION • Social Housing - County of Simcoe Terry Talon, General Manager, Social and Community Services and John Connell, Program Supervisor Social Housing Department provided a presentation to Council outlining the County's role in social housing, mandated programs including non-profit housing, waiting list management, the Simcoe County Housing Corp., non-mandated programs including rent supplement, the Canada-Ontario affirmable housing program, social housing renovating and retrofit program, renewal energy initiative, and the County's affordable housing incentives.
Ms. Talon addressed questions from Council with respect to the Provincial comment period on applications, and various funding programs available.
STAFF REPORTS • Residential Policy Review Mark Bryan, Community Planner - Planning Services provided Council with a residential policy review outlining provincial growth management policies, changing demographics and economic trends, new housing and neighbourhood demands, built boundary rev iew, land supply, infill and intensification, potential density changes, and changes to the Official Plan.
Mr. Bryan and Ms. Farrer addressed questions from Council with respect to intensification, wastewater treatment capacity, revisions to the zoning by-law to address supplementary housing and coach houses, considering secondary suites in townhouses, and retaining greenspace within the growth areas.
November 19, 2012 Council Planning and Development Minutes - Page 2 of 3 11 of157 CJI0008049
P2012-41 Severing Municipal Propetties When Used for Other Purposes No. 479 Moved by Councillor Chadwick Seconded by Councillor
THAT Council receive Staff Report P2012-41 and direct staff to provide an annual notice to organizations that operate a continued use on municipal property (for non-municipal purposes) confirming the equivalent property tax exemption.
CARRIED
MOTIONS No. 480 Moved by Councillor Edwards Seconded by Councillor Lloyd
THAT this Council proceeds in Camera in order to address a matter pertaining to : 0 labour relations or employee negotiations.
Item for Discussion: a) Union Negotiations with l.A.F.F.
CARRIED
BY-LAWS- Nil NOTICE OF MOTIONS - Nil OLD I DEFERRED BUSINESS - Nil
OTHER BUSINESS • Mr. Ed Houghton, Acting CAO reviewed a petition requesting transit service to the Blue resort area further noting the petition will help to bring awareness of this need in the community and hope that the Town of The Blue Mountains and the Village will consider the results of the survey when this initiative is considered .
• Council reported on various community events they had attended and announced upcoming events.
Council proceeded to in-camera session as previously resolved. (6:38pm)
Moved by Councillor Hull Seconded by Councillor Lloyd
THAT Council rise from in-camera and return to public session. (7:47pm)
CARRIED
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Councillor Lloyd
THA Tthe meeting of Council be hereby adjourned at 7:47pm.
CARRIED
MAYOR
CLERK
November 19, 2012 Council Planning and Development Minutes - Page 3 of 3 12of157 CJI0008049
Ce~~ A. l Co iii ngwoo · Room 560, La Promenade Building 50 I Hume Street Ottawa, ON KI A OA6 Collingwood, ON L9Y 4H8 Tel: (613) 992-4224 Tel: (705) 445-5557 Fax:{613) 992-2164 Fax: {705) 445-5155
HOUSE OF COMMONS CttAMBRE DES COMMUNES CANADA A lliston Kellie Leitch, a.Ont 23 Paris Street Dr. Alliston, ON L9R IJ3 Member of Parliament Tel: (705) 435-1809 Simcoe-Grey Fax: (705) 435-6448 November I st, 2012 ~ Dear M~ ....Cooper, On September 24, my colleague John Weston, Member of Parliament for West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast--Sea-to-Sky--Country, introduced the National Health and Fitness Day Art in the House of Commons. This is a vital and timely bill which I am proud to support.
Exercise and physical recreation offer major physical and mental health benefits. They reduce the risk of serious illness, as well as the associated costs to families and to the health care system. The National Health and Fitness Day Art will encourage Canadians to take advantage both of Canada ·s beautiful outdoors and of the many public health and fitness facilities available in communities across the country.
This Act will designate the first Saturday in June a~ an annual "National Health and Fitness Day." On National Health and Fitness Day, local governments will be encouraged to open recreational health, sports, and fitness facilities to their constituents free of charge. By raising Canadians' awareness both of the value of physical activity and of the fitness opportunities available in their communities, the Act aims to increase Canadian participation in health and fitness activities.
I hope that you will join me in supporting the National Health and Fitness Day Act. I look forward to working with you to carry out its recommendations and to make an impact on the health of our communities.
Sincerely,
Ic.-:_
Dr. Kellie Leitch, O .Ont., MD Member of Parliament Simcoe-Grey
13of157 [email protected] CJI0008049
GEORGIAN TRIANGLE HUMANE SOCIETY A.2 549 Tenth Line, Collingwood, Ontario, L9Y OW1 (705) 445 5204 www.gths.ca
November 1, 2012
Dear Mayor Cooper and Council:
We have had a rather busy year at GTHS and I now believe it is time to sit down, with a working committee of Council, to review the current situation regarding the rescinding of the Cat Bylaw and our Pound Operation for the Town. While we are quite comfortable with the Pound Operation, and trust the Council is as well, we have some serious concerns as to the control of the cat population in Town.
Last fall, John Worts supplied some members of Council and staff with material he received while on a visit to the Calgary Animal Services facility. We fully appreciate that we are not in the same league as Calgary; we feel strongly that there are some concepts which we may be able to apply to our municipal situation.
Our goal is to have a manageable flow of felines through the facility commensurate with the needs of the public. Currently we are overwhelmed by the number of people calling about stray cat/kittens and expecting us to do something about it. We take as many as we can but we see this problem compounding if remedial action is not taken.
We look forward to working with you on a beneficial solution for both the Town and its community.
President, GTHS Director of Municipal Affairs, GTHS
14of157 CJI0008049
THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF SIMCOE A. 3 NOTICE
RE: Draft Proposed Modified County of Simcoe Official Plan
This notice is being circulated to you because you have requested notice and information as it pertains to the County of Simcoe Official Plan.
TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the County of Simcoe, at its regular meeting of October 23, 2012, considered Item CS 12-144 of the Corporate Services Committee. The purpose of this Item was to provide Council with a summary of the comments received from the public, along with any further proposed modifications, regarding the County's Draft Proposed Modified Official Plan. Upon considering this Item, the following resolution was adopted by County Council on October 23, 2012:
"THAT the following recommendation (CS-143-12) (Item CS 12-144) of the Corporate Services Committee be approved:
THAT the draft Proposed Modified County Official Plan as released on June 26, 2012, with the additional changes as outlined in Schedules 1, 1 A, and 2 to Item CS 12-144, be endorsed;
AND THAT the County solicitor and staff be instructed to request a pre-hearing before the Ontario Municipal Board to seek approval of the County Official Plan as further modified;
AND THAT the final edited version of the draft County of Simcoe Official Plan (amended by the additional changes as outlined in Schedules 1, 1A, and 2 to Item CS 12-144) be brought back in its consolidated form to County Council."
The County of Simcoe Draft Proposed Modified Official Plan and Corporate Services Committee Item CS 12-144 are available for viewing on the County's website.
DATED AT the County of Simcoe this 2nd day of November.
Brenda Clark County Clerk County of Simcoe 1110 Highway 26 Midhurst, ON LOL 1 XO
15 of 157 CJI0008049
Ministry of Infrastructure . Ministere de !'Infrastructure
Ministry of Ministere des Transportation Transports A . 4 Ministry of Ministere des Municipal Affairs Affaires municipales and Housing et du Logement ~Ontario Office of the Minister Bureau du ministre
Ferguson Block, 3rd Floor Edifice Ferguson, 3• etage 77 Wellesley St. West 77, rue Wellesley ouest Toronto, Ontario Toronto. (Ontario) M7A 1Z8 M7A 1Z8 ri11!0V i 3 416-327-9200 4 i6-327-9200 www.ontario.ca/infrastructure www.ontario.ca/infrastructu re www.mto.gov.on.ca www.mto.gov.on.ca hi.-----c ; ~ - ~- www.ontario.ca/MAH www.ontario.ca/MAH
November 8, 2012
Ms. Sara J . Almas Clerk Town of Collingwood . 97 Hurontario Street PO Box 157 Collingwood ON L9Y 3Z5
Dear Ms. Almas:
I am pleased to provide you with a copy of Proposed Amendment 2 (2012) to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006. It contains proposed population and employment forecasts and related policies for municipalities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Proposed Amendment has been developed under the authority of the Places to Grow Act, 2005.
Growth Plans are not frozen in time and can be changed. Amendments to the Growth Plan must follow the process established in the Places to Grow Act, 2005. Proposed Amendment 2 is the result of a mandatory review of the Growth Plan's population and employment forecasts. Such a review must be undertaken at least every five years, in accordance with the Growth Plan's policies, to confirm that the forecasts remain current. The Proposed Amendment would, if approved, help ensure that the Growth Plan remains responsive and would allow planning to reflect the evolving nature of growth in this region.
The Greater Golden Horseshoe is a growing, thriving, economically strategic area that continues to attract people from across Canada and around the world. It is, and will continue to be, one of the fastest growing regions in North America, experiencing strong population and employment growth in the coming decades.
Through the internationally acclaimed Growth Plan, Ontario is making sure that this growth helps our communities prosper while curbing sprawl, protecting the environment and strengthening the economy. We are seeing good progress in the implementation of the Growth Plan. Community redevelopment is happening. New investment in major office buildings and public institutions is revitalizing downtowns. There is now more housing choice available to residents and newcomers. Transit ridership is increasing. The government is proud to support this progress through investments outlined in Building Together, the Province's long-term infrastructure plan.
. . ./cont'd
16of157 CJI0008049
-2-
The Growth Plan's horizon currently extends to 2031 and it is clear that the region's population · and economy witl continue to increase beyond that timeframe. Proposed Amendment 2 includes proposed forecasts for upper- and single-tier municipalities to 2036 and 2041 and outlines proposed policies relating to those forecasts. Extending the Growth Plan's forecasts would, if approved, help ensure that we continue to manage growth responsibly for the long term, both in existing urban areas and in new greenfield communities.
I recognize the importance of consistency in the land use planning process and by releasing this document there is no intention to disrupt current planning matters. I will take steps to ensure that if the Proposed Amendment is approved it will not upset the work that has already been done to implement the Growth Plan. For this reason, there is no change to existing 2031 population and employment forecasts and I am proposing transition provisions that would maintain stability for planning matters that are implementing the current Growth Plan. It ls also important to note that until any amendment is approved, the forecasts currently in the Growth Plan continue to be in effect under the Places to Grow Act, 2005.
The Places to Grow initiative has a strong track record of collaboration and consultation. I am proud of the first amendment to the Growth Plan for the Simcoe area and what we were able to accomplish by working together with municipalities, environmental groups, devefopers, and · committed individuals. I intend to continue this consultative and collaborative approach with Proposed Amendment 2. I am confident that working closely with all of our implementation partners will hefp to ensure that we are abfe to develop the best approach to manage growth responsibly.
Please ·send comments on Proposed Amendment 2 to the Ontario Growth Secretariat by February 8, 2013. Please be aware that any comments provided may be shared once personal information Js removed. Prior to making any comments, please review the notice setting out how we handle the information you provide by referring to the Proposed Amendment or visiting www.PlacestoGrow.ca and clicking on "Con.tact Us".
For further information, or to access an electronic copy .of Proposed Amendment 2, please visit the web site or telephone, tolHree, 1-866-479-9781, TTY: 1-800-239-4224.
Thank you in advance for your feedback. I look forward to continuing to work with you on the implementation of this update to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006.
Sincerely,
Bob Chiarelli Minister
Enclosure
17of157 CJI0008049
A. 5
Veterans Affairs Anciens Combattants I+ Canada Canada P.O. Box 7700 C.P. 7700 Charlottetown, P.E.I. Charlottetown O.-P.-E.) C1A8M9 C1A8M9
Your file - Volro reference
Our lils - Noire reference OCT 2 9 2012
Ms. Sara Almas Town Clerk 97 Hurontario Street P.O. Box 157 Collingwood, Ontario L9Y 3Z5
Dear Ms. Almas,
Further to your application for funding under Veterans Affairs Canada's Cenotaph/Monument Restoration Program, I am pleased to inform you that your proposal was presented to the External Review Committee on October 23, 2012. As you are aware, the Committee provides a recommendation and the final decision rests with the Minister of Veterans Affairs. You will be advised in due course of that decision.
In addition, the Committee asked me to pass along the following comments with regards to your application:
Please refer to the attached guidelines to ensure that all restoration work is carried out appropriately, particularily with respect to the engravings. It is recommended you check the durability of your proposed approach to painting the engraving, as frequent maintenance may result. An option that was mentioned would be the selection of cambrian black granite.
Should you have any questions with regards to the above, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience either by mail or by telephone at (902) 566-7230.
Sincerely yours, \~ CJLyJL J ~ na Clark Program Officer Cenotaph/Monument Restoration Program
l+I Cana d a 18of157 CJI0008049
A. 6
From: STEPHEN RIOUX< ------..- .. -==-- To: "[email protected]"
As a citizen of Collingwood I am writing to express my solicitude over the possible effects to our community that stem directly from the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) that is currently being negotiated, with little transparency between Canada and the European Union.
What triggered this e-mail was a November gth article written by John Jacobs from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (http:f/www.policyalternatives.ca/publ ications/cornmentary/why-38-ontario municipalities-oppose-canada-%E2%80%93-eu-trade-deal) Here he brought to light that 38 Ontario municipalities had passed motions expressing concern over CETA with some requesting exemption. Collingwood was glaringly missing from this list - as were all the municipalities on the southern shore of Georgian Bay! Why is that? Has CETA been addressed in Council as rve not been able to find evidence of it? Is there at least a general understanding of it?
Back in September John Jacobs also authored a report entitled Straightjacket: CETA's Constraining Effects on Ontario. I have attached a copy for your reference. It highlighted a number of troubling sections that could directly impact our community such as those around public services and procurement as well as the risk of litigation that could stem from imposed standards & regulations, especially those related to the environment and so on (please refer to the attached report).
Something else that has been written about quite extensively lately is that our area appears prime for natural gas fracking (shale gas extraction), so what are the implications around our renewable and non-renewable resources? Obviously when it comes to fracking we must ensure the protection of our water. Therefore, I would think the threat of privatization would be of great concern to our community especially as it relates to our water supply, which appears to be on the table with CETA. Given the current horrific state of our shoreline any notion of putting our water - perhaps our most valuable resource - under the control of foreign corporate interests has to be fully understood and I would suggest prevented!
We are seerng an onslaught of international free trade agreements these days (Canada Ch i na FIPA, TPP, CETA etc. http://www.internationa1. 9c.cattrade-aqreements-accards-commerciauxta9r accrinctex.as0x?vi~w~d ). Sadly each are being hurriedly and stealthily negotiated without any
19of157 CJI0008049
public review or debate, which only serves to reinforce the perception of there being an ever growing democratic deficit in Canada, at all levels of government. For all intents and purposes these agreements are investor/corporate rights agreements which set aside the rights of ordinary Canadian citizens. What also becomes obvious about CETA is that it will further erode our sovereignty - again subjugated to foreign interests - as it can achieve what a federally negotiated agreement like NAFTA can never do. Even your ability to make important day to day decisions on behalf of the constituency could be impeded or stopped all together. Like Star Trek this trade agreement may go where no man has gone before!
Therefore can you please provide some assurance that Collingwood Town Council is looking into CETA and that it will be putting forward its own set of questions, demanding transparency and in so doing it will be joining the list of concerned municipalities.
This negotiation is nearing conclusion so time is of the essence.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely!
Stephen Rioux
20 of 157 CJI0008049
DRAFT "No CETA" RESOLUTION
WHEREAS the Canadian government is close to concluding negotiations with the European Union (EU) on a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), with participation from provinces and territories; and
WHEREAS (the Municipality) recognizes the importance of trade to local, provincial/territorial and national economies but also the impact that trade agreements can have on the powers of local governments; and
WHEREAS in the CETA, Canada has exchanged an initial procurement offer with the EU (listing sub federal entities that will be bound by the rules of the procurement chapter) that may include (the Municipality) and that would explicitly tie the (the Municipality) to the terms and conditions of an international trade agreement; and
WHEREAS the EU is insisting on full access to procurement by municipalities, school boards, universities, hospitals, utilities and other provincial agencies, which could significantly reduce the freedom of these bodies to use public spending as a tool for economic development, environmental protection and support for local farmers and small businesses; and
WHEREAS procurement and investment rules in the CET A applied to transit, water, electricity and other locally delivered services may encourage and lock in privatization, and make it prohibitively expensive to apply new regulations to, re-municipalize services or create new services; and
WHEREAS (the Municipality) already has an open and fair procurement policy, and it is not the international norm for municipal governments to be covered by procurement agreements such as the one proposed in the CETA; and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Council requests:
• that (the Province/Territory) issue a clear, permanent exemption for (the Municipality) from the Canada-EU CETA, and that it otherwise protect the powers of municipalities, hospitals, school boards, utilities, universities and other sub-federal agencies to use public procurement as one of many tools to create local jobs, protect the environment, and support local development; and that • the (Province/Territory) disclose to municipalities and the public its initial procurement, services and investment offers to the EU, explain the impacts CETA would have on municipal governance, and give M.U.S.H sector entities the freedom to decide whether or not they will be bound by CETA provisions; and that • this resolution be sent to the provincial and federal government ministers responsible for the CETA negotiations, the (Provincial/Territorial) Municipal Association, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the (Provincial/Territorial) Hospital Association, the (Provincial/Territorial} University Association and the (Provincial/Territorial) School Board Association and any other relevant bodies for consideration and circulation.
21of157 CJI0008049
Municipal Procurement Implications of the Proposed Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the European Union
Legal opinion prepared by Steven Shrybman (Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP) for the Centre for Civic Governance at Columbia Institute
May 28, 2010
Centre for Civic Governance 1200-1166 Alberni Street Vancouver, BC V6E 3Z3 604 ~ 408-2500 Web: www.civicgovernance.ca/ Email: [email protected]
USW-2009
22of157 CJI0008049
1
Introduction
Purchasing power has long been a key policy tool for municipalities, and is becoming even more impotiant in the face of the extraordinary economic, social, environmental and ecological pressures currently confronting Canadian communities. Procurement choices can play a crucial role not only in promoting local economic development, local food production and green technologies, but also in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the community's ecological footprint through regional sourcing of goods and services.
It is in recognition of the impm1ance of local procurement to the wellbeing of Canadian communities that the Centre for Civic Governance commissioned this legal opinion. Sub-national public procurement in Canada had largely been left out of earlier international trade agreements, such as NAFTA and the FTAA. But in early 2010, after months of closed door negotiations, the government of Canada signed an agreement which for the first time opened up municipal procurement in construction services to American companies.
Canada gave away a lot in this 'Buy American deal' (the Canada-US Procurement Agreement, or 'CUSP A') but seems to have gained little in return. Most of the protected US stimulus funds that were Canada's rationale for the deal had already been spent, and many US municipalities chose not to put their own procurement powers up for negotiation. The Canadian govermnent has already pledged to extend and expand this 'Buy American' deal when it comes up for renewal in 2011.
While CUSPA is a source of serious concern, Canada's current trade negotiations with the European Union may set an even more worrying precedent. As Steven Shrybman explains in this legal opinion, leaked documents from the current Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) negotiations suggest that this deal goes much further than CUSPA. The EU has made specific requests for ful I access to public procurement in cities across Canada, including the right of European multinational corporations to bid on core municipal services, such as public transit systems, water services and wastewater treatment. The leaked CETA documents explicitly propose that enviromnental and local economic development considerations be excluded as factors in procurement decisions, and the deal would open up oppo11unities for corporations who don't get their way to tie municipalities up with expensive legal challenges.
Given these serious concems, it is crucial that the Canadian government consults closely with municipalities and provides objective research and risk assessments regarding the potential economic, social and environmental impacts of CETA before signing any new agreement. We hope this legal opinion will contribute to a wide-ranging public debate on this matter.
Charley Beresford Executive Director
cnain ~ (lit - ·•A\'IJ. olun1bia C; q \' r JtN 1\ 'i !"!• l '' "> l I ';[ i i i T The Centre f or Civic Governance is an initiative ofth e Columbia Institute, a charitable organization f ocused on nurturing leadership for inclusive, sustainable communities.
23 of 157 CJI0008049
2
Steven Shrybman Direct Line: 613-482-2456 [email protected] Our File No. 10-1078
May 26, 2010
Charley Beresford Executive Director Columbia Institute Centre for Civic Governance Ste 1200 - 1166 Alberni Street Vancouver, BC V6E 3Z3
Dear Ms. Beresford:
Re: Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA)
Canada is currently negotiating a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with the European Union (the "EU"). The following provides an assessment of the potential impacts of this proposed trade agreement on municipal government authority.
The federal government has described CETA as the most ambitious free trade initiative to be undertaken by Canada. Jn truth, many provisions of the proposed text replicate those of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Both agreements greatly expanded the scope of international trade law to encompass spheres of domestic policy and law that have little to do with international trade in any conventional sense, including those within the jurisdiction of municipal governments. Indeed the actions of local governments - including those related to waste management, the delivery of water services, and land use planning- can and have been challenged for offending the requirements of international trade law.
The following analysis does not provide a comprehensive assessment of the full scope of CETA rules that are likely to impact municipal governments, for as noted, much of this terrain has already been charted under NAFTA and WTO rules. For example, Canada proposes to provide corporations with a virtually unfettered right to invoke international arbitration to seek damages where they claim a Canadian government or other public body has failed to comply with the investment rules of the regime. While including such provisions in a comprehensive international trade agreement would be unprecedented for the EU, Canada has been dealing with the consequences of according private investors such extraordinary rights for over a decade.
Even so, the consequences of exposing Canadian governments to investor-state claims by countless EU-based corporations are not to be discounted. Because of the serious risks engendered by such investment rules, we have included an example of these litigation risks below in regard to water supply services in light of the EU's pointed demand that such services
24of157 CJI0008049
3 be subject to CETA rules and the dominant position of EU-based water service corporations in this sector.
However, the primary focus of the foIJowing assessment is on procurement. In this area, CETA proposals would substantially expand the application of trade rules to municipal governments and other public bodies, and the inclusion of sub-national procurement in CETA is arguably the EU's foremost demand. For the moment, the procurement practices of provincial and municipal governments remain largely untrammelled by international treaty obligations. For these reasons, and because procurement can play such an important role in a modern economy, the following analysis provides a detailed assessment of proposed CETA procurement rules.
SUMMARY
[The term "municipalities" is used throughout this analysis as a short form for all MASH sector entities, including schools, hospitals, libraries, power and water utilities, and virtually all other public bodies and institutions which under present proposals would also be subject to CETA procurement rules.I
The current procurement practices of Canadian municipalities are typically open and transparent. EU companies are as entitled to bid in response to municipal tenders as are their Canadian counterparts, and only very rarely do tender calls require some proportion of the goods and services to be provided locally. However, municipalities also recognize the important role that procurement can play towards achieving economic, social, or environmental goals.
Indeed the FCM has stressed the important relationship between infrastructure investment. and job creation. Commenting on federal budget commitments, and under the heading "The Road to New Jobs" the FCM put it this way:
Turning federal budget commitments into new jobs does not happen automatically. A number of steps are required, with multiple decision points, complex problem-solving, and external barriers and challenges along the way. Each of these milestones must be met by one or more of the three orders of government involved in this national stimulus effort in order to turn a dollar figure shown in a federal budget document into real projects and jobs in Canadian communities.
Of course a critical decision point concerns the conditions of public procurement, and the PCM has also called upon the federal government to preserve the right of municipalities to insist on local content and job creation as conditions of procurement. In setting out the principles that should guide Canadian trade negotiations, the FCM stressed the importance of:
Canadian content for strategic industries or sensitive projects: A trade deal must recognize strategic and public interest considerations before barring all preferential treatment based on country oforigin. There may be industries ofstrategic significance to a particular region, such as transit, or projects where considerations of quality, public benefit, environmental protection or business ethics means that a local government may be allowed to implement minimum Canadian content levels, within reason.
25of157 CJI0008049
4
To put it simply, proposed CETA rules would permanently remove the option of using procurement in this manner. Thus under CETA, municipalities would no longer be able to restrict tendering to Canadian companies, or stipulate that foreign companies bidding on public contracts accord some preference for local or Canadian goods, services, or workers. As a result, municipalities would lose one of the few, and perhaps the most important tool they now have for stimulating innovation, fostering community economic development, creating local employment and achieving other public policy goals, from food security to social equity.
At the same time, municipalities would bear significant administrative costs and litigation risks arising from having to expand the scope of their procurement practices; reporting upon, accounting for and defending their procurement choices; and from having to compensate unsuccessful bidders where CETA procedures and rules are not strictly observed.
Specifically, proposed CETA procurement rules would: i) prohibit municipalities from using procurement as a local economic or social development tool by restricting tender calls to local or Canadian companies or by requiring that bidders use some proportion of local or Canadian. goods, services or labour in providing the goods and services being tendered;
ii) prohibit municipalities from using procurement for strategic purposes, such as creating or supporting a market for innovative goods and services, including green technologies where the effect would favour Canadian producers or attract investment to Canada; iii) prohibit municipalities from using procurement for sustainable development purposes such as promoting food security by adopting "buy local" food practices; iv) require municipalities to shoulder the administrative costs associated with:
• providing the federal government with infomrntion and statistics about their procurement practices and activities:
• publishing detailed notices and announcements of intended procurements;
• issuing tenders in accordance with CETA procedures and technical specifications; • accounting to unsuccessful suppliers for their procurement decisions; and
• defending their actions if challenged, before domestic administrative, judicial and appellate bodies; v) put municipalities in jeopardy of their procurement processes being slowed or derailed by having to:
• provide unsuccessful EU bidders with sufficient time to appeal their decisions;
26of157 CJI0008049
5
• contend with an order suspending the procurement pending the resolution of such an appeal; or
• pay damages to an unsuccessful bidder or bidders where they fail to comply with CETA rules.
The constraints imposed by CETA on municipal procurement options also go well beyond those of the Agreement in Internal Trade (AIT) which allow municipal procurement to favour Canadian goods and services, and which unlike CETA rules, exempt procurement relating to water and water related services.
The Importance ofDue Diligence by Municipalities
Given the nature of these constraints, it is surprising that neither federal nor provincial governments have presented an assessment of their impact, nor have they offered any meaningful assessment of what municipalities might gain from abandoning their procurement prerogatives. However, it does appears to be conceded that Canada has little to gain from reciprocal access to EU procurement markets and so will be seeking gains in other areas.
For example, according to an account in a leading trade journal, recognizing that the EU has much more to gain from the inclusion of sub-national procurement in CETA, Canada's Trade Minister is poised to use sub-national procurement as a bargaining chip in exchange for new market access for Canadian beef, pork and grains. 1 We could not, however, find evidence that such a trade-off would be warranted, even if one accepts that it is reasonable to expect municipalities to bear the costs for benefits that other sectors and regions of the country might gain.
We have also included below a brief account of the outcome of recent bi-lateral procurement negotiations with the U.S. to belie the notion that one can rely upon the outcome of such negotiations to produce a balanced agreement that serves Canadian interests. The recently concluded Canada-U.S. Procurement Agreement is a remarkably one-sided agreement under which most benefits flow to U.S. companies, and this is particularly true for temporary provisions that require Canadian municipalities to comply with international procurement rules for the first time. Under these rules, Canadian municipalities must open procurement for construction and related services to U.S. companies, but U.S. states and municipalities, many of which maintain local preferences that effectively exclude Canadian bidders, are under no reciprocal obligation. It appears in that case that the federal government's political imperatives overwhelmed its interest in achieving an outcome that furthered Canadian interests. We believe there are good reasons to be concerned that the same dynamics are at play in CETA negotiations.
If there is any fmther need to underscore the importance of due diligence by those representing municipalities on the trade file, it is provided by recognizing the permanent character of CETA commitments. The practical and political difficulties of amending an international agreement are such that it is virtually impossible to reinstate the prerogatives of governments once these are
1 Inside Trade, 28-18-13.
27 of 157 CJI0008049
6 abandoned. Recognizing this difficulty, Canada has proposed an elaborate procedure for modifying the commitments it makes under the CETA regime. 2 But the right to modify commitments is highly qualified, and has not been accepted by the EU. Moreover, in our view Canada's proposal is unlikely to be accepted by the EU because it cuts so directly against the essential purpose of this proposed trade agreement, which is to establish binding and ongoing obligations that may not be amended domestically.
To underscore this point, we are aware of no instance of Canada seeking to amend NAFTA rules, notwithstanding serious dissatisfaction with aspects of the regime - the softwood lumber disputes and investor state claims being two examples. The only reasonable assumption for municipalities to make is that if procurement authority is ceded under CETA, it will not be recoverable.
In light of the outcome of 'Buy America' procurement negotiations with the U.S., and the sweeping constraints on municipal procurement powers engendered by proposed CETA rules, it would be reasonable in our view to call upon the federal government to: i) undertake and publish a thorough, timely and objective assessment of both the costs and benefits for municipalities of the CETA agenda; ii) provide an explanation of which sectors are most likely to be the principal beneficiaries of CETA, and how the purported benefits of this trade deal are to be distributed; iii) engage in effective consultations with municipalities following these analyses and before negotiations are pursued fmiher; and iv) allow sufficient time for municipalities to solicit public comment from those potentially affected by present proposals.
Most imp01iantly, given the failure of CETA proposals to preserve the right of municipalities to insist on Canadian content for strategic industries as the FCM called for, it would be reasonable to renew calls for the Federal Government to provide clear assurance that it will not trade away the authority of local governments to use procurement to achieve economic, social, environmental, sustainability and other valid public policy goals.
Finally, it is impotiant that the Federal Government's international procurement objectives are being pursued in at least one other major venue - bi-lateral negotiations under CUSP A. Under that Agreement Canada is committed to future discussions to explore an expansion of commitments with respect to market access for procurement.
We believe that Canadian municipalities should be very clear that the preservation of such rights is a necessary precondition for any future support they might offer for the CETA agenda ..
Caveats
2 See Article XVIII: Modifications and Rectifications to Coverage.
28of157 CJI0008049
7
Finally by way of introduction, it is important to qualify the following assessment by noting that it is based on unofficial and leaked copies of draft negotiating texts.3 Many of the details of current proposals have yet to be ironed out, and in many instances the drafts set out, in bracketed text, the respective negotiating positions of the two paitics which remain to be settled. While the federal government has provided ongoing briefings concerning the progress of negotiations it has not been willing to be transparent about the actual details and substance of those negotiations.
THE ROLE OF PROCUREMENT
Before describing the procurement rules set out in the draft CETA text, it is appropriate to describe how public procurement is now being used by Canada and its principal trading partners, for as noted, both the conventional and more innovative uses of procurement would be largely ruled out by these proposed trade rules.
The Conventional Use ofProcurement
Public procurement typically involves the expenditure of public funds to acquire goods (eg. computers, transit vehicles and wind turbines) and services (eg. engineering, accounting, waste management and energy conservation) for use by government or other public bodies. Subject to certain requirements concerning transparency and fairness, Canadian municipalities are relatively free to adopt whatever procurement practices they deem to be in the public interest.
In fact, procurement remains one of the few economic levers still available to governments under free trade, and may still be used to promote local economic development and create jobs. The importance of this tool is also explained by the fact that such public spending represents approximately 15-20% of GDP in OECD countries.4
Because of their utility and importance, many of Canada's trading partners have also preserved their rights to use procurement for economic and public policy purposes. For example, in the U.S. procurement is routinely used to promote community and local economic development -and preferences for local companies and goods are a ubiquitous feature of dozens of state and local procurement regimes.
Procurement to Foster Innovation and Sustainable Development
In addition to the more conventional uses of public procurement, it is increasingly being seen as providing an important tool for spurring innovation and creating markets for new products and services. Sometimes described as strategic procurement, this utilization of public purchasing can create demand for innovative technologies, products or services which stimulate a broader market. In this way public demand can play an important role with respect to the diffusion of new or alternative technologies, since public demand for innovative products also sends strong signals to private users.
3 These documents can be found on the website of the Trade Justice Network: (http://www.tradejustice.ca/) 4 Joint Repo1i on the EU-Canada Scoping Exercise, March 5, 2009.
29of157 CJI0008049
8
Green Energy Jn Ontario
This in fact is the approach that Ontario has recently adopted as part of a green energy initiative under which the government is using public funding and spending to attract and create a market for renewable energy products and producers.
Under the Ontario Green Energy Act, 2009, a preferential feed-in tariff programme has been established to encourage the use of renewable energy. The Green Energy Act includes significant domestic content requirements for the procurement of renewable energy projects. According to this new policy, at least 25% of wind projects and 50% of large solar projects must contain Ontario goods and labour. These percentages will increase for solar in 2011 (up to 60%), and for wind in 2012 (up to 50%). Ontario sees this initiative as a way to stimulate the economy, provide energy security for the province, and to achieve important environmental goals, including the reduction of greenhouse gases. It is telling that the EU has specifically identified the Act and these programs as offending the principles of the CETA procurement rules it is proposing.5
Sustainable Waste Water Treatment and Energy
Another example of strategic procurement is provided by present plans by the Capital Regional District (CRD) of British Columbia to establish sewage treatment works and related facilities. The CRD waste water treatment project is comprised of several elements, including a waste water collection system, two main waste water treatment plants, an energy centre for biogas, waste heat and other energy recovery projects, and resource recovery facilities for biosolids and other waste products. 6 The CRD has identified criteria for assessing the various options for proceeding with its project, including "the ability for the delivery option to provide maximum economic benefit to the CRD and British Columbia in tenns of jobs and other economic benefits".
But the CRD also sees procurement as means for promoting environmental innovation with respect to the management of wastewater.7 In this regard, the CRD plan is seen as an important means for "integrating wastewater management into sustainable water, storm water, solid waste and energy planning for the community." For practical applications of wastewater treatment resources, the possibilities are endless."8 This type of strategic procurement by the CRD can provide a market for innovative Canadian environmental and energy engineering services and technologies, while achieving its other stated goal of promoting economic development for the region and Canada.
5 MAAC 2009- List of Key Market Access Barriers in Canada under the Market Access Strategy.
6 Capital Regional District Core Area Wastewater Management Program Potential Program Delivery Options, January 6, 2010.
7 As noted by the CRD business case " ... the CRD is committed to implementing a large number of sustainability initiatives in these Programs. The CRD will demonstrate leadership in the field of wastewater treatment and beneficial reuse, and also aim for carbon neutrality." [G.5 Resource Rccovety And Carbon Neutrality - business case]
8 http://www.wastewatcrmadeclear.ca/environment/benefits.htm
30 of 157 CJI0008049
9
But as we describe below, under CETA rules the CRD would be prohibited from including "offsets" in procurement contracts for the purpose of encouraging local development "such as the use of domestic content . . . [or] licensing of technology ...." This rule clearly precludes procurement terms that would require any bidder to source environmental engineering services or technologies from Canadian providers, and would defeat the dual purposes the CRD is attempting to achieve.
Food Security
Another potential casualty of proposed CETA rules is buy-local food policies such as Toronto's "Local Food Procurement Policy" which was explicitly adopted to "reduce greenhouse gas and smog causing emissions generated by the impmt of food from outside of Ontario." That policy commits Toronto City Council "to progressively increase the percentage of food being served at City-owned facilities or purchased for City operations from local sources". "Local" is defined as "food that is grown in the Greater Toronto Area, the Greenbelt of Ontario and other regions of Ontario." 9
The benefits of Toronto's commitment were described as including reductions in:
• climate change and greenhouse gas emissions associated with food transportation and production;
• harmful effects of agricultural chemicals, in paiticular pesticides and fertilizers;
• the long-term effects of large scale monocultures; and
• increased reliance on imported food and food security issues related to breaks in the food chain due to emergencies or natural disasters.
Here again, proposed CETA rules would rule out these procurement goals.
Strategic Procurement in the EU
One of the ironies here is that Ontario is in many ways following the lead of European countries that have adopted very similar strategies for fostering the development of renewable energy technologies such as wind turbines (Denmark) and photovoltaic cells (Germany). In fact, in Europe these initiatives were often taken up by municipal governments.
For example, s. 2 of Germany's Renewable Energy Sources Act, provides for:
1. priority connection to the grid systems for general electricity supply of ;nstallations generating electricity from renewable energy sources and from mine gas within the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany, including its exclusive economic zone(territorial application ofthZ:'i Act),
9 See discussion http://www.torontoenvironment.org/campaigns/greenbelt/localfoodprocurement
31 of 157 CJI0008049
10
2. the priority purchase, transmission, distribution of and payment for such electricity by the grid system operators ...
The U.K. is also committed to using public procurement to foster innovation. Its policy is set out in a publication titled "Driving innovation through public procurement" which shows government departments how they can encourage suppliers to use their capabilities and know how to innovate in ways that will benefit both public services and the wider economy. The U.K. regards public procurers as having an important part to play "in making the U.K. the best place in the world to be an innovative business or public sector or third sector organisation."
As its responsible Ministry explains:
Innovation is a key element in driving greater value for money from public sector procurement. By encouraging suppliers to develop novel techniques to help deliver public services we will continue lo drive improvements in the performance ofpublic services. " 10
Given the very asymmetrical outcome of procurement negotiations with the U.S., which are described more fully below, it is a real concern that the EU may see an opportunity to challenge Ontario's green power initiative while leaving similar EU programs intact.
CURRENT CANADIAN PROCUREMENT PRACTICES
It is beyond the scope of this assessment to canvass the diverse procurement practices of Canadian municipalities and MASH sector bodies. Anecdotal accounts, however, indicate that a great deal of Canadian procurement by these sectors engender few restrictions on the right of EU-based corporations to bid on public tenders. It is also uncommon for tender calls to stipulate that some or all of the goods and services involved be acquired 1ocal1y or even in Canada. Nevertheless, there are notable exceptions to open tendering when municipalities or MASH institutions feel these are warranted. These, however, are clearly the exception.
IS IT PROTECTIONISM?
When the US government incorporated long-standing local preferences to recent stimulus legislation, Canada was quick to denounce these provisions as protectionist. Putting aside for the moment that similar domestic purchase and assembly requirements have been a feature of U.S. law since the 1930s, and are consistent with its international trade obligations, it is isn't obvious that such measures fit the definition of protectionism in any respect.
To begin with, procurement was not, until the advent of the WTO, a subject for inclusion in an international trade agreement. Under free trade rules, governments must not interfere with trade in goods across international borders, but they have not historically been required to spend public funds on foreign goods or services when they choose not to. Moreover, proposed CETA rules apply to services as well as goods - such as the planning, design, engineering, environmental assessment and management services associated with establishing a green box composting program, not just the green bins, trucks and composters needed to operate such a system. rn http://www.ogc.gov .uk/documents/Innovation__policy _ statement.pdf
32 of 157 CJI0008049
l1
More important than the label, however, is the very practical question of whether Canada should abandon such an impo11ant economic development tool, and why it should do so given the determination of the U.S. and other trading pa1tners to maintain this authority.
SCOPE AND APPLICATION
The EU has tabled its initial request for the application of CETA procurement rules, and is proposing the inclusion of all procurement contracts with a value in excess of $200,000 by the following entities:
111 All sub central government entities including those operating at the local, regional or municipal level as well as all other entities in all Canadian Provinces and Territories, including:
e in Ontario: the municipalities of Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton, London, Richmond Hill, Kitchener, Vaughan, Brantford, Windsor, Markham, Greater Sudbury, Burlington, Oakville, Oshawa, St. Catharine's-Niagara, Sherbrooke, Thunder Bay, Kingston, Barrie, Guelph
e in Quebec: the municipalities of Montreal (and/or Ville de Montreal ex-CUM), Quebec, Longueil, Gatineau, Trois Rivieres, Laval, Chicoutimi~Jonquiere
• in Alberta: Calgary, Edmonton
• in British Columbia: Vancouver, Richmond, Coquitlam, Burnaby, Abbotsford, Victoria, Kelowna
e in Manitoba: Winnipeg
• in other provinces: Regina, Saskatoon, Halifax, St John's (Newfoundland).
• All entities operating in the so-called M.A.S.H sector (municipalities, municipal organizations, school boards and publicly funded academic, health and social service entities) as well as any corporation or entity owned or controlled by one or more of the preceding.
111 All other entities whose procurement policies are substantially controlled by, dependent on, or influenced by central, regional or local government, and which .are engaged in commercial or industrial activities in one or more of the activities listed below.
1. Airpo1ts - including many run by municipal or regional authorities.
2. Transport-·· including the public transit systems of Canada's larest cities
3. Ports
4. Drinking water
33 of 157 CJI0008049
12
All entities, as per the above definition, which provide or operate fixed networks intended to provide a service to the public in connection with the production, transport or distribution of drinking water, or supply drinking water to such networks, including:
• EPCOR Edmonton • Toronto Water and Emergency Services • Municipal water and wastewater treatment entities
5. Energy
• All entities, as per the above definition, which provide or operate fixed networks intended to provide a service to the public in connection with the production, transport or distribution of electricity, or the supply of electricity to such networks including Toronto Hydro.
• Services already listed under Canada's current GPA commitments, including:
• engineering related scientific and technical consulting services and technical testing and analysing services • financial management consulting services, public relations services and other management consulting services • maintenance and repair of motor vehicles • market research and public opinion polling services • printing and publishing services • telecommunications services • courier services • construction services
• Works concessions contracts, when awarded by annex 1 , 2 and 3 entities, and provided their value equals or exceeds 5 000 000 SDR, are included under the national treatment regime. N.B: The definition of works concessions and the applicable rules are to be agreed upon during the next Rounds. As noted, these requests would impose permanent constraints on the exercise of procurement authority by sub-national Canadian governments, including municipalities and other local public entities, for the first time.
THE SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS OF CETA PROCUREMENT RULES
The essential requirements for procurement under CETA are essentially threefold and require municipalities and other public bodies:
1. to remove any preference for local companies, goods or services as a requirement for or condition of procurement;
2. to carry out procurement in accordance with the specifications and procedures delineated byCETA; and
34of157 CJI0008049
13
3. to accord EU bidders with recourse, including the right to claim damages, if CETA rules are not strictly met.
We consider these in turn.
1. Procurement ./ttlay not Favour Local Companies, Goods, Services or Workers
First, municipalities must provide access to the domestic procurement markets on a non discriminatory basis. Article IV provides:
Non-Discrimination
1. With respect to any measure regarding covered procurement, each Party, including its procuring entities, shall accord immediately and unconditionally to the goods and services of the other Party and to the suppliers of the other Party offering such goods or services, treatment no less favourable than the treatment the Party, including its procuring entities, accord'> to [EU: its own] [CAN: domestic] goods, services and [EU: locally established] suppliers.
2. With respect to any measure regarding covered procurement; a Party, including its procuring entities, shall not:
(a) treat a locally established supplier less favourably than another locally established supplier on the basis ofthe degree offoreign affiliation or ownership; or
(b) discriminate against a locally established supplier on the basis that the goods or services offered by that supplier for a particular procurement are goods or services ofthe other Party.
Equally important is the fact that these local entities are prohibited from stipulating conditions to a procurement that are intended in any way to encourage local development. In the terminology of international trade law, such a condition is known as an "offset" and is defined under CETA as follows:
ojf,<;et means any condition or undertaking that encourages local development or improves a Party's balance-of-payments accounts, such as the use of domestic content, the licensinfi of technology, investment, counter-trade and similar action or requirement; 1
and, under Article IV :6
With regard to covered procurement, a Party, including its procuring entities, shall not seek, take account of, impose or eriforce any off~·et.
11 Article I(k)
35 of 157 CJI0008049
14
The ban on offsets is arguably the more serious constraint imposed by the regime, and it is important to note that it applies to all procurement contracts regardless of the national pedigree of the prospective bidders.
This means that where CETA rules apply, procurement can no longer be used as a tool to foster local or Canadian economic or sustainable development, facilitate innovation, promote social goals, support food security, or address local or Canadian environmental problems. At a time when procurement is one of the few economic levers available to governments, CETA rules would take it out of the hands of government and other public bodies.
2. Procurement Must be Conducted in Accordance With CETA Rules
The second general obligation of municipalities is to adopt the procurement procedures and practices delineated by CET A. Because the administrative burden and costs of complying with these rules may be significant, and because non-compliance may give rise to damage claims by would-be or unsuccessful bidders, these substantive and procedural rules are briefly described here.
To begin with, procurement documents such as tender requests and requests for proposals must be drafted in accordance with detailed technical specifications set out by the Agreement. 12 Municipalities must also allow sufficient time for EU suppliers to prepare and submit requests for participation and responsive tenders.
The federal government is obliged to publish information about the requirements, conditions and statistics related to public procurement including by municipal governments and the MASH sector. 13 Much of that information would have to be gathered by municipalities and reported in some manner to the federal government.
Detailed and Summary Notices ofIntended Procurements
Municipalities would have direct responsibility for publishing detailed notices 14 of intended procurement, 15 and according to EU proposals this infmmation would be gathered and
12 A1ticle IX
13 Article V, ss. 1-3
14 Article VI: 2. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, each notice of intended procurement shall include: (a) the name and address of the procuring entity and other information necessary to contact the procuring entity and obtain all relevant documents relating to the procurement, and their cost and terms of payment, if any; (b) a description of the procurement, including the nature and the quantity of the goods or services to be procured or, where the quantity is not known, the estimated quantity; (c) for recurring contracts, an estimate, if possible, of the timing of subsequent notices of intended procurement; (d) a description of any options; (e) the time-frame for delivery of goods or services or the duration of the contract; (f) the procurement method that will be used and whether it will involve negotiation or electronic auction; (g) where applicable, the address and any final date for the submission ofrequests for participation in the procurement; (h) the address and the final date for the submission of tenders;
36of157 CJI0008049
15 disseminated free of charge through "single point of access".16 Municipalities are also to be responsible for publishing "a summary notice that is readily accessible, at the same time as the publication of the notice of intended procurement, in English or French." 17 Municipalities are either to be "encouraged" [CAN] or required [EU] to also publish notices of planned procurements as early as possible in each fiscal year.
It is beyond the scope of this assessment to estimate the costs of gathering, translating, and reporting this information. Municipalities may also want to know how the costs of maintaining a single national procurement infmmation system are to be allocated.
Post-Procurement Reporting Requirements
Municipalities would also be responsible for complying with significant post-contract reporting which would entail:
• providing an unsuccessful supplier with an explanation of the reasons why the entity did not select its tender and the relative advantages of the successful supplier's tender, when requested to do so;
• publishing a notice describing the details of the procurement and successful bidder;
• maintaining documentation concerning the procurement for a period of 3 years;
• collecting and reporting relevant statistical information about its procurement, which Canada suggests be presented as annual reports.
3. Dispute Resolution and Enforcement Procedures
It is likely that the most onerous costs for municipalities from having to comply with CETA procurement rules will arise when claims are brought by unsuccessful bidders. Resolving such claims will engage a multi-staged dispute process that would be demanding of staff resources,
(i) the language or languages in which tenders or requests for participation may be submitted, if they may be submitted in a language other than an official language of the Party of the procuring entity; G) a list and brief description of any conditions for participation of suppliers, including any requirements for specific documents or certifications to be provided by suppliers in connection therewith, unless such requirements are included in tender documentation that is made available to all interested suppliers at the same time as the notice of intended procurement; (k) where, pursuant to Article Vlll, a procuring entity intends to select a limited number of qualified suppliers to be invited to tender, the criteria that will be used to select them and, where applicable, any limitation on the number of suppliers that will be permitted to tender; and (1) an indication that the procurement is covered by this Chapter.
15 Article VI 1·2
16 Idem
17 Article VI:4
37 of157 CJI0008049
16 may involve significant legal and compensation costs, and that could potentially derail the entire procurement process.
Stage l: Disclosure oflnformation
Municipal procurement practices and decisions can be challenged under CETA by both the EU and unsuccessful bidders. At first instance, municipalities would be obligated to promptly provide the federal government with information explaining whether a particular procurement was carried out in compliance with CETA rules.
Article XVI:] (Provision ofInformation to Parties) provides:
On request of the other Party, a Party shall provide promptly any information necessary to determine whether a procurement was conductedfairly, impartially and in accordance with this Chapter, including information on the characteristics and relative advantages of the successful tender. (subject to certain exceptions where disclosure would eg. impede law enforcement or legitimate commercial interests)
Stage 2: Challenges by Unsuccessful Bidders
Unsuccessful suppliers are to be accorded the right to challenge the procurement before an independent administrative or judicial body and be given sufficient time to do so. Thus, under Article XVII (Domestic Review Procedures):
2. Each Party shall provide a timely, effective, transparent and non-discriminatory administrative or judicial review procedure through which a supplier may challenge:
(a) a breach ofthe Chapter; or
(b) where the supplier does not have a right to challenge directly a breach of the Chapter under the domestic law of a Party, a failure to comply with a Party's measures implementing this Chapter,
arising in the context of a covered procurement, in which the supplier has, or has had, an interest. The procedural rules for all challenges shall be in writing and m(lde generally available.
3. Each supplier shall be allowed a sufficient period of time to prepare and submit a challenge, which in no case shall be less than 10 days.from the time when the basis ofthe challenge became known or reasonably should have become known to the supplier.
Where a municipality establishes an informal process of review, an appeal to an independent adjudicator must be allowed. 18
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal
13 A1iicle SV11:5.
38 of 157 CJI0008049
17
In Canada such disputes are likely to be resolved by the Canadian Intemational Trade Tribunal, and may engender significant legal costs and delay. The CITT currently has responsibility for inquiring into complaints by potential suppliers concerning procurement by the federal government that is covered by the NAFTA, the AIT and the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (AGP).
There were 131 procurement disputes that proceeded before the CITT last year. The decisions are posted on line and reveal the complexity of such disputes. Many CITT procurement cases involved the patiicipation of several legal teams, and it is not uncommon for such disputes to take months to adjudicate. Moreover, the right to seek judicial review of CITT decisions before the Federal Court of Appeal may also be an option for an unsuccessful bidder that fails before the Tribunal. Not only is the expense of such proceedings typically onerous, but an unsuccessful bidder may be able to tie up the procurement process for many months by making a claim.
Stage 3: Preserving the Rights of Unsuccessful Bidders
In addition to the delay and costs of adjudicating such claims, an unsuccessful bidder is entitled to have its rights preserved while any dispute is resolved, including, for example, by way of an order suspending the procurement process itself.
Article XVII: 7(a) requires each Party to establish procedures that provide for:
rapid interim measures to preserve the supplier's opportunity to participate in the procurement. Such interim measures may result in suspension o( the procurement process. The procedures may provide that overriding adverse consequences for the interests concerned, including the public interest, may be taken into account when deciding whether such measures should be applied. Just cause for not acting shall be provided in writing; [emphasis added]
It is not clear whether the suspension of the procurement process will remain a permissive rather than mandatory feature of the regime, but it is obvious that such an eventuality has the potential to seriously derail the plans of both the municipality and the successful bidder.
Stage 4: Compensating Unsuccessful Bidders
Where the complaint of the unsuccessful bidder is borne out, the review body is to have the authority to require the municipality to compensate the unsuccessful bidder or remedy the breach. Article XVII: 7(b) provides:
where a review body has determined that there has been a breach or a failure as referred to in paragraph 1, corrective action or compensation for the loss or damages suffered, which may be limited to either the costs for the preparation of the tender or the costs relating to the challenge, or both. [emphasis added]
In light of the fact that the contract would have already been awarded to another bidder, it is likely that compensation would be the usual remedy for non-compliance, unless the procurement process has been suspended pending the outcome of the claim. These costs too may be considerable, for the costs of preparing a bid for a significant project can be very substantial.
39of157 CJI0008049
18
Moreover, it is possible that compensation could be payable to more than one unsuccessful bidder where CET A procurement rules are breached.
It is finally worth noting that when formal and expensive legal remedies become available to participants in a process, the threat of litigation may influence the selection process to the prejudice of bidders less able or inclined to litigate if their bid is unsuccessful.
THE SPECIAL CASE OF WATER-RELATED PROCUREMENT
The federal government has made effo11s to preserve its sovereign control over water when negotiating international trade agreements, and has been very deliberate about not committing water supply services under the services or procurement agreements of the WT0. 19 Knowing these sensitivities, the EU has nevertheless made of point of requesting that Canada include drinking water services under the CETA procurement agreement. That request is made in the following terms:
All Annex 1 and Annex 2 entities [sub-national entities including municipalities] which exercise one or more of the activities referred to below and in respect of contracts awarded for the pursuit of any of those activities. And all other entities whose procurement policies are substantially controlled by, dependent on, or influenced by central, regional or local government, and which are engaged in commercial or industrial activities in one or more of the activities listed below.
Drinking water
All entities, as per the above definition, which provide or operate fixed networks intended to provide a service to the public in connection with the production, transport or distribution ofdrinking water, or supply drinking water to such networks, including:.
EPCOR Edmonton
Toronto Water and Emergency Services
Municipal water and wastewater treatment entities.
No doubt the fact that the world's largest water service companies, Veolia and Suez, both of France, and Thames Water of England, are based in EU explains why the EU would make such a problematic request given Canada's reluctance to make such commitments.
The objective of these large water conglomerates is to expand their Canadian markets by winning contracts to establish and/or operate water supply and waste water treatment facilities and services. Companies like Vivendi and RWE (which formerly owned Thames) have bid on
19 See for example, Canada's explanatory notes to Appendix l of the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement which stipulates that: For the European Union, this Agreement shall not apply to contracts awarded by entities in Annexes 1 and 2 in connection with activities in the field of drinking water, energy, transport or telecommunications.
40 of 157 CJI0008049
19 several public-private partnership schemes to design, build, finance and operate water and waste water systems in Canada.
These companies have also been actively engaged in lobbying for stronger international services, investment and procurement rules to promote the privatization of water and wastewater services. From their perspective, international rules would ideally require municipalities and other entities to tender for such services rather than provide them through municipal or publicly owned water utilities.
The EU proposal to include water supply services does not go that far, but of course it would allow an EU-based transnational water company to bid on any privatization or P3 scheme that was tendered. In this scenario, and as we have seen in the case of the CRD wastewater treatment project, a municipality could not stipulate that the successful bidder use Canadian goods or services for carrying out the project, or impose conditions to the tender that would encourage local development in any other way.
Proposed CETA rules would allow a water conglomerate to get its foot in the door whenever a Canadian municipality or covered water utility tenders for any goods (eg. water treatment technology) or services (eg. for engineering, design, construction, or the operational services) relating to water supply systems. That contractual relationship could then provide a platform for the company to expand its interests in the water or waste water systems.
It is also important to understand these procurement rights in the context of proposed CETA investment rules. As noted, Canada is proposing that EU and Canadian investors be given the right to claim damages for any breach by the Party of the investor rights established by CETA. Similar rights have been written into NAFTA and many bi-lateral investment treaties - the latter typically negotiated with developing nations. Transnational water companies such as Vivendi (now Veolia) and Bechtel have invoked the dispute procedures of these treaties to claim damages when their investments in water privatization schemes have gone sour.20 Even the threat of such litigation (claims are often in the $1 Os of rn ill ions) can make it difficult for a municipality to extricate itself from a privatization scheme with a company that has the right to make such a claim even where there is good cause for severing the relationship.
In this way, international investment rules provide an important complement to those that facilitate foreign investment. Thus CETA procurement rules open the door for large water conglomerates to establish a stake in municipal water systems, and CETA investment rules effectively lock in those investments.
The most serious threat to public ownership and control of water arises from the risk of private entities being able to establish a proprietary claim to the water itself. Such claims have in fact already been made against Canada under NAFTA rules - in the Sunbelt.2 1 case arising from a ban
20 A summary of these and other investor-state claims can be found on the website of the World Bank Centre for the Settlement oflnternational Investment Disputes (ICSID), at http://icsid.worldbank.org/JCSID.
21 The Sunbelt claim has been dormant for years, but illustrates the risks associated with allowing foreign investor the open-ended rights engendered by NAFTA investment rules.
41of157 CJI0008049
20 by British Columbia on bulk water exports and in the Abitibi case, arising from Newfoundland's decision to reclaim a water use permit and related hydro-power facilities when the company decided to close a paper mill powered by those resources.
Because P3 schemes commonly span decades, they establish an ongoing interest in the water that is necessary for the services being provided. Indeed, schemes to sell the effluent from waste water treatment plants have already been proposed It is not implausible that international investment rules might be invoked to assert an interest in the underlying resource - water. While such a scenario may seem unlikely, the same was said about the Sunbelt and Abitibi claims as we11.
EXCEPTIONS
While the scope and application of CETA rules would be unprecedented, the proposed Agreement does set out a limited number of exceptions. For present purposes the most important of these are exceptions are the following:
Article II: 3
(a) the acquisition or rental of land, existing buildings or other immovable property or the rights thereon;
{b) non-contractual agreements or any form of assistance that a Party provides, including cooperative agreements, grants, loans, equity infusions, guarantees and.fiscal incentives;
Article IIl:2
Subject to the requirement that such measures are not applied in a manner that would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between Parties where the same conditions prevail or a disguised restriction on international trade, nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to prevent a Party from irnposing or enforcing measures:
(a) necessary to protect public morals, order or safety;
(b) necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health;
(c) necessary to protect intellectual property; or
(d) relating to goods or services of persons with disabilities, philanthropic institutions or prison labour.
Article IX:6
(J'echnical Specifications and Tender Documentation): For greater certainty, a Party, including its procuring entities, may, in accordance with this Article, prepare, adopt or apply technical :.,pecifications to promote the conservation ofnatural resources or protect the environment.
42 of 157 CJI0008049
21
The language of Article III:2 is taken from Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which includes two exceptions that have been invoked, unsuccessfully, to defend environmental measures. The more impo1tant of these, which speaks to the conservation of natural resources (Article XX (g)), is not included under Article In and the omission is obviously deliberate. However, the interpretation of the term "necessary" has established such a high bar for environmental and conservation standards to meet that none have survived the challenge.
As for the right to apply technical specifications to promote the conservation of natural resources or protect the environment (Article IX:6), this exception would not allow for the types of conditionality attached to Ontario's green energy program or allow the Capital Region of British Columbia to use procurement to spur environmental innovation by Canadian companies. In other words, while these environmental exceptions should be noted, they will have no material impact on moderating the prohibition of CETA procurement rules on any procurement condition, green or otherwise, that would encourage, either directly or indirectly, local development.
A CAUTIONARY TALE
Jn February, 2010, Canada entered into the Canada-US. Procurement Agreement (CUSPA)22 which was comprised of three elements, one of which included temporary Canadian procurement commitments for construction projects by many municipalities. In return, the federal government claimed the agreement would secure access to U.S. stimulus spending by exempting Canada from the "Buy American" provisions of the Recovery Act.
However, when the details of the deal were finally made public, it was apparent that Canada had gotten very little in exchange for opening its procurement markets to U.S. construction companies. Remarkably, Canada had agreed to an arrangement that obligated Canadian provinces and municipalities to open their procurement markets to U.S. bidders for construction services, but imposed no reciprocal obligation on U.S. states and municipalities.23
In fact, extensive state and municipal procurement preferences for local companies, goods and services that are ubiquitous in the U.S. were unaltered under CUSPA.24 This means that while a U.S. construction company is entitled to bid on ce1tain Canadian municipal construction projects, Canadian companies have no similar right to bid on U.S. projects. There are also CUSPA asymmetries concerning the scope of goods covered and remedies available for non-compliance that also clearly favour the U.S.
The federal government's claim that it had secured access to U.S. stimulus spending also didn't stand up to scrutiny. According to an uncontroverted assessment carried out by the Canadian Centre on Policy Alternatives (the CCPA), even if taken at face value, Canadian companies
22 Agreement Between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America on Government Procurement, February 3, 2010.
23 Idem., Patt B, Temporary Agreement on Enhanced Coverage, Article 6: Canada's Sub-Central Coverage.
24 Canada maintains an extensive list of US state and local procurement restrictions and preferences, see Government of Canada, U.S. State Procurement Preferences at http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/sell2usgov vendreaugouvusa/opportunities-opp01tunites/opp01tunities-debouches.aspx?lang=eng
43 of 157 CJI0008049
22 gained access to less than 2% of the approximately $US 275 billion of procurement fonded under the Recovery Act.25 But this access is subject to several qualifications and exclusions that greatly reduce the value of even this modest access to US procurement.
"Deal or No Deal"
The obvious question is why the Federal Government would have committed Canadian governments and municipalities to such a one-sided arrangement, and two possible explanations come to mind. The first is that Canadian trade officials are extremely poor negotiators. The other is that the political imperative to conclude a deal was such that the government felt compelled to accept an agreement on any terms, regardless of how disadvantageous the terms may be for Canada.
Unfortunately, CETA negotiations appear to reflect similar dynamics to those at play in the case of CUSPA. The Federal government once again has made a public political commitment to negotiating a ground-breaking free trade deal with a trading partner that did not initially see the rationale for a bi-lateral arrangement with Canada, at least until it understood how determined Canada was to conclude a deal. EC trade negotiators will be as hard-nosed as their U.S. counterparts, and quite ready to take advantage of the federal government's need for a 'successful' outcome to its trade initiative.
These dynamics strongly reinforce the need for municipalities to be vigilant in following the progress of CETA negotiations and to be precise about its collective bottom line. When FCM appeared before the Standing Committee on International Trade to discuss CUSPA, it declined to either endorse or reject that arrangement and reminded the Committee of the principles it had urged the Trade Minister to adopt in pursuing any trade initiative.
We believe it would be prndent to revisit those principles in light of the outcome of CUSPA negotiations, and for municipalities to seek a clear assurance from the Federal Government that it will not trade away the authority of local governments to use procurement to achieve economic, social, environmental, sustainability and other valid public policy goals.
en Shrybman SS:lr/cope 343
25 Scott Sinclair, Negotiating from Weakness, Canada-EU trade treaty threatens Canadian purchasing policies and public services, April 20 l 0. http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/negotiating %E2%80%89weakness
44of157 CJI0008049
PUBLIC ATE C NA ILL P · VATlZE u p c TERSYSTEMS
A report to provincial territorial and municipal governments regarding the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement
December 2010
THE LE: COUNCIL CONSEIL OF CANADIAN S DES CA.NADIENS
45 of 157 CJI0008049
ABOUT THIS REPORT
This report has been prepared by the Canadian Union of Public Employees and the Council of Canadians as part of their joint work on water and trade policy. The report is being distributed to federal, provincial and territorial decision makers, trade negotiators, municipal councilfors, Members of the European Parliament, the media and the public in advance of a sixth round of Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) negotiations, scheduled for Brussels in January 2011. The report cautions provincial and territorial governments in particular about the effect of proposed services, investment and procurement commitments in CETA on public water systems and water management in Canada. It explains the benefits of public ownership and management of water utilities and the importance of public finance for urgently needed municipal and First Nations water system upgrades. Finally, it makes several recommendations on how to protect public water systems from proposed policy restrictions in CHA that would encourage privatization.
ABOUT THE COUNCIL OF CANADIANS
Founded in 1985, the Council of Canadians is Canada's largest citizens' organization, with members and chapters across the country. We work locally, provincially, federally and internationally to promote progressive policies on fair trade, clean water, energy security, public health care, and other issues of social and economic concern to Canadians. The Council does not accept money from corporations or governments, and is sustained entirely by the volunteer energy and financial assistance of its members.
ABOUT THE CANADIAN UNION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
The Canadian Union of Public Employees {CUPE), Canada's largest union, represents more than 605,000 women and men working in municipalities, health care, education, libraries, universities, social services, public utilities, transportation, emergency services and airlines. CUPE members are proud to deliver the majority of Canada's community drinking water and wastewater services.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank all those who gave help and advice in the writing and production of this report. All of the views included in the report are those of CUPE and the Council of Canadians and are not attributable to colleagues in other organizations. Thank you to Merrell-Ann Phare (Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources), Irving Leblanc (Assembly of First Nations), Maude Barlow (Council of Canadians I Food and Water Watch), Scott Sinclair (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives), Steven Shrybman (Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP), Wendy Lyon and Sylvie St. Jean from CUPE, and Brent Patterson, Emma Lui, Matthew Ramsden, Pam Woolridge, Jan Malek and Dylan Penner from the Council of Canadians. Also, a special thanks to Corporate Eu rope Observatory, the Transnational Institute, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, and the Centre for Civic Governance (Columbia Institute) for allowing us to reproduce their material.
AUTHORS: Kelti Cameron, Meera Karunananthan and Stuart Trew PROOFREADING: Wendy Lyon, Sylvie St. Jean DESIGN: Matthew Ramsden
46of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary 2
Introduction 3
Canada's Vulnerability: A public water system in crisis 5
A federal privatization agenda 5
Environmental legislation 7
Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulation 7
Safe Drinking Water for First Notions Act 8
In the interest of the EU 9
Canada-EU Free Trade Negotiations and Public Water 11
Liberalization of water services: From GATS to CETA 12
CHA, investment and water services 13
An investor-to-state dispute process in CETA? 15
Sub-federal procurement and water utilities 17
Alternative visions for procurement 20
Conclusion 22
Endnotes 24
TEXT BOXES 1. 2.
it
Ji. surn1m1'ltY tifRtcornmendations
1 47of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The federal, provincial and territorial governments in Canada are currently negotiating a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with the European Union that presents a serious threat to Canada's public water systems. At the request of Europe's large private water companies, the provinces and territories are considering including drinking water and wastewater services in their CETA commitments. EU negotiators are also asking that Canada's municipalities and their water utilities be included in a chapter on public procurement. Initial provincial-territorial offers in services, procurement and investment will be sent to the European Commission early in January 2011.
If CETA is negotiated on these terms, it would be the first time that Canada has allowed our drinking water to be fully covered under a trade treaty and the first instance that a trade agreement has covered municipal procurement of water services. The services and procurement commitments proposed in CETA would be protected by strong investor rights. The effect of these rights as they relate to the services and procurement provisions would be to lock in existing private water contracts, restrict how local governments regulate the activity and investment of private water companies, and to encourage more private sector involvement in a number of public service sectors, including water.
The federal, provincial and territorial governments are being asked to make these commitments to the EU during what has been described as an infrastructure crisis in Canada. Municipalities and First Nations communities are under pressure to upgrade aging water facilities, and to meet new environmental and safety legislation without access to proper financial resources. At least $31 billion is needed to cover the cost of the facility upgrades, and the estimated cost of the new sanitation regulations is $20 billion. Not surprisingly, the private water industry sees leaky pipes as an opportunity to increase its role in water delivery and treatment. Existing government programs, including the Building Canada Plan, and funding initiatives under Public Private Partnershps Canada (PPP Canada Inc.), encourage privatization as a condition of receiving federal money for municipal infrastructure projects.
Experiments with privatization have failed all over the world, and a growing trend in Europe, the United States and Latin America is toward remunicipalization (or de-privatization) of private and P3 water projects. Time and again, partial or full privatization of water systems has been a disaster; accountability disappears, water rates go up, workers are laid off, service levels decline. Once public revenues are transformed into private profits remunicipalization will become next to impossible under the services, investment and procurement rules set out in CETA. There are no economic or social gains from agreeing to the EU requests as they relate to water services. There are only unnecessary and costly risks to Canada's municipalities and First Nations.
Provincial, territorial and municipal governments must take immediate action to protect Canada's public water systems from decay and privatization. As one of the wealthiest countries in the world, solving the infrastructure crisis in municipalities and First Nations communities is a matter of political will, not adequate funding. First, government procurement and trade-in-services commitments related to water systems must be rejected in CETA. Provincial and territorial governments must work with municipalities and the federal government to develop a public funding plan to upgrade Canada's neglected water infrastructure. Finally, all levels of government must be transparent with Canadians about the effect that CETA will have on the provision of public services and development of social policy. They should seek informed consent from Canadians on what provisions a trade agreement with the EU should and should not include.
2 48 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
PUBLIC WATER FOR SALE: HOW CANADA WILL PRIVATIZE OUR PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
A report to provincial, territorial and municipal governments regarding the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement
INTRODUCTION
Canada and the European Union are currently negotiating a broad free trade agreement that threatens Canada's already challenged public water systems. At the request of Europe's large private water multinationals, the provinces and territories are considering including drinking water and wastewater services in their services commitments under the proposed Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). EU negotiators are also asking that Canada's municipalities and their water utilities be included in a chapter on public procurement. If CETA is negotiated on these terms, it would be the first time that Canada has allowed our drinking water to be fully covered under a trade treaty and the first instance that a trade agreement has covered municipal procurement of water services. 1 The goal is clearly to encourage and facilitate the privatization of Canada's public municipal water systems.
The majority of our water and sanitation services in Canada are publicly owned, operated and delivered. Water and other essential services such as health care, public transit, postal services and energy act as important inputs into all economic activities, which reinforces the need for their delivery to be accountable to the public. Our public services provide stability and ensure a decent quality of life for all Canadians. They further act as equalizers in our increasingly unequal society by providing support to the most disadvantaged members of our communities. Our governments oversee our public services in the public interest and must not consider handing control over to corporations whose interest is profit. The inclusion of water and wastewater services, utilities and municipalities in CETA would undermine public control and accountability of this vital sector while offering no real gains to domestic or industrial water users. Canada's drinking and sewage systems are important community assets. Public drinking water and sanitation services are a human right and the lifeblood of well-functioning communities.
Unfortunately, today these systems that were built by generations before us are under enormous stress. Municipalities and First Nations communities across the country require critical water facility upgrades to meet present and future needs. According to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), at least $31 billion is needed for water facility upgrades alone. Proposed new federal water sanitation standards would add $20 billion2 to that figure. Providing safe drinking water to First Nations communities witl raise the price tag even further. Not surprisingly, Canada's municipalities have been lobbying the federal government for long term funding in order to meet these critical needs. Though these numbers may seem high they are not out of reach. Canada is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. The problem is a matter of priorities and political will - not financial capacity.
Instead of preserving and improving our public water systems, the current federal and some provincial governments seem to have other priorities. They are encouraging municipalities to look elsewhere, to the private sector, for water infrastructure financing. Meanwhile, the federal, provincial and territorial governments are negotiating a free trade agreement with the European Union (EU) that would lock in
3 49of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
existing contacts w ith foreign corporations, restrict how local governments regulate the activity of private water companies, and encourage more private sector involvement in a number of public service sectors, including water.3
According to an August draft of an EU Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) of the proposed agreement, this is entirely the point of including water services in CETA:
Canada-EU trade could a/low deeper penetration of EU-based water utilities in Canada. This could lead to changes in water management and water consumption ... Increased liberalisation in this sector could provide benefits to EU environmental service providers as they are able to capitalise from greater market access to Canada's water management system.4
For years, international development and public interest groups have warned that the European Commission uses trade negotiations to push for trade rules that encourage and lock in water privatization. The public has always fought back against these trade agreements on the grounds that they would impede the ability of governments to provide for the vital drinking water and sanitation needs of their residents. Numerous examples from around t he world show that experiments with the privatization of water and sanitation services have led to rate hikes and cut-offs to lower income households, poor environmental stewardship and lack of transparency and public accountability among many other shortcomings. This has led to a growing anti-privatization movement calling for water and sanitation services to be declared a human right that must be accessible and affordable to all. While EU and US-based water firms have made global inroads in private water delivery and treatment, the growing trend in Eu rope, the US and Latin Amerrca is now remunicipalization-the bringing back into public hands of failed privatizations. CETA would be taking Canada down a well trodden but ultimately rejected path.
Public pressure is now essential to convince the Canadian provinces and territories, which are at the negotiating table for the first time, to reject including drinking and wastewater services and utilities in their commitments in CETA. Notwithstanding the need for sanitation and infrastructure upgrades, the high quality of public water management in Canada and the proven failures of water privatization around the world means there can be few if any efficiency gains from water services liberalization. The agenda of EU negotiators is clearly to pry open Canada's largely public water systems to private involvement and then to enforce a regime that facilitates privatization and commercialization through the terms of the CETA investment, services and procurement provisions.
This paper will first look at the internal pressures on Canadian municipalities to privatize public water systems which has created fertile ground for CETA's privatization agenda. It will then explore the EU trade agenda pertaining to services liberalization before examining the key provisions of the CETA text as they relate to water services. 5
While provincial and territorial government s must fully exclude water from all government procurement and trade-in-services commitments in CETA, investment protections in the text could still pose a significant threat to public water delivery and treatment systems. We include several recommendations on how to safeguard public water systems from Canada's future trade commitments, and on the need to maintain and upgrade Canada's suffering municipal water systems by keeping them public.
4 50 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
CANADA'S VULNERABILITY - A PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM IN CRISIS
In 2010, with few exceptions, Canadian water and wastewater systems remain in public hands. While the majority of Canadian municipalities own, operate and manage our drinking water and sanitation facilities, and despite strong public support for the public provision of water, there is cause for concern that this situation may change.
In May 2010, the City of Winnipeg approved a 30-year deal to potentially hand over the design, construction and partial operations of its wastewater treatment facility upgrades to the French multinational corporation Veolia Environment. The total cost of these upgrades is expected to exceed $660 million. At this time, it is no secret that Canadian municipalities are being underfunded and experiencing what is widely understood to be an infrastructure crisis. In search of capital, municipalities are being persuaded to consider the private sector.
The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) has calculated that an investment of at least $31 billion is needed to maintain and repair water infrastructure across Canada. This shortfall exists in the context of an overall infrastructure deficit of over $123 billion. Receiving only eight cents for every tax dollar collected in Canada, our municipalities are being stretched to the limit.
A large number of Canadian water and wastewater systems are in desperate need of upgrades. Water supply, wastewater and storm water systems are approaching the end of their service life. Many older cities have infrastructure that is over 100 years old and facing serious deterioration. Montreal currently loses 40% of its municipal water through leaky pipes, while 34% of Canadian municipal water pipes will meet their service life by 2020.6 The situation in our First Nations communities is even worse. According to Health Canada, as of October 31, 2010 there were 116 First Nations communities under drinking water advisories, while 49 First Nations water systems were dassified as "high risk" in March 2010. 7
There has been significant investment in infrastructure in recent years. The problem is that it has not been sufficient to meet the infrastructure needs of municipalities and First Nations communities. 8 A related issue of concern is the fact that these federal funding initiatives directly and indirectly support a broad privatization agenda to the detriment of our communities.
A Federal Privatization Agenda
In 2007, the Federal government rolled all infrastructure investments into the Building Canada Plan. This was to be a $33 billion investment in infrastructure over seven years. The plan had many components but two important features were the Building Canada Fund (BCF) and the Public Private Partnership {P3) Fund.
The P3 Fund was the only source of new funding in this plan and is explicit in its promotion of privatization. This $1.25-billion fund was a massive subsidy to promote the use of P3s in the procurement of public infrastructure by provincial, territorial, municipal and First Nations governments. To administer the fund, a Crown Corporation called PPP Canada Inc. was created with a mandate to "develop the Canadian market for public-private partnerships for the supply of public infrastructure in the public interest." Their interest in municipal infrastructure is not a secret and is certainly cause for concern.
Municipal proposals are actively being solicited for a multitude of infrastructure projects including water and wastewater treatment. Several cities in Canada have applied for funding for their drinking water facilities. And of the 73 proposals PPP Canada Inc. received tn its second round of calls that closed in the summer of 2010, 35 involved municipal projects, including seven wastewater projects.9 The government is particularly interested in gaining access to First Nations communities and in "bundling" several small rural water treatment facilities for private operation.
5 51of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: flow Canada Wilf Privatize Our Public Water Systems
Under the BCF, cities that applied for funding had to undergo a mandatory P3 screening process for large projects over $50 million. Municipalities had to go through an elaborate process involving expensive legal fees before they were allowed to exercise their right to keep services public. In 2006, Whistler had to spend over $1 million dollars in legal fees before giving in to public pressure to maintain a public water system. Although the P3 screen was put on hold for federal stimulus projects since 2009 there is nothing to suggest that the underlying political agenda has changed in any way.
Federal and provincial underfunding has created the conditions for the privatization of public services. Despite their well documented failures all over the world, and a growing trend in Europe, the United States, and Latin America to remunicipalize private and P3 water projects, our federal government and several provinces are promoting P3s as a legitimate solution to address the infrastructure deficit, including our leaky pipes and deteriorating water facifities.
PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERS Hf PS: A FAILED MODEL GLOBALLY
6 52of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Wi/I Privatize Our Public Water Systems
To present P3s as a viable funding option is to ignore the reality that P3s cost more over the long term, are highly risky, provide lower service quality, and lock governments into long term contracts with the private sector, effectively undermining local control and democratic, accountable processes. In the water sector in particular~ there is no empirical evidence that the private sector can outperform public utilities. Virtually all P3s in Canada have been justified on the basis that they are more efficient and transfer large amounts of risk to the private sector. But Ron Parks, one of British Columbia's most respected forensic accountants, recently calculated that the cost of privatization would add $116 million to Be's Capital Regional District (CRD) sewage treatment system.13
Remunicipalization or de-privatization, also referred to as contracting-in, would become much more complicated once the rights of European water corporations are entrenched in an international trade agreement with a dispute settlement mechanism that is unaccountable to the local public and above domestic law. Even when a private company fails to meet its end of the bargain, breaking a contract could be declared expropriation under international trade law, forcing governments to compensate for millions of dollars in lost profits.
Environmental Legislation
WASTEWATER SYSTEMS EFFLUENT REGULATIONS
New regulations proposed by the federal government may render our municipalities particularly vulnerable to the interests and demands of EU water corporations to increase private investment in Canadian water services. A draft set of regulations called the Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations was released in March 2010 with the goal to harmonize regulations across Canada to protect our water sources from wastewater effluent. While the details are still being negotiated, it is possible that these changes to the federal Fisheries Act will require as many as 1000 Canadian wastewater facilities to upgrade their treatment levels to a secondary level of treatment, at a cost of over $20 billion. This would bring to over $50 billion the total municipa I water deficit.
To date, the federal government has not presented our cities with a realistic plan to cover these costs. The disturbing element here is the use of necessary environmental regulations to download costs onto cash-strapped municipalities, which ought to be borne by all three levels of government. Efforts to set and enforce regulations that ensure our water is clean and safe and that our environment is protected should be supported. But with CETA on the horizon they could become a double-edged sword. The timing of these new regulations could not be better for multinational corporations looking to gain access to municipal water services in Canada.
In Europe and elsewhere in the world, there is a growing concern that such regulations will become a gateway to the privatization of our wastewater facilities. In fact, they have been identified by the industry as an opportunity for private investment. According to a Global Water Intelligence Report in 2006:
Wastewater treatment, which for a long time was perceived as an impediment to economic growth, is becoming - both in central and provincial government policies - a force of economic development itself. This is now true across the region (China) and, in wealthy or fast growing economies; it is becoming the single largest source of business for private water companies. 14
In Canada, these new regulations will legally require our cities to invest ln wastewater facilities despite other pressing needs in the community and regardless of their economic situation or fiscal capacity. Clearly, higher standards for water treatment are a good thing in the long run. But according to the FCM, without proper funding, these regulations could result in the largest property tax increase in Canadian history.
7 53 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
Furthermore, without adequate funding from senior levels of government for municipalities to meet these higher water quality standards, CETA could well become the mechanism that allows multinational water corporations greater access to our public water. Small, rura[ and First Nations communities whose population and property tax base may not generate sufficient revenue to support the necessary facility upgrades are particularly vulnerable to these privateers lurking in the shadows.
COMMITTED TO THE ENVIRONMENT YOU SAY ...
» RECOMMENDATION 1: The federal government should establish a National Public Water Fund to finance water and wastewater upgrades to be cost-shared with provincial and municipal governments.
An immediate injection of $3. 7 billion in the 2011 federal budget should go into this fund with at least $1 billion earmarked for the cost of meeting the new sanitation standards. These will be cost-shared with provincial and municipal governments. Municipal water transfers could then reach a yearly target of $3.1 billion between 2012 and 2022 to pay down the infrastructure deficit in 10 years. An additional $150 million per year should cover training, certification and testing with funding restricted to publicly-operated facilities.
SAFE DRINKING WATER FOR FIRST NATIONS ACT
Bill S-11 titled "Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act" was tabled in Parliament on May 26, 2010. The stated objective of ensuring First Nations have access to safe drinking water was swiftly called into question when the federal government did not make clear how these regulations would be implemented. On June 9, 2010 the National Chief issued a national bulletin on the issue stating that
BiJJ S-11, does not guarantee that First Nations will have access to safe drinking water. Without funding for infrastructure/facilities, skills, resources, training and support, safe drinking water for First Nations will not be guaranteed . ... the AFN is calling on the federal government to engage in real action to address the capacity gap as well as working towards a regulatory regime that reflects our rights, jurisdiction and delivers equitable and guaranteed access to safe drinking water. 17
Among the many concerns regarding Bill S-11 are the fact that First Nations communities were never consulted, and the fact that Canada will have the authority to force First Nations into agreements with third parties to operate First Nation water systems. The private sector will have the ability to enter First Nations as owners and operators of water and wastewater facilities due to a lack of infrastructure, resources and training within First Nations. Private operation of public facilities can lead to higher costs of service and user fees downloaded to First Nations resulting in further inequality. An added problem is that set-asides
8 54of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
for First Nations companies, an important means for provincial-territorial governments to encourage economic development, may be lost to the CETA procurement chapter.
» RECOMMENDATION 2: The federal government should respect the right of First Nations communities to prior informed consent, and must consult and include them in any negotiations having to do with the water and wastewater facilities on First Nations reserves. Direct financial support will also be required to improve water and wastewater facilities on First Nations reserves and communities beyond 2012 when funding for the First Nations Water and Wastewater Action Plan {FNWWAP) expires.
In the Interest of the EU
Given this context, it is no surprise that Europe's largest and most notorious private service providers, including the world's largest water companies, Veolia Environment and Suez, have signed a joint business declaration "in Support of a Canada-EU Trade and Investment Agreement."18 In the absence of proper funding, new water regulations render our municipal and territorial drinking and sanitation facilities increasingly vulnerable under this trade and investment agreement. Requirements to consider private public partnerships and incentives for municipalities further entrench opportunities for private water companies.
Allowing these corporations to gain even a foot in the door of our water facilities is problematic when we consider what is at risk. To enter into operating agreements with a private water corporation effectively amounts to signing away the public's right to control its water. Once our water services are privatized, generally through multi-decade contracts, it will be very difficult to bring them back under public control no matter the consequences in terms of poor service or higher rates.
LABOUR MOBILITY AND REGULATORY HARMONIZATION
aI though not (lJ'i ; c.ritl~ I ~5 th eJ;~rvl<::~s, ptocurement/a nd JnV!f!i;tnt~nt 15 hoW'EU' con1pMies
9 55 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
Canadian provinces, territories and municipalities must resist the urge to turn to the private sector to fill these desperate financing and staffing deficits. Funding is not a fundamental issue. The problem in Canada is largely one of political will, not money. But the will of the federal government is toward further tying the hands of provincial, territorial and municipal governments in the interest of supporting the commercial ambitions of the EU's largest water corporations.
We will now look more closely at how the proposed Canada-EU free trade agreement will support this privatization agenda and exert pressure to dismantle and privatize Canada's public water system.
10 56of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
CANADA-EU TRADE NEGOTIATIONS AND PUBLIC WATER
Canada-European Union free trade negotiations are now a year old and progressing rapidly, according to federal and provincial negotiators. There have been five rounds of trade talks, which alternate between Ottawa and Brussels. Provinces and territories are at several of the negotiating tables at the insistence of the EU Commission - the policymaking branch of the EU - because many of the EU's priorities for CETA fall under sub-federal jurisdiction. These include government procurement, investment and services, technical barriers to trade, labour and labour mobility, environment, monopolies and state enterprises, and regulatory cooperation. From this list of areas we can get a sense of the scope of the CETA negotiations, which clearly goes beyond what most people understand as trade. It is the stated aim of the EU Commission to achieve legislative and regulatory convergence in a number of these areas. Canada as the smaller partner will be expected to make the majority of legislative and regulatory changes.
While much of the architecture of the CETA text has been completed, provincial-territorial offers to the EU in the areas of their jurisdiction have not yet been sent to the European Commission. 21 Initial offers regarding procurement, services and investment will be exchanged within the next few months. These will be the basis for further negotiation, arm-twisting and pressure for deeper commitments. Contentious issues such as government procurement, intellectual property, and agricultural tariffs and policy will probably not be resolved until the final stages of the negotiations. The next round will take place in Brussels, January 17 to 21, 2011, followed by a seventh and perhaps final round in Ottawa in April 2011. The Government of Canada hopes to have a final agreement signed by October 2011.
As we have se'en so far, the needs of Canadian municipalities around water infrastructure are clear, as are the problems with relying on the private sector to meet those needs. Already there is pressure on municipalities federally and at the sub-federal level to privatize essential services such as water distribution and treatment. It is in this context that we must understand the Canada-EU free trade negotiations as providing yet another tool to private water companies to see this vision through.
Public water services in Canada are threatened in three related ways by the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement:
i) Through EU requests to include drinking water and wastewater services in provincial and territorial services commitments.
ii) Through strong investment protections as they relate to services and market access commitments, and which may grant EU investors rights to underlying water.
iii) Through the proposed inclusion of provincial-territorial water agencies, municipalities and water utilities in the CETA procurement chapter, which could seriously compromise the ability of local governments to manage public water systems.
Each of these will be treated separately below but it is the way the three will work together to encourage and then protect privatization that is of most concern.
Until very recently, provincial, territorial and municipal purchasing and contracting policies have been excluded from Canada's international trade agreements. Previous federal governments have also pledged to safeguard water and water services for human use in all Canadian international trade negotiations. But, under the current federal government, this sensible caution has now been thrown to the wind. Preliminary studies suggest that the procurement chapter will also only increase pressure on municipalities, provinces and territories to contract out or privatize essential social services, including water. Before we get to a detailed look at the CETA text, some international context around the controversy of liberalizing services is useful.
11 57 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
Liberalization of water services: From GATS to CETA
Services range from birth (midwifery) to death {burial); the trivial (shoe-shining) to the critical (heart surgery); the personal (haircutting) to the social (primary education); low tech (household help) to high-tech {satellite communications); and from our wants {retail sales of toys) to our needs (water distribution).22
The controversy over services liberalization at the World Trade Organization (WTO) is long and unsettled. The word "liberalization" is synonymous with "deregulation" in many contexts, and refers to an emphasis on competition and the free flow of capital in the exchange of goods or provision of services. One of the top concerns for developing and developed countries alike relates to the constraints that services agreements, in particular, the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), put on the capacity of governments to regulate in those sectors covered by the agreement.
The ultimate goal of GATS, its so-called built-in agenda for expansion, and subsequent free trade agreements designed to move beyond the level of ambition at the WTO is to create commercial opportunities for private service providers by reducing the role of government in the provision of committed services. According to the International Forum on Globalization, these agreements take the decision on whether or not to privatize water services out of the hands of communities and governments and put it into the hands of trade bureaucrats tasked with enforcing the terms of the agreement. 23
The WTO, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD}, as well as major European water firms have attempted to contradict these claims. The WTO argues it is not "after your water" and that GATS rules would not interfere with the decisions of governments to maintain public monopolies in water delivery. As we will see below, these promises ring hollow when you look at the terms of the agreements. The intent of other Bretton Woods institutions, such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF}, must also be taken into account. These economic governance bodies heavily pushed privatization onto the developing world in the 1980s and 1990s - notably water privatizations - as a condition of receiving loans.
Though the IMF and World Bank have since admitted their "structural adjustment" programs were too aggressive, their interest in private water remains strong. The International Financial Corporation (IFC), part of the World Bank Group, is currently helping fund Veolia Environment's expansion into Eastern Europe through Veolia Vada, which is 90 per cent owned by the French firm. Wealthy developed countries such as the EU and United States continue to have a commercial interest in privatizing public services globally. As the primary drivers of including strong services commitments at the WTO, it is dear these governments see services agreements as a way to open up new opportunities and lock in existing privatizations through binding trade rules at the WTO. The lobby group International Financial Services London put it concisely in 2002 when it claimed "Opening service markets to foreign providers (which is what GATS is designed to do) is self-evidently inconsistent with maintaining public monopolies."24
The expansion of services and procurement markets for EU-based multinational firms remains a first priority of the European Commission according to its newly released trade agenda toward 2015:
Cutting tariffs on industrial and agricultural goods is still important~ but the brunt of the challenge lies elsewhere. What will make a bigger difference is market access for services and investment, opening public procurement, better agreements on and enforcement of protection of [intellectual property rights], unrestricted supply of raw materials and energy and, not in the least, overcoming regulatory barriers including via the promotion of international standards. 25
12 58 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
Any doubts that the ultimate goal is not privatization of public services, including water, were eliminated in a recently released draft inception report - the first step in a Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA} of the Canada-EU free trade agreement -which suggested:
Water utilities in Canada are mostly publicly owned and water consumption per capita is among the highest in the world. Canada-EU trade could allow deeper penetration of EU-based water utilities in Canada. This could lead to changes in water management and water consumption. Public control and management of water resources is a sensitive issue in Canada and it is likely that despite potential environmental benefits, stakeholder concerns will focus on public ownership and the risk of higher cost of water and its impact on low-income families. 26
Claims of environmental gains from water privatization, based on assumptions of increased conservation, are refuted by most real-world examples (see examples of remunicipalization below}, and the SIA does not elaborate on the loss of democratic control or accountability from going the private route. But the draft report is clear on the commercial gains EU water companies could see in Canada:
Increased liberalisation in this sector could provide benefits to EU environmental service providers as they are able to capitalise from greater market access to Canada's water management system. Conversely, Canadian providers of environmental services could realise gains from removal of requirements of commercial presence by several EU Member States.
In other words, water services liberalization is very much intended to open market opportunities for private water firms, whether full privatizations or long-term operational contracts. The preliminary assessment for the EU Commission indicates a two-way opening, so that public water management in Europe may also be threatened.
Considering the continued controversy around services liberalization as it affects essential public services - a major sticking point delaying ratification of the EU's free trade agreements with African, Pacific and Caribbean nations - it is disturbing to see that the federal, provincial and territorial governments in Canada are actively considering including water delivery and water treatment in its trade agreement with the EU. According to Canada's lead negotiator, the decision may be entirely up to the provinces how far they go down the path toward offering these firms new rights to invest in public water.
CETA, investment and water services
The new EU trade direction released this fall suggests the goal of the EU in trade agreements is to seek coherence between internal and external policy, for example "a more complete internal market for services and more systematic regulatory cooperation with major third countries ... to facilitate trade in services and the dismantling of behind-the-border barriers!' Canada's transit, hea Ith and energy services, remain largely in public hands whereas they are highly privatized in the EU. An important goal of EU negotiators in the CETA talks is to "liber.ate" some of that public capital to the benefit of large EU-based service providers. More than tariff elimination, the EU is looking to CETA to help it export a regulatory regime designed to encourage competition and the private delivery of many services Canadians would consider essential public services, including public water.
How will this be achieved through CETA? Services commitments in CETA would, in general, prohibit performance requirements for private investors, such as conditions that oblige them to hire or purchase inputs locally, and limits on the number and type of investments. The CETA rules would apply regardless if a firm was foreign or domestic.27 This is not to say t hat these firms would operate in a totally unregulated
13 59 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
environment, but that regulations must fit within the strict limits set out in the services chapter of the agreement. These include:
• An outright ban, regardless of nationality of the firm, on any limitations on the number of investments, whether in the form of quotas, monopolies, exclusive service suppliers or the requirement of an economic needs test;
• A ban on limitations on the total value of transactions or assets, the total number of operations, or the total quantity of output;
• A ban on any limitations on the participation of foreign capital {maximum percentage limits on foreign shareholders or the total value of foreign investment); and
• A probation of measures requiring a certain type of legal entity or joint venture to perform a given economic activity in a committed sector, or measures limiting the total number of persons that can be employed in a particular sector. 28
The result of these services commitments is that investment in a committed sector, defined very broadly, becomes locked in and is protected with a strong dispute resolution system. On the other hand, states do not retain similar guarantees that they will be able to hold foreign investors to account when contracts go awry. For example, cost overruns, exorbitant rate hikes or lacklustre service that frequently accompany water privatizations become difficult or very expensive to fix without infringing on the rights of water corporations under these services and investment provisions. To commit a service sector in a free trade deal is to commit to private delivery. Governments' ability to regulate in these sectors is also restricted; committed sectors become venues for profit-making removed to a large extent from effective public control.
Supporters of CETA argue that the public delivery of these services will be unaffected by new commitments to the agreement's services chapter. But the exclusion in CETA for services provided by government holds only when the service is provided neither on a commercial nor competitive basis. Once there is some degree of for-profit delivery within a committed sector, services commitments come into play, forcing open the sector to private competition.29 It is this lock-in effect of services commitments -the "foot in the door" argument, which we will revisit in the procurement section below - that makes them so attractive to groups like the European Services Forum (ESF), a powerful corporate lobby group with an interest in financial sector liberalization in particular but also water, with Veolia Environment one of its 30 members.30
In other EU trade negotiations, only wastewater services have been sought and, in the case of the EU-Korea Free Trade Agreement, included. But to split the intimately connected delivery and treatment of water does not make sense. Both are more naturally and most accountably delivered as fully public services. Elsewhere in the world, wastewater is given advanced treatment to make it suitable for drinking. Water services and investment commitments risk limiting the ability of municipalities or provincial water agencies to set transparent community-wide or regional water management plans.
As mentioned already, water services are in Europe, as in Canada, largely in publtc hands. The majority ·of private contracts are in the form of concessions to private firms - more often than not with one of the large French multinationals, Veolia Environment and Suez. There has been in the past, pressure from the European Commission to come up with a Europe-wide water policy that would level out widely divergent regulatory environments. For example in England there exists full privatization, in Germany hundreds of small-scale water companies run a largely public network of small utilities), while other countries are hostile to water privatization in any form. Coming up with a unified regulatory regime in the EU will not be an easy task. 31
14 60 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
Seen in this light, it is possible the EU Commission sees the inclusion of water services in CETA as a game changer, internationally and domestically. It would be a wedge with which to provoke internal reforms on water regulation and move other countries to include water services in their GATS commitments at the WTO. It is also possible that some provinces, Ontario for example, which is seeking to develop a domestic water technology and water services industry, see commitments on water services as an opportunity to open future ma rkets in the EU. The problem for these provinces is that EU firms clearly have the competitive advantage as it is. Competition would likely wipe out any fledgling domestic industry. And without excluding water utilities, municipalities or water-funding provincial agencies from the procurement chapter, the province will lose all levers with which to effectively grow its local industry.
» RECOMMENDATION 3: Canada's provinces and tl;!rritories must seek a clear exemption for water services (delivery and treatment) from any commitments they make under CETA.
An investor-to-state dispute process in CETA?
If Canada gets its way, EU water multinationals will have an even more powerfu I tool at their disposal to deregulate water services in the form of an investor-state dispute settlement process. This heavy-handed tool offers investors the right to challenge government decisions (laws or regulations) affecting their profits in front of private tribunals. There is no requirement to exhaust domestic legal avenues first, and the provisions of existing investment chapters, for example in NAFTA and Canada's other bilateral trade deals, allow companies to claim damages for indirect expropriation of projected future profits - not just actual monetary losses.
Multinational water companies have used international investment dispute bodies to claim damages in contracts gone awry in Bolivia, Argentina and Tanzania . For example, in 1999 Azurix, a subsidiary of Enron Corporation, paid for the rights to provide water and sanitation services to Buenos Aires for 30 years. There were complaints of pollution due to mismanagement of water treatment services and the Argentine government ended up issuing a warning to citizens to boil their water after an algae outbreak. Customers refused to pay for the water and in the economic crisis of 2001 Azurix demanded a contract renegotiation and higher water rates.
Azurix took Argentina to the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes under the terms of a bilateral investment treaty with the United States. The company claimed the government of Argentina violated their rights to protection from expropriation without compensation, "fair and equitable treatment" and other standards. The private trade tribunal found in favour of Azurix, fining Argentina $165 million in compensation. According to the Canadian Council for International Cooperation, this case "demonstrates the high price that can be paid when governments decide to serve the public good in ways later deemed by a tribunal to be contrary to investor interests."32
Canadian firms have used the process to challenge environmental and public health decisions abroad. Highly controversial is the CAFTA (Central America Free Trade Agreement) investment suit against the government of El Salvador by Canadian mining firm Pacific Rim. The company is using a US subsidiary in order to invoke CAFTA's protections against expropriation to challenge delays to a mining project in El Salvador due to concerns about the effect on water and the environment.
The process is certainly not limited to the developing world. The list of investor challenges to Canadian public policy is long and the number of challenges increased dramatically over the past five years. 33 For example, Dow Agrosci ences is challenging Quebec's cosmetic pesticide ban as an indirect expropriation of profits while Bilcon, another US firm, wants compensation for its failed attempt to establish an environmentally disruptive quarry in Nova Scotia.
15 61of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
Of considerable relevance to water policy in Canada is the very recent NAFTA Chapter 11 settlement with AbitibiBowater, which may have established a de facto right to water for corporations that rely heavily on the resource for industrial activities.
AbitibiBowater, a Canadian-based pulp and papermaking company registered in the United States, complained under NAFTA that its assets, as well as its water and timber rights, had been unfairly expropriated by the Newfoundland and Labrador government. Though private property rights do not exist in Canada as they do in the United States, the current federal government nonetheless settled under the full terms of the Abitibi complaint, meaning that the $130-million settlement included a payoff fort he investor's loss of water rights.
The consequences of this decision for other water-intensive industries, including tar sands development but also the bottled water industry and future private investment in water delivery, are potentially very significant. We use the example here to show that while states may sometimes cautiously avoid challenging the domestic policies of their trading partners, private firms are less scrupulous. The combination of water services liberalization and a binding investor-state dispute resolution process offers too high a risk to Canadian and European communities.
The overwhelming negative impact of investment protections in trade regimes, on human rights, democracy and environmental policy, has led 46 arbitration experts to endorse a new public statement which concludes: States should review their investment treaties with a view to withdrawing from or renegotiating them in light of the concerns expressed above; should take steps to replace or curtail the use of investment treaty arbitration; and should strengthen their domestic justice system for the benefit of all citizens and communities, including investors. 34
» RECOMMENDATION 4: Under no circumstances should Canada negotiate an investor state dispute resolution chapter in CETA. The provinces and territories should push the federal government to remove investment from the scope of the agreement while a new model investment treaty is developed with input from the public, and based on Canada's experience with Chapter 11 in NAFTA.
REMUNICIPALIZING WATER SERVICES
16 62of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
Sub-federal procurement and water utilities
The last but perhaps most immediate threat to Canada's public water systems may come from the unlikeliest of places. Canada is in many ways pioneering, or should we say playing the guinea pig, when it comes to committing sub-federal procurement by provincial, territorial and municipal agencies in trade agreements. The consequences of recent commitments, and those proposed by the EU in CETA's procurement chapter, would be to further erode policy space of local governments without offering any tangible economic gains to Canadian municipalities.
On February 16, 2010, the Harper government both signed and made public an agreement with the United States-the Canada-US Agreement on Government Procurement -that permanently committed a list of provincial and territorial departments to disciplines on public spending.
17 63 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
The agreement was in two parts:
1. First, it opened up Canada's commitments in the plurilateral WTO Agreement on Government Procurement to include a new list of provincial and territorial government agencies and departments. Sub-federal governments were previously excluded from Canada's GPA commitments.
2. Second, it submitted to the WTO a temporary bilateral arrangement between Canada and the United States that went beyond the GPA commitments to include municipalities for construction projects only, and only until September 2011.
Canada's lead CETA negotiator explained to the Commons Committee on International Trade in November 2010 that the CETA procurement chapter will be much more ambitious:
We 'II be covering a lot more ground in terms of the range of areas that would be subject to government procurement obligations and there won't be as many exemptions as there were in that particular agreement. So it will be much broader than that was, although that [the Canada-U.S. deal) could be seen as a starting point. 37
The so-called "Buy America" deal signed earlier this year was highly imbalanced, opening about $25 billion worth of new contracts to US firms in exchange for perhaps $4-5 billion worth of 2008 US stimulus cash (which has largely dried up as ofwriting).38 Nothing in the agreement will insulate Canadian firms from future "Buy American'' conditions on infrastructure spending. As of February 2011- there was a one-year standstill on the deal - and until October 2011 (unless the agreement is extended), US firms will be able to challenge lost bids on construction tenders above $8 million in Canadian municipalities without reciprocal recourse for Canadian firms in the US. If this is how the Harper government negotiates, there is little chance of Canadians receiving a fair commercial deal under CETA.
Under the procurement agreement proposed by the EU, covered provincial, territorial and municipal entities must abide by three general conditions:
1. A ban on "offsets" defined as: "any condition or undertaking that encourages local development or improves a Party's balance-of-payments accounts, such as the use of domestic content, the licensing of technology, investment, counter trade and similar action or requirement;" 39
2. A one-size-fits-all procurement method, including a one-stop access point for bidders to see available contracts across the country at all levels of government;
3. A legal means for lost bidders to challenge the result of a concession.
The EU is requesting a large list of sub-federal entities to be covered under this chapter, from provincial and territorial agencies and Crown corporations, including energy, transit or transportation agencies not committed under the WTO or US procurement agreement, to air and seaports, universities, hospitals, municipal governments and utilities.40
While it is clear that access to sub-national procurement alone does not lead to privatization, under these conditions EU water corporations are being presented with the perfect opportunity to chip away at our public water system. Trade lawyer Steven Shrybman warns:
Proposed CETA rules would allow a water conglomerate to get its foot in the door whenever a Canadian municipality or covered water utility tenders for any goods (eg. water treatment technology) or services (eg. for engineering, design, construction or the operational services) relating to water supply systems. That contractual relationship could
18 64of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
then provide a platform for the company to expand its interests in the water or waste water systems. 41
To be clear, European corporations already have access to Canadian municipal services. Winnipeg city council just voted in favour of a 30-year contract with French water corporation Veolia Environment. Under CETA, the legal rights of these corporations would be entrenched in an international agreement above and beyond the reach of national laws. If European negotiators are successful in including subnational procurement in CETA, European companies would be granted legal guarantees and a dispute settlement process (distinct from the general dispute settlement chapter in CETA or the possible investor-state process) that must be recognized by Canadian courts. This new process could grant private bidders compensation if a panel ruled they should have won a bid for a municipal service. Even if a panel rules in favour of a municipal government choosing against a private contract, it will make the entire process of procurement and tendering far more expensive for local governments.
Here is where existing pressures to privatize water services come into play. As described already, the federal government and some provinces put strings on money for water projects designed to give a helping hand to private water firms operating in Canada. For example, the Building Canada Fund requires municipalities to consider the P3 option in order to qualify for federal infrastructure money for water upgrades. Most private water firms in Canada are European and American (there is no domestic Canadian water service industry). There is a good chance a procurement dispute panel would decide that on market determinations alone, a private firm should have won out over the public option after going through this procurement process. The private firm might then be granted compensation for the lost bid and possibly have the decision overturned.
The administration and legal requirements of the process proposed in the CETA procurement chapter and the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (applied to municipalities) would be costly in addition to onerous. Canadian municipalities would be forced to publish detailed notices and announcements of intended procurements and issue tenders that comply with CETA procedures and specifications.
In addition to driving up administrative costs and creating litigation risks for Canadian municipalities, CETA would also slow down the process of municipal procurement as EU bidders would have to be granted sufficient time to appeal decisions. Public control and accountability are undermined as municipal councils and our elected officials lose their authority to operate in the best interest of the communities they serve.
The novelty of committing municipalities to international procurement regimes in trade agreements means there are fewer examples to draw on than there are for services and investment protections related to public water. The EU Commission argues that procurement within Europe is largely done under terms similar to those proposed in the CETA procurement chapter. What they fail to mention is that the commercial benefits of open procurement between Canada and the EU, as Canada has experienced with the United States, will run largely one way- to the benefit of very large and competitive European water, construction, energy and transportation firms. We feel the legal risks described in the available analyses are enough to warrant taking a cautious approach.
» RECOMMENDATION 5: There should be no municipal commitments in CETA, and these should be allowed to expire in October 2011 in the Canada-US procurement agreement.
19 65 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
Alternative visions for procurement
While we are critical of the procurement chapter in CETA we are by no means opposed to open, fair and transparent procurement processes. Despite notable exceptions mentioned above, Canadian municipal and provincial governments rarely include other social criteria when tendering public contracts. Under existing trade agreements, local governments have maintained the freedom to include local (or national) preferences and other local economic development conditions on tenders. And increasingly, governments are adopting a "Triple Bottom Line" approach where economic, social and environmental goals are integrated.
The Capital Regional District of British Columbia's plan to establish sewage treatment facilities that promote environmental innovation is an example of such an approach that is threatened by CETA. As Shrybman points out in his report on CETA and municipalities, by providing a market for Canadian environmental services, the district would be infringing the CETA prohibition on "procurement terms that would require any bidder to source environmental engineering services or technologies from Canadian providers." Procurement rules also limit the pursuit of ambitious joint ventures whereby water treatment, distribution and energy production are grouped together; perhaps with heat generation and indoor farming experiments.
For example, the public utility responsible for heating the Olympic village in Vancouver, and surrounding commercial and residential buildings, draws heat from the region's wastewater pipes and main sewer line. It transforms that heat into steam which powers the neighbourhood. In November 2010, engineers at the utility were surprised to see rates for homeowners lower than those supplied by BC Hydro. The savings were high and the project resulted in 64 per cent less greenhouse gas emissions than had the village been heated with electric baseboard heaters. Vancouver's mayor said added benefits could be achieved by raising hydro rates a few cents more per kilowatt hour and reinvesting that money in the public system to achieve even greater efficiencies.42 Large scale infrastructure projects are precisely where municipalities can seek the most bang for their buck in terms of social investment in the community and yet they are the contracts that will be limited by CETA's provisions.
The opportunities lost here are extraordinary. For example, in Ontario clean energy production has been coupled with green job creation through the Green Energy Act. The act grants high feed-in tariffs to wind and solar projects on condition that 25 and 50 per cent of the sourced content (in the form of components or labour) be from the province. The goal of the energy program is to allow the province to phase out its highly polluting coal-fired plants and become a global leader in the development of clean energy technology. Contrary to WTO claims by Japan that the act is an elaborate subsidy that discriminates against foreign firms and should therefore be illegal under the global trade regime, the Green Energy Act is more accurately a creative use of public spending to meet two objectives: environmental protection and good, green job creation. Not surprisingly, the EU has put a bull's eye on the act as something which must be dismantled through the CETA negotiations.43
Other procurement strategies such as Ontario's proposed Water Opportunities and Conservation Act, which also claims to have a dual purpose of promoting water conservation strategies at the municipal level while creating markets for Canadian green technology, could be challenged under the CETA procurement rules. Provisions of the act that require public agencies to include water conservation and innovation in their procurement practices - an ambition also of the new Water Charter announced during the 2010 meeting of the Council of the Federation - could also be challenged as an impediment to the profits of multinational water corporations.44 ln fact, as documented by Corporate Europe Observatory, corporations like Veolia have lobbied hard to prevent local governments from adopting strategies that promote reduction in water consumption within Europe, favouring the promotion of water reuse technologies instead, which are more profitable. Through CETA these corporations wou Id have new powers to challenge local measures aimed at reducing water consumption.
20 66of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
The Canadian Community Economic Development Network {CCEDNET) highlights Calgary's Sustainable Environmental and Ethical Procurement Policy, and Ontario's Poverty Reduction Strategy as other areas where governments are using procurement to achieve other social goals. Manitoba Hydro sets aside a portion of contracts to Aboriginal companies. Living wage policies in the municipalities of New Westminster and Toronto are other examples of where "market" considerations -the lowest price for the "consumer" -are set aside because of the relatively higher benefits to the community of investment in the community. According to Brendan Reimer with CCEDNET:
The US Government has targets of procuring 5% of contracts from small women-owned businesses, 3% from Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned businesses, and gives small businesses located in "HUBZones" {Historically Underutilized Business Zones - located in economically distressed communities) a 10% price evaluation preference on tenders and aim for 3% of all federal contract dollars to be awarded eligible businesses. 45
In Europe too, governments, labour unions, environmental and anti-poverty groups are looking to maximum social value versus best consumer price on local procurement. The UK government has a policy called "Driving innovation through public procurement'' under which, according to its responsible Ministry, the policy encourages "suppliers to develop novel techniques to help deliver public services" and thus "to drive improvements in the performance of public services."46 A response to the EU procurement legislation and policy currently underway at the European Commission from a collection of civil society groups suggests:
there is a cost- we would argue a bigger cost- to pay by not including social and environmental considerations, even if this cost may appear to some harder to quantify. People across the EU and certain businesses are already taking into account social and environmental considerations when buying products or services. EU rules should not prevent contracting authorities from choosing between products and services on the basis of sustainable development considerations.47
The potential to include these kinds of social preferences on water projects while retaining water service and treatment within public hands is significant. That potential will disappear if municipalities and their water utilities are committed to CETA's procurement chapter. EU officials have highlighted that there are exceptions in CETA which would allow a covered entity to stray from the rules to protect public morals or safety, or human, animal or plant life or health. Set-asides for goods and services procured from persons with disabilities, philanthropic institutions or prison labour are also carved out. But these are very limited cases and government measures claiming an exception would be subject to a cumbersome necessity test to prove they were not the least restrictive measure possible. There are no exemptions for sustainable or ethical sourcing of goods and services, and notably no protections that we can see for existing set-asides, including for fndigenous businesses. 48 It is highly doubtful that a decision to keep a service public on the grounds it is more efficient or accountable would survive a challenge under CETA.
» RECOMMENDATION 6: In an unstable economic environment defined by climate instability and the increasing precariousness of good employment, local governments should be seeking ways to maximize the social value of public spending rather than adopting international procurement rules set in Brussels and Geneva that give an upper hand to EU-based multinationals.
21 67of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
CONCLUSION
For too long water has been an invisible component of almost all economic activity but especially trade. We need it to produce energy, extract and refine minerals, build consumer products and grow food. Expansion of activity in any of these areas will put added pressure on water-a problem that is starting to be addressed in the concept of "virtual water," or the water it takes to produce and trade the goods we consume each day. Canada is second only to Australia in the amount of virtual water it exports each year - 60 billion cubic metres, or enough to fill the Rogers stadium in Toronto 37 and a half times.49 The federal government needs to do an assessment on the full impact of trade on Canada's water. Such an assessment is outside the scope of this paper, which is focused on the immediate threat to Canada's publicly owned and operated water delivery and treatment systems.
These public water systems are in desperate need of upgrade. Access to clean water on First Nations reserves is severely compromised and in need of immediate funding. The financing, though hefty, should come from all three levels of government-federal, provincial-territorial and municipal - rather than the private sector. As the cases of remunicipalization above prove, public financing is almost always cheaper while public delivery of water services is the only way to keep those services accountable to the public. The federal government should extend infrastructure stimulus spending where necessary for municipal infrastructure, with an emphasis on replacing aging municipal and First Nations pipes and systems. As one of the richest nations in the world, the problem for Canada is not money but political will.
Current trade negotiations with the European Union include pressure to cover water services and investment. Decisions about whether and how far to accede to this pressure are largely being left up to the individual provinces and territories. Combined with the proposed procurement chapter in CETA, competitive and aggressive EU multinational water firms will be granted a foot in the door to increase privatization of Canada's public systems. The commercial gains for Canadian firms in the EU from such an arrangement are negligible while the costs to public water are too much to ask.
We believe that public services such as health care, energy, transit, water delivery and postal services should be treated differently than commercial services such as engineering, tourism and construction. These essential services act as important inputs into all economic activities, which reinforces the need for their delivery to be accountable to the public. Our public services provide stability and ensure a decent quality of life for all Canadians. They further act as equalizers in our increasingly unequal society by providing support to the most disadvantaged members of our communities.
Our governments oversee our public services in the public interest and must not consider handing control over to corporations whose interest is profit. The inclusion of water and wastewater services, utilities and municipalities in CETA would undermine the public control and accountability of this vital sector while offering no real gains to domestic or industrial water users. Canada's drinking and sewage systems are our community assets and public drinking water and sanitation services are a human right and the lifeblood of well-functioning communities.
On a more general note, we ask the federal, provincial and territorial governments, at the negotiating table for the first time with CETA, to be open with the public about what is being asked of Canada in these trade talks. Given how deeply CETA will impact social policy in Canada and the EU, the negotiations should be transparent and allow for open public input and debate.
» RECOMMENDATION 7: The federal, provincial and territorial governments have a responsibility to seek and receive prior informed consent from the Canadian public on what a trade agreement with the EU could look like. Considering the scope of the CETA negotiations, the prospect of having an agreement announced in 2011 as a fait accompli is unacceptable. 50
22 68 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
23 69 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
(ENDNOTES)
1. While the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT) (Article 11.02, Natural Resources Processing) specifically excludes "water, and services and investments pertaining to water," municipal procurement services for construction, which would cover water infrastructure upgrades, are temporarily covered under the Canada-US Agreement on Government Procurement. As of February 16, 2010, procurement of water services by provincial governments is now covered permanently under the WTO's AGP, the top of a slippery slope for covering water services in future trade agreements. Finally, water remains categorized in NAFTA as a tradable good by virtue of it not being explicitly excluded as raw logs and other resources have been.
2. Balancing budgets: Don't do it on backs of cities, Toronto Star editorial, Nov. 18, 2010 http://www.thestar.com/ opinion/editorials/article/892537--balancing-budgets-don+do-it-on-backs-of-cities
3. Given Canada's Most Favoured Nation commitments in NAFTA, CETA would open new market opportunities not just for EU -based water firms but also American companies, although with no reciprocal commercial benefits for Canadian firms in the US and Mexico.
4. "A Draft SIA relating to the Negotiation of a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between The EU and Canada:' available on the European Commission website: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/dodib/docs/2010/ september/tradoc_146459.pdf
5. The report is informed by copies of the January and October 2010 drafts of CETA, leaked publicly in October by the Trade Justice Network. It will also reference civil society briefings over the past year with Canada's lead CETA negotiator, Steve Verheul.
6. Canada's infrastructure deficit a sad legacy for future generations Saeed Mirza, Ph.D., Professor of Civil Engineering and Cristian Sipos, Ph.D. Candidate, McGill University
7. Source: http://www.hc-sc .gc.ca/fnia h-spn ia/p remotion/pub Ii c-publique/water-ea u-eng.ph p#how_many
8. In addition to a backlog in maintenance and repair needs to address aging infrastructure and our deteriorating water treatment facilities, our cities face new challenges such as climate change, population growth, diverse social needs and new environmental regulations and standards.
9. http://www. financia Ipost.com/opinion/ columnists/Pu bl i c+accepts+deals/3908738/story. html
10. Report of the UK House of Commons Transport Committee, printed January 16, 2008: http://www.publications. parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmtran/45/4502.htm
11. (Thill, Scott (2010). Watch Out: The World Bank Is Quietly Funding a Massive Corporate Water Grab. http:// current.com/news/92813260_watch-out-the-world-bank-is-quietly-funding-a-massive-corporate-water-grab.htm
12. Report of the Auditor General of Quebec to the National Assembly for 2010-2011. http://www.cupe.bc.ca/sites/ default/files/Quebec%20AG%202010%20report%20on%20Hospital%20P3s.pdf. Accessed December 8, 2010.
13. Source: Capital Regional District ("CRD") Core Area and West Shore Wastewater Treatment Programs Review of Business Case in Support of Funding from the Province of British Columbia
14. Global Water Intelligence Report: Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Vol 7, lssue2 (2006) http://www. gl obalwaterintel.com/arch ive/7/2/market-i n sight/crouching-tiger-hidden-dragon .htm I
15. Source: http://www.epsu.org/a/6071
16. Source: http://www.corporateeurope.org/water-j usti ce/conte nt/2010/02/aq u i ris-veolias-lost-bet-bru ssels, and http://www.epsu.org/a/6071
17. See AFN briefing note: http://www.afn.ca/misc/Bill-S-11.pdf
24 70of157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
18. CUPE Ontario and the Council of Canadians. Say bye to buy local. A Primer on Trade Deals Impacting Canada.
19. Environmental Labour Market Research (ELM). Municipal Water and Waste Management. Labour Market Study. http://www.eco.ca/pdf/Municipal%20English.pdf. Accessed May 13, 2010.
20. Scott Sinclair (2010). Negotiating from Weakness: Canada-EU trade treaty threatens Canadian purchasing policies and public services
21. From a briefing by Canada's lead negotiator, October 28, 2010.
22. "Facing the Facts: A Guide to the GATS Debate," by Scott Sinclair and Jim Grieshaber-Otto for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2002.
23. The WTO's Threats to Global Water Security: The General Agreement on Trade in Services and Beyond: International Forum on Globalization, http://www.ifg.org/pdf/cancun/issues-WTOwater.pdf
24. EU Commission and International Financial Services London quoted in a Corporate Europe Observatory briefing note http://arch ive .corporatee urope.org/water/infobrief3.htm
25. See the EU Commission communication "Trade, Growth and World Affairs," http://trade.ec.europa.eu/dodib/ docs/2010/november/tra doc_ 146955.pdf
26. "A Trade SIA relating to the Negotiation of a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between the EU and Canada," August 2010: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/dodib/docs/2010/september/tradoc_146459.pdf
27. See "Negotiating from Weakness: Canada-EU Trade Treaty Threatens Canadian Purchasing Policies and Public Services," by Scott Sinclair, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives: http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/ default/ftles/uploads/publications/reports/docs/Negotiating%20From%20Weakness%20EU%20Canada.pdf
28. These are paraphrased from the October draft text of CETA, leaked publicly on October 26, 2010 and available at http://tradejustice.ca.
29. See "Facing the Facts: A Guide to the GATS Debate," by Scott Sinclair and Jim Grieshaber-Otto for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2002.
30. The ESF has requested that through the CETA negotiations Canada remove all foreign ownership reviews on major acquisitions; all remaining equity caps on investment, and "better access to Canadian public procurements at all levels, in all public entities, for relevant services sectors (architects, engineers, construction services, transport services, waste management services, water distribution services, education services, IT and Computer restated services, financial services, etc.)." Source: http://www.esf.be/new/wp-content/upload s/2010/03/ESF-Priorities for-E U-Canada-CETA-March-2010-Final. pdf
31. See Corporate Europe Observatory http://www.corporateeurope.org/water-justice/blog/martin/2010/01/21/ new-commissions-views-water
32. From a Canadian primer on bi lateral investment treaties produced by the Canadian Council for International Cooperation: http://www.ccic.ca/_files/ en/what_ we_ do/trade_ 2010-04_investmt _ treaties_pri mer__ e. pdf
33. For a complete list of NAFTA claims, see: http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/ftles/uploads/ publications/National%200ffice/2010/11/NAFTA%20Chapter%2011%201nvestor%20State%20Disputes.pdf
34. See the public statement, released August 31, 2010: http://www.osgoode.yorku.ca/public_statement/ documents/Pu bl ic%20Statem ent.pdf
35. Public Works, CUPE, Lets be clear- City of Hamilton-Wentworth, Ontario Contracted-In Water: Public Excellence. May 2007. http://cupe.ca/updir/Hamilton_Contracted-ln_Water_Public_Excellence.pdf
25 71 of 157 CJI0008049
Public Water for Sale: How Canada Will Privatize Our Public Water Systems
36. 'Paris: local authorities regain control of water management,' by Anne Le Strat, August 2010: http://www.tni.org/ article/paris-local-authorities-regain-control-water-management
37. Full transcript of Steve Verheul's comments to trade committee can be found here: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/ HousePublications/Publicalion.aspx?Docld=4775831&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=3
38. See "Buy American Basics," by Scott Sinclair for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives: http://www. policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/reports/docs/Buy_American_Basics.pdf
39. From the October draft text of CETA, available at http://tradejustice.ca
40. The EU will almost surely seek protections for EU firms involved in private-public partnerships, as negotiators secured in the EU-Korea Free Trade Agreement. A supplementary analysis of where P3s fit into trade agreements would be useful in the Canada-EU context but is beyond the scope of this paper.
41. See Shrybman, Steven (2010) http://www.civicgovernance.ca/files/uploads/FINAL-Shrybman_CETA_report.pdf
42. "Vancouver flush with savings from sewage-heat project," Postmedia news, December 3, 2010: http:// www.canada.com/technology/Vancouver+flush+with+savings+from+sewage+heat+project/3922379/story. html#ixzz176bPwgh L
43. At the time of publishing, Japan had yet to decide whether to pursue its WTO claim by requesting a panel. Japan and Canada were still in the consultation phase, with participation by the US and EU governments.
44. The Water Charter is available: http://www.councilofthefederation.ca/pdfs/PremiersEndorseWaterCharter.pdf
45. Fast Facts: Making Waves out of Ripples, a report for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, August 18, 2010: http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/commentary/docs/FF_ procurement_081810.pdf
46. See Shrybman, Steven (2010) http://www.civicgovernance.ca/files/uploads/FINAL-Shrybman_CETA_report.pdf
47. EPSU and Civil Society letter to Commissioner Barnier on Procurement, November 23, 2010: http://www.epsu. org/a/7048
48. Based on a copy of the November draft of the Sustainability Impact Assessment for CETA, provided to CUPE prior to a November 26 consultation.
49. Rahman, Nabeela, Leaky Exports: A portrait of the virtual water trade in Canada, forthcoming (2011)
50. The authors recognize prior, informed consent as a right of Indigenous peoples on all economic projects that affect their lands, surrounding water and air. The language is used in the context of CETA negotiations to underline the extent to which the agreement will impact social policy. Canadians are entitled to be fully informed about the CETA negotiations. Full transparency and democratic engagement in trade policy is necessary for that policy to meet the social and economic needs of Canadians. wllcope 491
26 72 of 157 CJI0008049
County of Simcoe Main Line {705) 726-9300 Corporate Services Toll Free 1-866-893-9300 111 O Highway 26, Fax(705)792-9832 Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1XO simcoe.ca
November 15, 2012
Ed Houghton Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Town of Collingwood Box 157, 97 Hurontario Street Collingwood, ON L9Y 3Z5
Dear Mr. Houghton,
RE: Confirmation of County of Simcoe Transit Funding Assistance Collingwood-Wasaga Beach Transit Link Bus
As you are aware our staff have been working together recently to determine how the County of Simcoe can assist with expanding transit services in the Southern Georgian Bay area. Further to requests for funding from the Councils for the Town of Collingwood and the Town of Wasaga Beach, County staff prepared a report on this matter for consideration by the County's Corporate Services Committee and County Council. As a result, County Council has approved the following recommendation contained within Corporate Services Item 12-151:
THAT a grant in the amount of $30,000, representing 113 share of the required funds, be approved to assist with the purchase of a public transit bus dedicated to operate the Collingwood-Wasaga Beach Transit Link route, as outlined in Item CS 12-151.
The County of Simcoe is pleased to be a partner in this initiative and commends both the Town of Collingwood and the Town of Wasaga Beach for their collaboration and foresight to improve the services available to residents in their respective municipalities. Please note that the transfer of the funds is being coordinated by our Finance Department via electronic fund transfer. We look forward to hearing about the success of this joint venture in the future.
Sincerely,
Rick Newlove, P. Eng General Manager - Engineering, Planning & Environment
cc. George Vadeboncoeur, Town ofWasaga Beach (By Email Only) Brian Macdonald, Town of Collingwood (By Email Only) David Parks, County of Simcoe (By Email Only) Derek Averell, County of Simcoe (By Email Only) Nathan Westendorp, County of Simcoe (By Email Only)
COR-003-C01 73of157 CJI0008049
Town of Collingwood
Elvis Festival Board Services Minutes
October 23, 2012
Board I Staff: Councillor Ian Chadwick - Council Representative Trish Irwin - General Manager Chamber of Commerce Peter de Vries - Citizen Representative, Board Chair John Eaton - Citizen Representative Joe Saunders - BIA Representative - Regrets Karen Cubitt - Municipal Staff Liaison Rosemarie O'Brien - Festival Manager
Guest: Kay Blakely - Deputy Director of Finance
CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the Collingwood Elvis Festival Services Board was held on, Wednesday, October 23, 2012 at the hour of Noon in the Braniff Room, 105 Hurontario Street. The Chair welcomed all in attendance, established that a quorum was present and called the meeting to order at 12:08 p.m.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
Moved by Member Irwin Seconded by Member Eaton
THA Tthe October 23, 2012 Elvis Festival Services Board Agenda be adopted as presented.
CARRIED
DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST - Nil
ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
Moved by Member Irwin Seconded by Member Eaton
THA Tthe June 11 , 2012 Elvis Services Board Minutes be adopted as presented.
CARRIED
DEPUTATION- Nil
October 23, 2012 Elvis Festival Services Board Minutes Page 1 of 3
74of157 CJI0008049
FINANCE
The Festival Manager introduced the Deputy Director of Finance and requested that she presents the forecasted financials for 2012 Collingwood Elvis Festival for the period ending December 31 5\ 2012, which forecasts a $9500.00(+/- $500)deficit.
The Deputy Director of Finance explained that the deficit is primarily economy based as ticket sales, bar I wrist band receipts were lower than projected and lower than the 2011 actual. Despite the fact that ticket pricing was lowered and bundling of packages was offered, overall ticket revenue was reduced due to the weak economy. The Festival incurred increased expenses as the OPP and Fire Services demanded that paramedic services be increased, alcoholic beverages cost more than budgeted and the bar operator fee was higher than budgeted.
The Festival Manager added that events for which there is no charge are good for the community, and meets the Festival's mandate, which is to bring visitors to the community. International visitors have increased. The Festival is a successful tourist attraction as demonstrated by the 40% increase in attendance to all free events.
The Festival Manager explained that the auditors have instructed her to develop a 'break even budget'; however she believes that this sets up the Festival for failure as any negative occurrence leads to a significant deficit. Staff Liaison Cubitt suggested that the Board should consider including a li ne item reserve to buffer negative years. Discussion took place regard ing ticket sales and attendance. The Board believes that tickets to the arena shows seem expensive. Staff explained that the 2012 ticket pricing has been reduced however, all production and staging costs need to be reflected in the tickets cost. Staff confirmed that they will be issuing Request for Proposals (RFP) for the 2013 Festival for production, staging and bar I catering. The Board believes that this may lower the Festival's overall expenses.
In the past, the Festival has had to step in to take over floundering venues to preserve the Festival's name and quality. Previous boards realizing that the major cost of a venue is the set up initiated multiple shows per venue to offset costs. The Board requested that they be provided with a profit I loss breakdown per show to determine which shows are financially viable and which need to be eliminated.
Councillor Chadwick noted that based on the information brought to the Board by the Deputy Director of Finance and discussion during the meeting, the Board realizes that the 2% deficit in current economic times demonstrates the Festival's resilience.
Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) - the analysis will be reviewed at the next Working Committee meeting.
Festival Objective Setting- the Working Committee will discuss the 2013 Festival's Objective and provide the Board with specific recommendations.
Presentation to Council - the Board agreed to make its presentation to Council at their November 25th meeting, in advance of which, the Board charged Staff to issue a news release.
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Collingwood Elvis Festival Board will take place at the Call of the Chair.
October 23, 2012 Elvis Festival Services Board Minutes Page 2 of 3
75 of 157 CJI0008049
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Member Irwin
THA Tthe Elvis Festival Working Committee meeting adjourns at 1: 11 p.m.
Peter de Vries, Chair
PdV:mg
October 23, 2012 Elvis Festival Services Board Minutes Page 3 of 3
76 of 157 CJI0008049
Town of Collingwood
Collingwood Heritage Committee Minutes
October 18, 2012
COMMITTEE: COUNCIL: Lindsay Cook - Chair- Regrets Councillor Joe Gardhouse Darrell Reeder - Acting-Chair Peter Koenig RESOURCE: John Harrison - Regrets Ron Martin, Deputy Chief Building Official Ed Christie - arrived@ 9:12 a.m. Cathy deRuiter, Admin. Assistant, Build ing Services William T Smith Monica Gal, Recording Secretary Gre g Dorbeck
A meeting of the Heritage Committee was held on Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. in the Building I Planning Department Conference Room of the Collingwood Public Library Building & Municipal Offices, 55 Saint Marie Street.
CALL TO ORDER
The Acting-Chair established that a quorum was present, welcomed all in attendance and called the meeting to order at 8:35 a.m.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
Moved by Committee Member Koenig Seconded by Committee Member Dorbeck
THA Tthe October 18, 2012 Heritage Committee Agenda be adopted as presented.
CARRIED
ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
Moved by Committee Member Smith Seconded by Committee Member Koenig
THATthe September 20, 2012 Heritage Committee Minutes be adopted as amended.
CARRIED
DECLARA T/ONS OF CONFLICT OR PECUNIARY INTEREST - nil
DEPUTATION- there were no deputations.
77 of 157 CJI0008049
CORRESPONDENCE
CHO News - The October issue distributed at the meeting. Membership renewal will be paid from the Heritage Budget. Administrative Assistant de Ruiter advised that the 2013 conference will take place in Midland.
Committee of Adjustment - Minor Variance Application - 200 Hume Street- Notice of the Minor Variance Application was circulated to the Committee for comment. After discussion, the Committee agreed that they had no comment.
BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
Heritage Newsletter - The draft newsletter was well received.
2012 Heritage Awards - Photographs of potential nominated properties were circulated at the meeting.
Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) - 250 Hume Street - Curling Club - An H IA is being carried out.
5 Huron Street (former Mountain View Hotel) - Administrative Assistant de Ruiter advised that a number of artifacts were salvaged from the former Mountain View Hotel. As per Council's direction, the Heritage Consultant will undertake a Heritage Report. The Consultant will be provided more information about the salvaged items. The Administrative Assistant will photograph the various stages of demolition.
NEW BUSINESS - nil.
OTHER BUSINESS
Community Outreach - The Deputy Chief Building Official and the Administrative Assistant made presentation to Heritage Barrie regarding how Collingwood developed its Heritage Conservation District.
Travelling Display - The Committee recommended that staff investigate types of mobile display units to advertise and promote heritage properties.
HERITAGE PERMITS
Permit# Location Type 476-2012 90 Ontario Street Shingles 491 -2012 31 Simcoe Street Masonry repair - Heritage Grant recipient 493-2012 88 Ontario Street Shingles 500-2012 25 Hurontario Street Repair Facade 508-2012 64 Hume Street Replacement wood door - Heritage Grant recipient
Moved by Committee Member Dorbeck Seconded by Committee Member Christie
THA Tthe above identified Heritage Permits be forwarded to Council for approval.
CARRIED
October 18, 2012 Heritage Committee Minutes Page 2 of 3 78of157 CJI0008049
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Heritage Advisory Committee will take place on Thursday, November 15, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. in the Building & Planning Conference Room (Third Floor), 55 Ste. Marie Street.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Member Smith
THATthe Heritage Committee meeting adjourns at 10:26 a.m.
CARRIED
Darrell Reeder, Acting-Chair
DR : mg
October 18, 2012 Heritage Committee Minutes Page 3 of 3 79 of 157 CJI0008049
Town of Collingwood
Collingwood Downtown BIA Board of Management Minutes
Oct obe r 25, 2012
BOARD OF MANAGEMENT COUNCIL Joe Saunders - Chair - Regrets Councillor Ian Chadwick - left @ 8: 10 p. m. Margot Nicolson - Acting-Chair Bob Cook RESOURCE Cameron Trott - arrived@ 6:35 p.m . Susan Nicholson - BIA General Manager Ed Christie - Regrets Paula Lehr - Downtown Revitalization Coordinator Ryan Gardhouse Monica Gal - Recording Secretary Douglas Snider - arrived @ 6:42 p.m. Bradley Green
A meeting of the Downtown Collingwood Board of Management Business Improvement Area (BIA) was held on Thursday, October 25, 2012 at the hour of 6:00 p.m. in the Braniff Room, Town Hall.
WELCOME I CALL TO ORDER
The Chair welcomed all in attendance and determined that a quorum was present then called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.
DEPUTATION
HR Polices I ESA - The Acting-Chair advised that she and the Chair invited the Manager of Human Resources, Ms. Marianne Nero, to speak with the Board and review the Employment Standards Act 2000.
The Manager of Human Resources provided a detailed PowerPoint presentation with respect to the Employment Standards Act. The General Manager observed that the BIA Board has adopted the Town of Collingwood's Human Resources Policy. The General Manager and the Downtown Revitalization Coordinator left the meeting at 7:54 p.m.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Moved by Member Cook Seconded by Member Gardhouse
THAT the Collingwood Downtown Board of Management Business Improvement Area (BIA) adopts the October 25, 2012 Agenda as amended.
Add: Motion to Move in Camera.
CARRIED
80 of 157 CJI0008049
Move in Camera Member Green Seconded by Member Gardhouse
THAT this Board proceeds in Camera in order to address a matter pertaining to: personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees and budget;
CARRIED
Rise from In Camera
Moved by Member Green Seconded by Member Cook
THA Tthis Board rises from In Camera at 7:56 p.m.
CARRIED
The Acting-Chair thanked the Manager of Human Resources for meeting with the Board and excused her from the meeting at 7:57 p.m.
CONFIRMATION OF THE ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
THE October 3, 2012 Collingwood Downtown Board of Management Business Improvement Area (BIA) Minutes was adopted electronically in accordance with Procedural By-law 2006-120.
DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR PECUNIARY INTEREST
*Board Member Green declared a Conflict of Pecuniary Interest with respect to the Invoices Paid to Georgian Staffing Services as he is an employee of the firm.
BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE OCTOBER 3, 2012 MEETING
Ice Sculpture Event - staff confirmed that they are striving for a break even budget based on 40 displays, with the only the BIA member sponsored displays subsidized. Some of the lighting could be purchased through the Winter Carnival budget. The information package has been sent out. The Board requested that the Coordinator and the General Manager follow-up and bring packages to future meetings. Both the Coordinator and the General Manager confirmed that non BIA members have expressed concern with the participation rate and that members are also concerned that smaller displays are not being subsidized. Board members agreed to actively assist staff with promoting and signing on participants.
TREASURER'S REPORT
Preparation for the Annual General Meeting - The Board will finalize the 2013 Budget at their November 14th Budget Meeting. The Board requested that the General Manager speaks with the Revenue Coordinator to provide levy projections for the next meeting. The Board agreed to:
1. Continue to enhance partnerships with the Town regarding cost saving opportunities such as waste pick-up and the installation and storage of Christmas Decor.
October 25, 2012 Downtown Collingwood BIA Board of Management Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 5 81of157 CJI0008049
2. List of successful grant applications to be provided at the AGM. 3. That the General Manager's role in the Elvis Festival needs to be reviewed and likely reduced . The Board believes that the Chamber of Commerce needs to return to the table.
Draft 2013 Budget- Finance Chair Gard house distributed copies of the Draft 2013 Budget
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The Finance Chair confirmed that the Board's actual and estimated Statements are sound.
Moved by Member Snider Seconded by Member Green
THAT the Collingwood Downtown BIA Board of Management accepts the 2012 Financial Statement to October 24, 2012 as presented.
CARRIED
Invoices Paid - the Board having reviewed the list of invoices paid since the last meeting approved them as follows:
Moved by Member Cook Seconded by Member Gardhouse
THAT the Accounts Payable Vouchers of the BIA up to and including October 24, 2012 in the amount of 13,217.23 dollars be approved as presented.
CARRIED
Moved by Member Cook Seconded by Member Trott
THAT the Supplementary Accounts Payable Vouchers for the period ending October 24, 2012 in the amount of 80.28 dollars to Georgian Staffing Services be approved as presented.
CARRIED
*Board Member Green declared a Conflict of Pecuniary Interest with respect to the Invoices Paid to Georgian Staffing Services as he is an employee of the firm .
CORRESPONDENCE SENT BY THE BIA GENERAL MANAGER SINCE THE OCTOBER ~o MEETING:
1. Media Release regarding Black Harvest event 2. Memo to members and poster regarding Black Harvest event 3. Member Newsletter - October 4. Santa Claus Parade - Entry and Sponsorship Information
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED BY BIA GENERAL MANAGER SINCE THE OCTOBER 3Ro MEETING:
1. Email regarding 2013 Doors Open event
October 25, 2012 Downtown Collin gwood BIA Board of Management Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 5 82 of 157 CJI0008049
2. Copy of Media Release from regarding Tracks award 3. Email from Rick and Anke Lex regarding possible casino 4. Email from Sheri Gabriele - regarding Halloween
NEW BUSINESS
Presentation to Council - the Draft PowerPoint presentation was circulated and reviewed at the meeting. The Report of the studies could be released at the same time.
Ongoing Staff support funding- the Board agreed to continue discussions with the Acting CAO and the Finance Committee Chair regarding the continuation of the role of the Coordinator.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Downtown Revitalization - the Coordinator will work with the Clerk's Department and draft a Request for Quotation for a downtown magazine which would dovetail time wise and compliment existing broader publications.
2013 Art Chair Event- a local manufacturer has been approached to sponsor the art chairs featuring a nautical theme to compliment the Tall Ships Event.
Maintenance - Maintenance Chair Christie sent regrets.
Decorating - Decorating Chair Green sought the Board's support to endorse the purchase of Christmas Decor from Blanchere Illumination.
Moved by Member Green Seconded by Member Cook
THAT the Downtown Collingwood BIA Board of Management agrees to enter into an agreement with Blanchere Illumination to purchase street based Christmas Decor for Downtown Collingwood for $52,790 plus installation and HST over a three year period.
CARRIED
Communications - Communication Chair Saunders sent regrets.
Promotions - Promotions Chair Trott confirmed that all promotions are set and ready to roll out for the balance of the year.
Marketing - some of the Board expressed concern that the Kiosks have not been updated as requested . The General Manager is to speak with the operator of Mountain Life Magazine who has been contracted to create the new directory panels.
Walkway!Laneway Project - Member Snider confirmed that he and staff have met with the Acting CAO regarding the project.
Policy and Procedures - no discussion.
Parking and Bylaws - Member Trott confirmed that he has had discussions with the Clerk regarding offering complimentary 1 day parking passes for visitors. Some of the Board expressed concern, as the local population may be upset by such action. Councillor Chadwick confirmed that he would be requesting that Council be provided with a Staff Report regarding creating dedicated Charity Parking Meters as is done in other
October 25, 2012 Downtown Collin gwood BIA Board of Management Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 5 83 of 157 CJI0008049
municipalities. As well a Staff Report has been requested regarding increasing the Hurontario Street parking meters rate. The Board expressed concern with the latter.
General Manager- the General Manager confirmed that she has had preliminary discussions regarding setting up a short pre-Christmas indoor Farmers Market. rr
Council Representative Ian Chadwick - confirmed that the Public meeting regarding the proposed gaming facility will take place at the October 291h .
COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVE REPORTS
Heritage Advisory Committee - Member Christie sent regrets.
Collingwood Elvis Festival - Member Cook questioned Gard house Conflict of Pecuniary Interest' as he is a partner in G & G Enterprises, a contracted vendor to the Elvis Festival. Member Gardhouse explained that he felt he was not in conflict as he is a member of the Elvis Festival Working Committee and not on the Elvis Festival Board.
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Board of Management of the Collingwood Downtown BIA will take place on Thursday, November 14, 2012 at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, Town Hall.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Board Member Green
THAT the meeting adjourns at 9:34 p.m.
CARRIED
Margot Nicolson, Acting- Chair
MN: mg
October 25, 2012 Downtown Collingwood BIA Board of Management Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 5 84of157 CJI0008049
Town of Collingwood
Collingwood Downtown BIA Board of Management Minutes
November 14, 2012
BOARD OF MANAGEMENT COUNCIL Joe Saunders - Chair Councillor Ian Chadwick - Regrets Margot Nicolson - Vice-Chair Bob Cook RESOURCE Cameron Trott Susan Nicholson - BIA General Manager Ed Christie Monica Gal - Recording Secretary Ryan Gardhouse- 8:10 p.m . Douglas Snider - Regrets Bradley Green
A meeting of the Downtown Collingwood Board of Management Business Improvement Area (BIA) was held on Wednesday, November 14, 2012 at the hour of 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, Town Hall.
WELCOME I CALL TO ORDER
The Chair welcomed all in attendance and determined that a quorum was present then called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Moved by Member Cook Seconded by Member Nicolson
THAT the Collingwood Downtown Board of Management Business Improvement Area (BIA) adopts the November 14, 2012 Agenda as amended.
Move in Camera session to the beginning of the meeting.
CARRIED
Move in Camera Member Gardhouse Seconded by Member Green
THAT this Board proceeds in Camera in order to address a matter pertaining to: Personnel matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees and budget;
CARRIED
85 of 157 CJI0008049
Rise from In Camera
Moved by Member Nicolson Seconded by Member Cook
THATthis Board rises from In Camera at 6:59 p.m.
CARRIED
ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES - deferred.
DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR PECUNIARY INTEREST
* Board Member Saunders declared a Conflict of Pecuniary Interest with respect to the Invoices Paid to Saunders Office Pro as he is an owner of the business and works for the firm.
BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE OCTOBER 25, 2012 MEETING
Ice Sculpture Event - Event Chair Cook advised that the event is expected to be revenue neutral.
Preparation for the Annual General Meeting - The Board agreed to focus on preparing the 2013 budget at its October 25th regular meeting and finalize it at their November 14th Budget Meeting.
2013 Budget Preparations- the Board reviewed the Draft 2013 Budget. The General Manager provided the requested budget implications of increasing the levy as the Board realizes that revenue such as the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Fund will not be forthcoming.
Moved by Member Gardhouse Seconded by Member Green
THAT the Downtown Board of Management Business Improvement Area (BIA) agrees to an incremental increase to the levy by 12,500 dollars to 412,000 dollars to offset the lack of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Fund revenue.
CARRIED
Moved by Member Gardhouse Seconded by Member Nicolson
THAT the Downtown Collingwood Board of Management BIA approves the amended budget.
CARRIED
Invoices Paid - the Board having reviewed the list of invoices paid since the last meeting approved them as follows:
Moved by Member Green Seconded by Member Christie
November 14, 2012 Downtown Collingwood BIA Board of Management Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 5 86of157 CJI0008049
THAT the Accounts Payable Vouchers of the BIA up to and including November 14, 2012 in the amount of 3,367.90 dollars be approved as presented.
CARRIED
Moved by Member Cook Seconded by Member Trott
THA Tthe Supplementary Accounts Payable Vouchers for the period ending November 14, 2012 in the amount of 18.07 dollars to Saunders Office Pro be approved as presented.
CARRIED
* Board Member Saunders declared a Conflict of Pecuniary Interest with respect to the Invoices Paid to Saunders Office Pro as he is an owner of the business and works for the firm.
CORRESPONDENCE SENT BY THE BIA GENERAL MANAGER SINCE THE OCTOBER 25TH MEETING:
1. Media Advisory regarding Black Harvest event. 2. Media Release regarding Random Act of Kindness. 3. Memo to Ed Houghton regarding 2013 Budget discussion - the Board realizes that 2013 budget discussions have not started. 4. Media Advisories (2) regarding Random Act of Kindness. 5. Community Connection Community Announcement regarding Santa Claus Parade. 6. Collingwood Chamber of Commerce e-blast regarding Celebrate this Way event and Santa Claus Parade.
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED BY BIA GENERAL MANAGER SINCE THE OCTOBER 25TH MEETING:
1. Email regarding 2013 Doors Open event - theme is Arts & Culture the Board believes that the Events Department (Arts & Culture). 2. Letter from Collingwood Arts & Music Festival regarding its 2013 event 3. Email from Sara Almas regarding Christmas parking 4. Email from Linda Richardson regarding objection to First Street turn lane 5. Copy of email response from Brian MacDonald to Linda Richardson regarding her objection to First Street turn lane 6. Email from Glenn Gibbons regarding downtown 7. November 13 - Online petition for transit link to between Collingwood and the Blue Mountain Resorts - the General Manager to post the link to the BIA website.
NEW BUSINESS
Christmas Parking - Member Trott reviewed the Clerk's November 5th email in which she sought the Board's direction with respect to Christmas Parking. The Board reviewed presented options and agreed to recommend to Council that they reinstate the Toy for Ticket program.
Member Moved by Green Seconded by Member Nicolson
THAT the Downtown Collingwood Board of Management BIA recommends that Council institute a Toys for Tickets Program from December 1dh, 2012 through January 151, 2013. November 14, 2012 Downtown Collingwood BIA Board of Management Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 5 87of157 CJI0008049
CARRIED
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Downtown Revitalization - the General Manager advised that Cooperative Christmas advertising with the Collingwood Connection and the Peak FM has been secured.
Maintenance - Maintenance Chair Christie confirmed that Downtown Collingwood is in good shape.
Decorating - Decorating Chair Green advised that all new Christmas decor has been received and will be installed well in advance of the November 24th Santa Claus Parade.
Communications - Communications Chair Saunders confirmed that notices and newsletters are circulating as usual. We had one member go on the email list.
Promotions - the General Manager advised that due to current economic conditions, the office is experiencing some resistance in securing sponsors for the Santa Claus Parade.
Marketing - Marketing Chair Nicolson confirmed that all marketing for the holiday season is in place. The kiosks have been updated.
Walkway/Laneway Project- Member Snider sent regrets. Member Christie confirmed that the Coordinator will take the lead on the project.
Policy and Procedures - Member Snider sent regrets. Member Green recommended that a policy with respect to the requirements of Bill 168 be prepared as soon as possible.
General Manager- the General Manager confirmed that she was in the process of drafting Celebrate Ontario Grant Applications; the GTTA will be taking the lead on Winter Carnival and the Girlfriends Getaway Applications. The Board requested that the General Manager submits a Celebrate Ontario Grant Application for the Ice Carving Event.
Council Representative - Councillor Chadwick sent regrets.
COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVE REPORTS
Heritage Advisory Committee - Member Christie will advise the Heritage Committee that Doors Open 2013 theme is 'Arts & Culture'.
Collingwood Elvis Festival Committee - the General Manager advised that the Elvis Festival Board will make their presentation to Council at their November 25th_
OTHER BUSINESS - nil
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Board of Management of the Collingwood Downtown BIA will take place on November 28, 2012 at 6:00 p.m. in Community Rooms B & C of the Collingwood Public Library.
November 14, 2012 Downtown Collingwood BIA Board of Management Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 5 88 of 157 CJI0008049
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Board Member Green
THAT the meeting adjourns at 8:50 p.m.
CARRIED
Joe Saunders, Chair
JS: mg
November 14, 2012 Downtown Collingwood BIA Board of Management Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 5 89of157 CJI0008049
STAFF REPORT
REPORT#: P2012-37 --- DATE: November 261h, 2012 ------~ ------·-- ~ --- ~ · I-· SUBMITTED TO: Mayor & Members of Council
~------·-·~· SUBMITTED BY: Nancy Farrer - Director of Planning Services Zoning By-law Amendment and Plan of Subdivision Town Files: Z-2006-07 and DC-2006-18 Related File (DC2006-14 - Site Plan Control) Legal Description: Lots 10, 11and12 South of Fifth Street and Lots 10, 11 SUBJECT: and 12 North of Sixth Street, Registered Plan No. 45, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe Municipal Address: 400 Maple Street Applicant: The Victoria Annex Group
1. RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the proposed Victoria Annex subdivision be given draft approval by Council subject to the conditions as generally set out in Appendix "G", including that draft approval lapse after three (3) years, being November 26, 2015, in the event that a subdivision is not registered within that period. (400 Maple Street)
AND FURTHER THAT the proposed Common Element Condominium for the Victoria Annex development be given draft approval by Council subject to the conditions as generally set out in Appendix "H", including that draft approval lapse after three (3) years, being November 26, 2015, in the event that the condominium is not registered within that period. (400 Maple Street)
AND FURTHER THAT Councfl enact and pass amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-117 in order to support the redevelopment proposal for the property. (400 Maple Street)
2. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND:
Synopsis of Proposal
The purpose of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, Plan of Subdivision and Plan of Condominium is to support a residential infill and intensification proposal for the Victoria School Annex property consisting of:
• three (3) semi-detached buildings with a total of six (6) dwelling units, • two (2) three unit townhome buildings for a total of six (6) dwelling units, • a block to establish a seven (7) unit walk-up apartment dwelling by way of renovating and constructing an addition onto an existing building, • two (2) walkway/amenity area blocks, and • one (1) common element condominium (for a shared private road, to allow vehicular access to dwelling units, and several walkways). Page 1 of28 90 of 157 CJI0008049
A Site Plan and draft subdivision plan are attached - Appendices B and C
Related Planning Applications
The subject lands are also subject to a Site Plan Control Application (DC-2006-14) for the wafk up apartment dwellings pursuant to Section 51 and Section 41 respectively of the Planning Act. The applicant also intends to file a draft plan of condominium application to facilitate the sale of the apartment dwelling units in the proposed walk-up apartment building on the site. An Official Plan Amendment was approved by Council for the property earlier in the year - re-designating it from Low Density residential to Medium Density Residential to support the density associated with the 19 dwelling unit proposal.
Property Description
The subject property is located on the west side of Maple Street abutting Fifth Street to the north and Sixth Street to the south. The subject property has total lot frontage onto Maple Street of approximately 99.40 metres (326.12 feet), a lot depth of approximately 60.57 metres {198. 72 feet) and a total lot area of approximately 6002 square metres (1.48 acres).
The property currently contains an existing two and a half storey brick building which was formerly used as part of the Victoria Public School.
Surrounding Land Uses
The surrounding land uses consist of a low density residential neighbourhood, incfuding single detached dwellings, small-lot single detached dwellings and an occasional semi-detached dwelling. The density of the surrounding areas is approximately 10 to 17 units per hectare.
Public Meeting and Comment
Council originally held a public meeting of the development proposal on July 24, 2006, but considering the revisions made to the development concept and the length of time that had passed an additional public meeting was deemed necessary. Consequently, a public meeting regarding applications for an Official Plan amendment, Zoning By-law amendment, plan of subdivision and plan of condominium was held on June 20, 2011. Several members of the public spoke indicating opposition and support for the proposal. Please see Appendices D and E for the detailed minutes of the public meetings.
Public comment in support of the application focused on the preservation of the Victoria Annex School Building and the merits of the development's design and appropriateness as an infill and intensification project. Public comment fn opposition to the proposal was based on objections to the increased density and number/design of the units, as well as concerns over inadequate parking, increased traffic, foss of greenspace and site layout issues such as location of garbage receptacles and snow storage.
Comments from the original public process expressed support and opposition to the development proposal. Three letters were submitted which supported the proposed development's restoration of the existing school, preservation of the historic property, and revitalization of the neighbourhood: One letter, supported by a petition with thirteen signatories, was received indicating that the proposed density and unit count was too high for the property, that there was a lack of open space in the proposal and that traffic flow through the property onto Maple Street would be problematic. An additional petition in opposition to the proposal, reiterating earlier concerns was also received in 2010.
Page 2 of28 91 of 157 CJI0008049
Circulation Comments
There were no objections raised with the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, Plan of Subdivision or Plan of Common Element Condominium. Comments from Engineering Services and Water Services reflected issues with an appropriate configuration of the site and installation of services. Engineering Services confirmed through the earlier Official plan Amendment process that the site layout, as now proposed, can accommodate vehicular access and parking. Planning Services staff note that the applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Assessment which indicated that the development proposal would not generate traffic volumes that would have any significant operational impacts on the adjacent road system.
Matters of Provincial Interest
Section 2 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c .P. 13, as amended, provides that Council in carrying out their responsibilities under the Planning Act shall have regard to matters of provincial interest.
Planning staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-117, if enacted and passed, and the Plans of Subdivision and Common Element Condominium, if given Draft Approval, shall not offend any matters of provincial interest.
Provincial Policy Statement (PPS - 2005)
Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c .P. 13, as amended, provides that the Council of a municipality, in exercising any authority that affects a planning matter, shall ensure that those powers are exercised in a manner that is consistent with the policy statements issued by the Province.
Planning staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-117, if enacted and passed, and the Plans of Subdivision and Common Element Condominium, if given Draft Approval, will be consistent with the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement.
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, provides that the Council of a municipality, in exercising any authority that affects a planning matter shall conform to the provincial plans that are in effect, or shall not conflict with them, as the case may be. The Growth Plan plans and manages growth to support a strong economy and to build complete communities, while encouraging intensification.
Planning staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-taw No. 2012-117, if enacted and passed, and the Plans of Subdivision and Common Element Condominium, if given Draft Approval, will be in conformity with the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
County of Simcoe Official Plan
Schedule 5.1 entitled Land Use Designations of the County of Simcoe Official Plan, as amended, identifies the Town of Collingwood as a Settlement Area. The County of Simcoe Planning Division has provided no specific comments with respect to the amending Zoning By law No. 2012-117 and the Plans of Subdivision and Common Element Condominium.
Pfanning staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-117, if enacted and passed, and the Plans of Subdivision and Common Element Condominium, if given Draft Approval, will conform to the general intent and purpose of the County of Simcoe Official Plan.
Page3 of28 92 of 157 CJI0008049
Town of Collingwood Official Plan
Schedule "A" titled Land Use Plan of the Town's Official Plan identifies that the subject land is designated Medium Density Residential, Medium Density. These land use designations were placed on the property with the approval of Official Plan Amendment No. 24.
The Medium Density Residential permits the proposed uses to a maximum density of 19 units for the property, including 7 apartment units using the Victoria School Annex building and a proposed addition.
Planning staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-117, if enacted and passed, and the Plans of Subdivision and Common Element Condominium, if given Draft Approval, will conform to the general intent and purpose of the Town's Official Plan policies and OPA No. 24.
Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-117
This by-law creates site specific zone provisions for the medium density development proposal, including increases from the standard zone provisions for maximum lot coverage and reductions to minimum yard requirements. Additionally, the location of the existing Victoria School Annex building is recognized with respect to required yards. The new applicable zoning proposed is Residential Third Density Exception Thirty-Eight (R3-38).
The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is included as Appendix F.
Planning Services staff note that the reduction in minimum requ ired front yards from 4.5 to 1.2 metres does represent a departure from what is typically required of street townhomes and semi-detached dwelling units, but that garages for the relevant units are located to the rear of the residences with access by a proposed shared private road. Additionally, the features of the overall design of the site, such as the inclusion of walkways, view corridors and adaptive re-use of the Victoria School Annex building are viewed as compensatory for the zoning relief needed to achieve the proposal.
Parking has been provided in compliance with Zoning By-law 2010-040.
Draft Plan Approval
A Plan of Subdivision is required with this development proposal to create the individual lots for the townhomes, semi-detached dwelling units, the apartment condominium and the common element condominium private road. The Conditions of Draft Plan Approval are attached as Appendix "G" and contain standard provisions.
Given the 'tight' nature of the site a condition of Draft Plan Approval has been included which holds the applicant to the development concept which has attended Council's consideration of the proposal, including the recently approved Official Plan Amendment. Specifically the condition reads:
That the Owner shall agree in the Subdivision Agreement that the development of the subject lands shall be in substantial conformity, to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood, to the Masterplan for the development as contained in drawing SP20D, Victoria Annex Masterplan Development dated January 3, 2012 and prepared by Young and Wright/ IBI Group Architects.
Additionally, Planning Services staff note that a building, 93 Sixth Street, in the immediate vicinity of the Victoria Annex property, was given a heritage designation on January 9, 2012 and that implementation of the development proposal will have to take into account relevant Provincial and Municipal policies to assist in the conservation of the heritage attributes of the Page4 of28 93 of 157 CJI0008049
protected heritage property. Accordingly, a condition of draft plan approval has also been included to ensure that the applicable policies are addressed prior to development.
A Plan of Common Element Condominium is required with this development to facilitate vehicular access to the various dwelling units fronting onto Sixth Street and Maple Street which do not have independent driveways directly onto the local roads. With the exception of two semi-detached dwelling units fronting onto Fifth Street the rest of the dwelling units will be accessed by a shared private road. Three walkways are also included in the Common Element Condominium allowing for walking access from the surrounding roads and to provide views into the site. The Conditions of Draft Plan of Common Element Condominium are attached as Appendix "H".
Conclusion
1. Based upon the above analysis, it is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposed zoning by-law amendment and subdivision represent good land-use planning. Planning staff recommends that Council approve amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-117 and give draft plan approval to the plans of subdivision and condominium subject to the conditions as generally set out in Appendices "G" and "H".
3. DISCUSSION:
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment 2012-117 and the proposed plan of subdivision and plan of common element condominium have proceeded under the requirements of the Planning Act. The public review process has provided opportunity for the public, internal and external departments and agencies to comment and review the proposals.
4. DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW:
This Staff Report was reviewed by Department Heads at their regular meeting of Tuesday September 25, 2012. The report was recommended to proceed to Council on Monday November 26, 2012.
5. EFFECT ON TOWN FINANCES:
• Current Year: None
• Future Years: None
6. DISPOSITION:
• Implementation of the Zoning By-law Amendment, Draft Approval for the Plan of Subdivision and Draft Approval for the Common Element Plan of Condominium will be undertaken and monitored by Planning Services. Approval of a Site Plan, a Deeming By-law and Approval or Exemption for a Plan of Condominium will still be needed to facilitate the development of the Victoria School Annex component of the project.
Page 5of28 94of157 CJI0008049
7. APPENDICES:
D None rzl Attached
1. Appendix "A" Location Map
2. Appendix "B" Development Concept
3. Appendix "C" Proposed Plan of Subdivision
4. Appendix "D" Minutes of June 20, 2012 Public Meeting
5. Appendix "E" Minutes of July 24, 2006 Public meeting
6. Appendix "F" Zoning By-law Amendment
7. Appendix "G" Conditions .of Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval
8. Appendix "H" Conditions of Draft Plan of Condominium Approval
Respectfully submitted
Prepared by
Page 6 of28 95of157 CJI0008049
Appendix A - Location Map and Aerial Photograph
Page 7 of 28 96of157 CJI0008049
Appendix B - Development Concept - May 2011
Fif IH STREET -·~-~--.. --.-....------~~ .. ---;..,;.7~-·-.. _-_ _..,_ _...;.,;,_ __,,, _,,.,__...... ~ ... , '· I / \ .
1;;e.
r w w ·~ (/) I
~ ~ 'f ~ \.,, I I ( (
StXTH STREET // ~-...... _._... ___...... _~ ...... ,..,...._ . _____ "!' ___.. ______.¥
f'7"'\ PROPOSED MASltlRj;)l,AI'-.' \r~~ 'U'Ml
Page 8 of 28 97of157 CJI0008049
Appendix C - Proposed Plan of Subdivision
ll 11 : 11fi1 f ri I !ff ~~ ! liJ. .. i I ~ a tr;tfi~1· . !! '~ 1. ~ .* ~ i
• •• I
_.,
Page 9 of28 98 of 157 CJI0008049
Appendix D - Minutes of June 20, 2011 Public Meeting PUBLIC MEETING ~opm;ed .Official Plt1n ·Amendnnmt and toning By~law:Amendment(40t). Maple J;!,.,.,.,11
Acting Dlte:ctor Bryanfo
The purpo.it.I de ·· .$lillJec!Hmra Re the H~~~i~i'll#:l Offit~lal lands fora rlHl1rdar.'ri.~1 .
Th~ an a PJarinltU;J•A.ct;. Coun:ty· Fife rik>,
SU feDI}~ appro~irn/JtlJly of Fifth Stmal and Cal/ing~Yaod, Coun#y Qf
Page 10 of 28 99 of 157 CJI0008049
Page 11of28 100 of 157 CJI0008049
Mr .. Bcyan and Ms. Farrer ad.dressed oom:ems that ilave~ raised with mspeo! to parking, ~rdc tdudy~'crmooms m'ld· deft&ily~ Council requeitsd clarifi¢8Hon an 'th.a: ~nsisl~ruly ,(A the$e applications wi!f:i the Provincial PoUcv Statement, desfgnatloos, comptlsooo With .z'Onlng. oarnin:g:, setback requirements,, and the propo.s.ed one' wa:y~eet
Pub:flc sessim1 Glos.ad at 6:20 pm,
Page 12 of 28 101of157 CJI0008049
Appendix E - Minutes of July 24, 2006 Public Meeting
The purpose of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment is to re designate the subject land from the Low Density Residential designation to the Medium Density Residential Designation and to re-zone the subject land from the Community Facility (CF) zone to the Residential Fourth Density Exception (R4-E) zone and the Residential Sixth Density Exception (R6-E) zone. The effect and general intent of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment is to re-designate and re zone the lands for a residential plan of subdivision.
The Zoning By-law Amendment proposes to modify the R4 zone provisions, including but not limited to, front and exterior side yard setbacks and lot coverage, and also to modify the R6 zone provisions, including but not limited to, recognizing the existing location of the Victoria School, modifying front and exterior side yards, maximum lot coverage and minimum landscape open space. The amendment also proposes to modify the Zoning By law's General Provisions, including but not limited to, minimum distance between an accessory building and the main dwelling, accessory building lot coverage, accessory building height and minimum opening elevation. The proposed zoning classification placed on the subject property may also be the subject of a Holding "H" symbol that will not be removed until such time as Council for the Town of Collingwood is satisfied that certain conditions have been fulfilled in order for the orderly development of the land can proceed.
The purpose of the proposed plan of subdivision is to subdivide the parcel of land into smaller lots and blocks. The effect of the proposed subdivision is to create lots and blocks consisting of approximately eleven (11) single detached dwelling units, approximately two (2) semi-detached lots and one (1) block for the purposes of retaining the existing school building and converting it into a seven (7) unit residential condominium building. The remaining portion of the proposed subdivision will divided into one (1) block to seive as a common access lane to the proposed dwelling units.
Mr. Gordon Russell, Director of Planning Services, provided a detailed explanation of the official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment and plan of subdivision applications and their purpose and effect as outlined above. Mr. Russell noted that the applications are presently being reviewed by the Development Committee with note made that an audit and archaeological study of the subject lands will be undertaken as per the age and the redevelopment of the lands. Comments received noted a possible requirement for a blanket easement to allow for a watermain through the property.
Mr. Steven Christie, one of the principles of the project, addressed Council reviewing the history of the site along with the proposed development. He stressed the importance of keeping the historical nature of the existing structure, blending the historical architecture with the proposed structures and that the site is being designed to be pedestrian friendly with walkways throughout the project and rear lanes throughout the site. All efforts are being made to preserve all existing mature trees.
Chair Mayor Geddes called for the first time for comments and questions from the public.
Mrs. Mary Hall, 319 Beech Street, expressed opposition of the development as she felt that it would not be compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood and is concerned with the amount of increased traffic due to the proposed development, the small lot frontage proposed and the density of the proposal. Mrs. Hall also noted that no affordable housing would be offered in the development and requested more time be allotted to allow residents to review the application and provide input.
Page 13 of 28 102 of 157 CJI0008049
Chair Mayor Geddes called for the second time for comments and questions from the public.
Mr. George Marron, 319 Beech Street, expressed concern regarding the height, density of the proposed development and possible increased traffic.
Chair Mayor Geddes called for the third and final time for comments and questions from the public.
Mr. Doug Burn, corner of Fifth Street and Maple Street, expressed his support for the project and the ability to save and incorporate the school building into the design; however, he expressed some concern in regard to the density of the project.
Discussion occurred regarding the Provincial Policy Statement and its recommendations pertaining to intensification and how they could be incorporated into the proposed development.
Mr. Russell confirmed the development aspects in regard to water and sewer, noted that the location of the semi-detached building may better suited as a single detached dwelling and clarified that all structures excluding the existing school site conform to the height provisions in the zoning by-law.
Question regarding possible easements through the site and if there will be any type of historical monument were raised. Mr. Christie advised that a plaque and pillar are proposed to be erected at the entrance of the common walking trail.
Councillor Lloyd inquired if any additional streetscape and boulevard planning would occur. Mr. Christie advised that the intent was to keep as many of the existing trees as possible and incorporate new planting in between what exists.
Councillor Sandberg commented that the Provincial Policy Statement encourages that the recommendations of intensification, heritage, affordable housing, servicing and redevelopment be looked at as a whole.
Mrs. Sara Almas, Clerk (Acting) read written comments reviewed from Albert Winkels and Patti Wadlands on July 20 and Doug Burn on July 19, all in support of the project.
Councillor Jeffery questioned the visitor parking and the width of the internal road structure. Clarification was provided stating that the apartment complex would have visitor parking and the width of the laneway will be 6 metres wide with a two-way traffic roadway of 7.2 metres in the wesVeast direction.
Mr. Christie noted that they would be responsible for snow removal.
Moved by Councillor Sandberg Seconded by Councillor Lloyd
THAT Council hereby direct Planning Services to review and prepare a staff report and by law with respect to the comments received.
CARRIED
There being no further questions or comments the public meeting for this application adjourned at 9:12 pm.
Page 14 of28 103of157 CJI0008049
Appendix "F" Zoning By-law Amendment BY-LAW No. 2012-117
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD
BEING A BY-LAW UNDER THE PROVISlON OF SECTION 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT, RS.O. 1990, C. P.13, AS AMENDED
--~~ --· ~ -- ~------·------WHEREAS Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, permits a Council to pass a by-law prohibiting the use of land, buildings or structures within a defined area or areas;
AND WHEREAS Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is the governing By-law of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood and such was finally passed by the Council of the Town of Collingwood on April 12•h, 2010;
AND WHEREAS Council deems that adequate public notice of the public meeting was provided and adequate information regarding this Amendment was presented at the public meeting held, 2011, and that a further public meeting is not considered necessary in order to proceed with this Amendment;
AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood has deemed it advisable to amend Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, and thus implement the Official Plan ofthe Town of Collingwood;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. THAT Schedule "A" Map 21 of Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, as amended, is hereby further amended as it pertains to lands shown more particularly on Schedule '1 ' affixed hereto and forming part.of this by-law, by rezoning a portion ofsaid lands from the RESIDENTIAL SECOND DENSITY (R2) ZONE to the RESIDENTfAL THIRD DENSITY EXCEPTION THIRTY-EIGHT (R3-38) ZONE.
2. THAT Section 6.5 titled Residential Exception Zones of the Collingwood Zoning Byclaw No. 2010-040, as amended, is hereby amended by adding the following new paragraphs entitled RESIDENTIAL THIRD DENSJTY EXCEPTION THIRTY-EIGHT - R3-38 ZONE in proper sequence to read as follows;
"RESIDENTIAL THIRD DENSITY EXCEPTION THIRTY-EIGHT - R3-38 ZONE
Notwithstanding the provisions of 4.33.10 a detached accessory building in this zone which is constructed abutting a lane it shall have a required setback of a minimum of 5.9 metres from the opposite boundary of the lane.
Notwithstanding General Provision 5.1 entitled Parking and Loading Provisions the minimum parking provided for residents and visitors in an apartment in a R3-38 zone shall be 1.25 spaces per unit plus an additional 0.25 spaces per unit for visitor parking including a tandem covered parking space in a private garage PLUS one loading space and one handicapped space.
Notwithstanding any other provisions.to the contrary, a private road established under a Common Elements Condominium.in accordance with the Condominium Act, 1998 S.O. 1998 shall be deemed to meet the requirements for direct frontage and access to an improved public street.
3. THAT Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is hereby amended to give effect to the foregoing, but that Collingwood Zoning By-law 2010-040 shall in all other respects remain in full force and effect.
4. THAT this By-law shall come into force and effect on the date it is enacted and passed by the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood, subject to notice hereof being circulated in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act and Ontario Page 15 of 28 104 of 157 CJI0008049
Regulation 545/06, and if required as a result of such circulation the obtaining of the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board.
ENACTED AND PASSED this 26th day of November, 2012.
MAYOR
CLERK
Page 16 of 28 105of157 CJI0008049
-----r I 2.j.rn
L2:n
4.)J j
tl..Sm 2.0m
t w w er: ...... (/) w -I o.Sm 0... ·4: \ ::.om :i \. SHARED PRIVATE ROAD
")t)1 2_;,m 1 2.6m N I - ~~ l-201 LEGEND
(. ····i Ii Building envelopes for dwelling units and accessory buildings.
MAYOR CLERK
TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD This is Schedule 'A' to By-law No. 2012-117 enacted and Planning Services passed the 26th day of November, 2012. OWG Dl\TE: Novomoor 2 1, 2012 Flt E NO: 72000·07 (RS)
Page 17 of 28 106 of 157 CJI0008049
Appendix "G" Conditions of Draft Plan Approval For a Plan of Subdivision
No. Conditions
1. That this approval applies to the Draft Plan of Subdivision located on Lots 10, 11 and 12 South of Fifth Street and Lots 10, 11 and 12 North of Sixth Street, Registered Plan No. 45, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe prepared by Zubek, Emo, Patten and Thomsen Limited, dated April, 2012 and showing a total of:
a. 6 Semi-detached residential Jots (Lots 1, 2, 6, 7, 11 and 12) (6 dwelling units} b. 6 Townhome lots (Lots 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10) (6 dwelling units} c. 1 Block for 7 apartment units (Block 13) (7 dwelling units) d. 1 Block for a shared private road (Block 14) e. 3 pedestrian walkway blocks
2. That the Owner shall agree in writing to satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise of the Town of Collingwood prior to final approval.
3. That prior to final approval and registration, the relevant existing lots of Registered Plan No. 45 shall be deemed not to be lots on a plan of subdivision.
4. That prior to final approval and registration, the appropriate zoning shall be in effect for the proposed subdivision.
5. That the Owner shall enter into serv1cmg, development and other necessary agreements, satisfactory to the Town of Collingwood or any other appropriate authority before any development or site alteration within the plan, excepting approved remediation works and general site earth works. These agreements may deal with matters including but not limited to the following:
a. Engineering and conservation works which include municipal services; b. Professional services including preparation of reports, plans, inspections, certifications and approvals; c. Hydro, stormwater management; d. Storm sewers, road widening and reconstruction; e. Monitoring wells, cash contributions, levies (development charges) f. Securities or letters of credit, emergency services; g. Land dedications and easements, reserves, noise abatement; h. Fencing, berming, buffer blocks and planting; i. Grading and sodding, signed entry features; j. Warning clauses, hoarding, parkland and tree preservation;
The details of which are indicated in correspondence from appropriate commenting agencies and departments.
6. That the Owner shall agree in the Subdivision Agreement that the development of the subject lands shall be in substantial conformity, to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood, to the Masterplan for the development as contained in drawing SP20D, Victoria Annex Masterplan Development dated January 3, 2012 and prepared by Young and Wright/ 181 Group Architects.
7. That the municipality shall confirm that the Subdivision Agreement has been registered, by the municipality against the lands to which it applies as provided for in the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990.
Page 18 of 28 107 of 157 CJI0008049
8. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement that all applicable development charges, processing and administrative fees be paid prior to building permit issuance in accordance with the current policies and by-laws of the Town of Collingwood and County of Simcoe.
9. That the Owner shall agree that the private road and walkways shown as Block 14 shall be constructed and named to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood with regard to 911 emergency servicing.
10. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement that the Owner will be required to complete to Town specifications, at the Owner's expense, the following road improvements:
a) Urbanization of Maple and Fifth Streets along these site frontages.
11. That the owner convey up to 5% of the land included in the Plan to the municipality for park purposes, or cash-in-lieu thereof, to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood.
12. That all roads within the proposed development will be constructed to Town of Collingwood Standards including curb & gutter, hot asphalt, granular, storm sewers, sanitary sewer, watermain, subdrains, sidewalks, street lights, traffic signs, driveway approaches, sodded boulevards, boulevard trees and landscaping.
13. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to provide public walkways and sidewalks to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood.
14. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to provide for the collection of garbage and removal of snow to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood.
15. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement that all dedications of land the Town of Collingwood requires shall be at no cost to the municipality.
16. That the Owner shall agree to provide fencing to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood, where required.
17. That prior to any site alteration within the plan, the following shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood:
a) A detailed stormwater management report; b) An Erosion Control Plan; and, c) A detailed Grading Plan.
18. That the Owner shall accommodate all existing drainage within and external to the subject plan according to the Town of Collingwood's Stormwater Management Policies and to the satisfaction of the Engineering Services Department. Where improvements and/or adjustments to the existing systems are necessary to facilitate this development, it will be the Owner's responsibility to provide the necessary works, including outlet improvements as required.
19. The Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to provide appropriate erosion and sediment control within the development areas to protect applicable watercourses from the impact of run off from the development. The Owner will maintain the erosion and sediment control facility in a fashion suitable to the Town's Engineering Services Department and any safety devices, if required, will be provided by the Owner at the direction of the Town's Engineering Services Department in their sole and unfettered discretion. Page 19 of28 108 of 157 CJI0008049
20. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to provide storm sewers suitably designed and of sufficient depth to provide for the proper drainage of the lands within and external to the subdivision and to discharge to drainage outlets as directed by and to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood.
21 . That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to provide sanitary sewers suitably designed and of sufficient depth to provide for the proper collection of the lands within and external to the subdivision as directed by and to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood.
22. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement that in order to provide proper and reliable water distribution systems within the development, reasonable looping of these systems shall be provided to the satisfaction of Collingwood Public Utility.
23 . That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to provide electrical servicing suitably designed and of sufficient capacity to provide for the proper servicing of the lands within and external to the subdivision as directed by and to the satisfaction of the COLLUS Power.
24. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement, that such easements and land dedications as may be required for access, drainage, servicing, stormwater management, utilities and construction purposes shall be designed to the satisfaction of, and granted to the appropriate agencies or authorities, free and clear of all encumbrances to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood and all appropriate agencies or authorities.
25. That the Owner shall agree in the Subdivision Agreement to provide to the Town of Collingwood, a soils report recommending the material necessary for road construction to meet Town standards. This report shall also address any potential groundwater issues as they related to the proposed development of homes, roads and stormwater management facilities.
26 . That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to make arrangements to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood for a suitable construction traffic route.
27. That prior to final approval, the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement, a municipal numbering system be assigned to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood with regard to 911 emergency servicing; and that the Owner agrees in the Subdivision Agreement to display the lot number and corresponding municipal address in a prominent location on each lot.
28. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement prior to final approval, arrangements will be made to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood for the relocation of any utilities required by the development of the subject lands to be undertaken at the expense of the Owner.
29. That the Owner will agree in the Subdivision Agreement that prior to final approval, the Owner is to submit a Streetscape and Stormwater Management Landscape Plan to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood. The Streetscape/Landscape Plan shall conform to the Town of Collingwood Subdivision Guidelines
30. That prior to any tree removal or site alteration, the Owner shall submit an Application to Destroy Trees to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood and aII site works shall be in strict accordance with the approved Permit and/or associated Agreement.
Page 20 of28 109of157 CJI0008049
31. That prior to any tree removal or site alteration, the Owner shall be required to submit a Tree Preservation Plan to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood. The Tree Preservation Plan shall be consistent with any and all applicable recommendations of the reports required to be prepared under condition 19.
32. That the Owner shall agree in the Subdivision Agreement to the preparation and implementation of architectural guidelines to govern the character of residential structures and commercial structures in a manner acceptable to the Town of Collingwood. The Owner shall submit, to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood, architectural guidelines that conform to the Town of Collingwood Subdivision Guidelines, including design principles and architectural styles. The Owner shall agree in the Subdivision Agreement to construct all buildings and structures in conformity with the approved architectural guidelines, and to the inclusion of the approved architectural guidelines as a schedule to the Subdivision Agreement.
33. That the Owner shall agree in the Subdivision Agreement to the preparation and implementation a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood. The HIA will evaluate the impact of the proposed dwellings on any relevant adjacent properties. Generally, these types of assessments will recommend certain architectural design characteristics to be included in the individual design of the dwellings to ensure the new dwellings will compliment the housing stock in the surrounding area ..
34. That the subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Town of Collingwood contain phasing arrangements, if required, to the satisfaction of the Town of Collingwood.
35. That prior to final approval the Owner shall carry out an archaeological assessment of the subject property and mitigate, through preservation or resource removal and documentation, adverse impacts to any significant archaeological resources found. No tree cutting, stump removal, grading or other soil disturbances shall take place on the subject property prior to the Town of Collingwood and the Ministry of Culture confirming that all archaeological resource concerns have met licensing and resource conservation requirements.
36. That the subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Town of Collingwood contain provisions indicating that no grading or other soil disturbances shall take place on the subject property prior to the Town of Collingwood confirming satisfaction with the recommendations of the Environmental Site Assessment.
37. That the owner shall agree in the Subdivision Agreement, with wording to the satisfaction of the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board, to include in all offers of purchase and sale a clause advising prospective purchasers that pupils from this development attending educational facilities operated by the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board may be transported to I accommodated in temporary facilities out of the neighbourhood school's area.
38. That the Owner shall co-ordinate the preparation of an overall utility distribution plan to the satisfaction of all effected authorities.
39. That the Owner shall provide Canada Post with two copies of the above-ground utility coordination plans. Furthermore, that the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement to the following:
a) work with Canada Post and the Town of Collingwood to determine and provide temporary suitable location prior to occupancy for the placement of the Centralized Page 21 of 28 110of157 CJI0008049
Mail Facility/Community Mailbox.
b) work with Canada Post and the Town of Collingwood to determine the location of the Centralized Mail Facility/Community Mailboxes and to ensure that they are properly identified on all appropriate maps and plans; and,
c) provide an appropriately sized sidewalk section (concrete pad) where applicable, to Canada Post's and the Town of Collingwood's specifications, any required walkways across the boulevard, and any required curb cuts for wheelchair access for the placement of the permanent Community Mailbox locations and include said requirements on the appropriate plans/maps.
40. That the Owner shall insert the following conditions in the subdivision agreement to the satisfaction of Enbridge Gas Distribution:
a) Streets are to be constructed in accordance with the municipal standards; b) The Owner shall grade all streets to as necessary prior to the installation of the gas lines and provide the necessary field survey information and references to final elevation required for the installation of the gas lines, all to the satisfaction of Enbridge Gas Distribution; c) All of the natural gas distribution system will be installed within the proposed road allowances therefore easements will not be required.
41. The Owner is hereby advised that prior to commencing any work within the Plan, the Owner must confirm that sufficient wire-line communication I telecommunication infrastructure is currently available within the proposed development to provide communication I telecommunication service to the proposed development. In the event that such infrastructure is not available, the Owner is herby advised that the Owner may be required to pay for the connection to and/or extension of the existing communication I telecommunication infrastructure. If the Owner elects not to pay for such connection to and/or extension of the existing communication I telecommunication infrastructure, the Owner shall be required to demonstrate to the municipality that sufficient alternate communication I telecommunication facilities are available within the proposed development to enable; at a minimum, the effective delivery of communication I telecommunication services for emergency management service (i.e., 911 Emergency Services).
42. That the Owner shall agree in the subdivision agreement, in words satisfactory to Bell Canada, to grant Bell Canada any easements that may be required for telecommunications services. Easements may be required subject to final servicing decisions. In the event of any conflict with existing Bell Canada facilities or easements, the Owner/Developer shall be responsible for the relocation of such facilities or easements.
43. That prior to final approval, a copy of the proposed final plan is to be forwarded to the Town of Collingwood as the Approval Authority for review and approval.
44. That prior to final approval the Owner will provide the Town of Collingwood with confirmation, in writing, as to how conditions 1 to 34, 36 and 45 have been satisfied.
45. That prior to final approval the Town of Collingwood as the Approval Authority be advised, in writing, by the Ministry ofCulture how condition 35 has been satisfied.
46. The prior to Final Approval the approval authority be advised, in writing, by the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board how condition 37 has been satisfied.
Page 22 of28 111 of 157 CJI0008049
47. That prior to final approval the Town of Collingwood as the Approval Authority be advised, in writing, by Enbridge Gas Distribution how condition 40 has been satisfied.
48. That prior to final approval the Town of Collingwood as the Approval Authority be advised, in writing, by Canada Post how condition 39 has been satisfied.
49. That prior to final approval the Town of Collingwood as the Approval Authority be advised, in writing, by Bell Canada how condition 41 and 42 have been satisfied.
50. That draft plan approval is for a period of three (3) years. The Owner shall apply for any extension at least sixty (60) days prior to the fapsing date.
Notes to Draft Approval
1. It is the applicant's responsibility to fulfill the conditions of draft approval and to ensure that the required clearance fetters are forwarded by the appropriate agencies to the Approval Authority, quoting file numbers DC 2006-14.
2. It is suggested that the Owner be aware of Section 144 of the Land Titles Act and subsection 78(10) of the Registry Act. Subsection 144(1) of the Land Titles Act requires that a plan of subdivision of land that is located in a land titles division be registered under the Land Titles Act. Exceptions to this provision are set out in subsection 144(2).
Subsection 78(10) of the Registry Act requires that a plan of subdivision of land that is located onfy in a registry division cannot be registered under the Registry Act unless the title of the Owner of the land has been certified under the Certification of Title Act. Exceptions to this provision are set out in clauses (b) and (c) of subsection 78(10).
3. Tthe municipality register the subdivision agreement as provided by subsection 51 (26) of the Planning Act, R.S.0. 1990 against the land to which it applies, as notice to prospective purchasers.
4. The Town of Collingwood requires all engineering drawings to be submitted in AutoCAD 14 format as well as hardcopies.
5. All measurements in subdivision final plans must be presented in metric units.
6. All deeds to be conveyed must be free and clear of all encumbrances.
7. The Town of Collingwood Waste Water Treatment Plant and Water Treatment Plant capacities are subject to the registration of the plan and entering into the associated agreement.
8. The Owner will be required to contact Bell Canada's Engineering Department regarding the details for servicing within the subdivision as well as the necessary Letters of Understanding.
9. The Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority will require a copy of the executed subdivision agreement prior to the clearance of the draft plan conditions.
10. The Owner shall agree, prior to final approval, to pay all development fees to the Conservation Authority as required in accordance with the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority's fees policy, under the Conservation Authorities Act
Page 23 of 28 112of157 CJI0008049
11 . If agency draft plan conditions concern conditions within the subdivision agreement, a copy of the agreement should be sent to them. This will expedite the clearance of the final plan.
12. Clearances are required from the following agencies:
The Town of Collingwood Engineering Services Department 97 Hurontario Street P.O. Box 157 Collingwood, Ontario L9Y 3Z5
The Town of Collingwood Planning Services Department 105 Hurontario Street P.O. Box 157 Collingwood, Ontario L9Y 3Z5
Ministry of Culture Attn: Mr. Winston Wong 400 University Ave. Toronto, Ontario M7A2R9
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 8195 Concession 8 Utopia, Ontario LOM 1TO
Simcoe County District School Board 1170 Highway 26 West Midhurst, Ontario LOL 1XO
Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board 46 Alliance Blvd. Barrie, Ontario L4M 5K3
Enbridge Gas Distribution Planning 500 Consumers Road North York, Ontario M2J 1 P8
Bell Canada Development & Municipal Review Services Control Centre Floor 5 Blue, 100 Borough Drive Toronto, Ontario M1P4W2
Canada Post Delivery Planning 300 Wellington Street Page 24 of 28 113of157 CJI0008049
London, Ontario N6B 3P2
Collingwood Utility Services PO Box 189 43 Stewart Road Collingwood, Ontario L9Y 3Z5
Utility Providers for the following as/if required: Telecommunications Provider Electricity Service Provider
13. The approval of this draft plan is for a period of three (3) years and will lapse on November 26, 2015.
If final approval is not given to this plan within the draft approval time period above the draft approval will lapse under subsection 51(32) of the Planning Act. Draft approval may be extended pursuant to subsection 51(33) of the Planning Act, but no extension can be granted once the approval has lapsed.
If the Owner wishes to request an extension to draft approval, a written explanation, together with a resolution from Council, must be received by the Approval Authority sixty (60) days prior to the lapsing date.
14. The Final Plan approved by the Approval Authority must be registered within 30 days or the County may withdraw its approval under subsection 51(32) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended.
Subject to the conditions set forth above, this Draft Plan is approved under Section 51 of the Planning Act R.S.O 1990, Chapter 13, as amended this 26th day of November, 2012.
Sara Almas, Clerk Town of Collingwood
Sandra Cooper, Mayor Town of Collingwood
Page25 of 28 11 4 of 157 CJI0008049
Appendix "G" Conditions of Draft Plan Approval Common Element Condominium for a Shared Private Road and Walkways
No. Conditions
1. That this approval applies to a Draft Plan of Condominium for a Common Elements Condominium located on part of Lots 10, 11 and 12 South of Fifth Street and Lots 10, 11 and 12 North of Sixth Street, Registered Plan No. 45, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe; prepared by Zubek, Emo, Patten and Thomsen Limited, dated April 27, 2012 and showing one block (Block 14) consisting of a shared private driveway and several walkways.
2. That the Owner shall agree in writing, or an agreement, to satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise of the Town of Collingwood prior to final approval.
3. That prior to final approval of the condominium, a copy of the proposed final plan, and any associated easement and condominium declaration documents, as deemed necessary by the Town, are to be forwarded to the Town as the approval authority for review and approval.
4. That prior to final approval the Owner shall confirm to the satisfaction of the Town, in writing, that the aforementioned conditions have been satisfied.
5. That registration of the condominium shall only proceed, concurrently with the registration of the associated plan of subdivision such that the appropriate block for the common element condominium has been created,
6. That draft plan approval is for a period of three (3) years from the date of approval of this draft approval. The Owner shall apply for any extension at least sixty (60) days prior to the lapsing date.
Notes to Draft Approval
1. It is the Owner's responsibility to fulfill the conditions of draft approval and to ensure that the required clearance letters are forwarded to the Town as approval authority, quoting file number DC2006~14
2. It is suggested that the Owner should review section 144 of the Land Titles Act and section 78 of the Registry Act. Subsection 144(1) of the Land Titles Act requires that a plan of condominium of land that is located in a land titles division be registered under the Land Titles Act. Exceptions to this provision are set out in subsection 144(2).
3. Subsection 78(11) of the Registry Act indicates that a description as defined in the Condominium Act. 1998 in respect of land that is within an area to which the Land Titles Act applies but not within an area designated under subsection 144(3) of the Land Titles Act shall not be registered under the Registry Act.
4. The Town requires all engineering drawings to be submitted in AutoCAD 14 format as well as hardcopy.
5. All measurements in condominium final plans must be presented in metric units.
Page 26of 28 11 5 of 157 CJI0008049
6. If applicable, the Owner shalt agree, prior to final approval, to pay all development fees to the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority as required in accordance with the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority's fees policy established under the Conservation Authorities Act.
7. Clearance is only required from the Town.
8. The approval of this draft plan is for a period of three (3) years and will lapse on November 26, 2015.
If final approval is not given to this plan within the draft approval time period above the draft approval will lapse under subsection 51 (32) of the Planning Act. Draft approval may be extended pursuant to subsection 51 (33) of the Planning Act, but no extension can be granted once the approval has lapsed.
If the Owner wishes to request an extension to draft approval, a written explanation, together with a resolution from Council, must be received by the Approval Authority sixty (60) days prior to the lapsing date.
9. The Final Plan approved by the Approval Authority must be registered within 30 days or the County may withdraw its approval under subsection 51(32) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended.
Subject to the conditions set forth above, this Draft Plan is approved under Section 51 of the Planning Act R.S.O 1990, Chapter 13, as amended this 26th day of November, 2012.
Sara Almas, Clerk Town of Collingwood
Sandra Cooper, Mayor Town of Collingwood
Page 27 of 28 116of157 CJI0008049
I 'I • fl'l.1 ) l!illl1 ,, ~ .+ ·· 1.1
- 11 , 1.,_ ~
'H
Jll l
Page 28 of 28 117 of 157 CJI0008049
t-3~---·- -·-·-·-·-· .. 7.0m i •• _J 6.0111 i i i i i i 2.0m i i i I i 2.3mi -1 ! i ! i ! • 1.2m I i i 2.9m I i i j 4.3m ·-t i 2.9111 i -.L. ----- 1-----i i ! i 6.4m o.Sm i 2.0m i ! i i ! i I 4.3m i i =-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-· -·-·-·----i 1- WAU
4.9m
,2.Sm I i 2.6m i i i N I i i i i.-·-·-· -·-·-+·-·-·-· ----~ 2.0m 2.0m 2.0m l.2m 2.0m + LEGEND
Q Building envelopes for dwelling units and accessory buildings.
MAYOR CLERK
TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD This is Schedule 'A' to By-law No. 2012-117 enacted and Planning Services passed the 26th day of November, 2012. DWG DATE: November21, 2012 FILE NO: Z2006C07 (RS) CJI0008049
EXPLANATORY NOTE TO THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD BY-LAW No. 2012-117
By-law No. 2012-117 is a by-law under the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, for prohibiting the use of land for or except for such purposes as may be set out in the by-law.
The purpose and effect of the zoning by-law amendment is to rezone the subject property from the Residential Second Density (R2) zone to the Residential Third Density Exception Thirty Eight (R3-38) zone. The R3-38 zone contains site specific provisions supportive of a nineteen (19) dwelling unit development proposal for the property consisting of:
• three (3) semi-detached buildings with a total of six (6) dwelling units, • two (2) three unit townhome buildings for a total of six (6) dwelling units, • a block to establish a seven (7) unit walk-up apartment dwelling by way of renovating and constructing an addition onto an existing building, and, • one (1) common element condominium for a shared private road and walkways.
119 of 157 CJI0008049
BY-LAW No. 2012-117
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD
BEING A BY-LAW UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S .O. 1990, C. P.13, AS AMENDED
WHEREAS Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, permits a Council to pass a by-law prohibiting the use of land , buildings or structures within a defined area or areas;
AND WHEREAS Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is the governing By-law of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood and such was finally passed by the Council of the Town of Collingwood on April 121h, 2010;
AND WHEREAS Council deems that adequate public notice of the public meeting was provided and adequate information regarding this Amendment was presented at the public meeting held, 20 11, and that a further public meeting is not considered necessary in order to proceed with this Amendment;
AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood has deemed it advisable to amend Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, and thus implement the Official Plan of the Town of Collingwood;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. THAT Schedule "A" Map 21 of Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, as amended, is hereby further amended as it pertains to lands shown more particularly on Schedule '1 ' affixed hereto and forming part of this by-law, by rezoning a portion of said lands from the RESIDENTIAL SECOND DENSITY (R2) ZONE to the RESIDENTIAL THIRD DENSITY EXCEPTION THIRTY-EIGHT (R3-38) ZONE.
2. THAT Section 6.5 titled Residential Exception Zones of the Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, as amended, is hereby amended by adding the following new paragraphs entitled RESIDENTIAL THIRD DENSITY EXCEPTION THIRTY-EIGHT - R3-38 ZONE in proper sequence to read as follows;
"RESIDENTIAL THIRD DENSITY EXCEPTION THIRTY-EIGHT - R3-38 ZONE
Notwithstanding the provisions of 4.33.10 a detached accessory building in this zone which is constructed abutting a lane it shall have a required setback of a minimum of 5.9 metres from the opposite boundary of the lane.
Notwithstanding General Provision 5.1 entitled Parking and Loading Provisions the minimum parking provided for residents and visitors in an apartment in a R3-38 zone shall be 1.25 spaces per unit plus an additional 0.25 spaces per unit for visitor parking including a tandem covered parking space in a private garage PLUS one loading space and one handicapped space.
Notwithstanding any other provisions to the contrary, a private road established under a Common Elements Condominium in accordance with the Condominium Act, 1998 S.O. 1998 shall be deemed to meet the requirements for direct frontage and access to an improved public street.
3. THAT Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is hereby amended to give effect to the foregoing, but that Collingwood Zoning By-law 2010-040 shall in all other respects remain in full force and effect.
4. THAT this By-law shall come into force and effect on the date it is enacted and passed by the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood, subject to notice hereof
120 of 157 CJI0008049
being circulated in accordance with the prov1s1ons of the Planning Act and Ontario Regulation 545/06, and if required as a result of such circulation the obtaining of the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board.
ENACTED AND PASSED this 261h day of November, 2012.
MAYOR
CLERK
121 of157 CJI0008049
i"'" --·--·-·-·-· --·-·-·-· .. 7.0m 4.6m
2.0m
2.3m -1 0.8m i i • J .2m i 2.91n I I r--I ------i I 1---- _1 4·==---1 i i i i i i I 0.8n1 i 4.3m 2.0m I i i '----~ i i ! i i ! 4.3rn i 0.28m I ... ·-·---·-·-·-·-·-·-· -·-·-·-·-·~ 1- WA LKWAY w w 7Xlm •"-'·-· --·-·-·-·-·-·- 2.SJn·-·-·-·- i i 5.Sm i 0::: i i 1- i ,.---+---, I 2.i:lm UJ I I i i w i ------_J ..J 0.8m 1. 2m c.. 2.0rn <(
7-0m :!:
2.Sm
1---·--·I -·-·-·-·-·---· ·-·-·-·-·~ SHARED PRIVATE ROAD
1 0.8rn 0.8m O.Sm ~·-·-·-·-·--·- i ,.____...-~-·-·-·.-·-· I ,.____.. _ _.._.,.._~ I ·-·-·-·-·-..i ··-·-· i 5.6m.--- .. i i'>.9rn 6.0m .9nJ 5.4rn
4.9m 4.')m
25nl I 2.6m i :i.onl i i I i ]\; i i i i I i L-·--· ·-·-·-· ... -..:..·-·-· -·-·-+·-·-· -~?-· 2.0m 2.0rn 2.0m L2m 2.0rn
LEGEND rii •• •·· ••1 Building! envelopes for dwelling units and accessory buildings.
MAYOR CLERK
TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD This is Schedule 'A' to By-law No. 2012-117 enacted and Planning Services passed the 26th day of November, 2012. DWG DATE: Novembe r 21 , 2012 FI LE NO: Z2006-07 (RS)
122 of 157 CJI0008049
STAFF REPORT
REPORT#: P2012-38 DATE: November 26, 2012 SUBMITTED TO: Mayor & Members of Council SUBMITTED BY: Nancy Farrer -Director of Planning Services Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-120 Town Files: D14712 Legal Description: Lots 3, 4 & 5; Part Lots 1, 2, 6 & 7, Registered Plan SUBJECT: No. 282, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe Municipal Address: 182 & 186 Erie Street Owner: Healthcare Properties Holdings Ltd. Agent: Lakeshore Group
1. RECOM:MENDATION:
AND THAT Council enact and pass amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-120 (182 and 186 Erie Street).
2 •. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND:
Synogsis of Progosal
Proposed amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-120 is to rezone 182 Erie Street from Holding Fourteen Residential Second Density Exception Twenty ((H14) R2-20) to Community Service Exception One (CS-1) and to rezone 186 Erie Street from Community Services Exception Six (CS-6) Zone to Community Service Exception One (CS-1) Zone.
The zoning by-law amendment will also remove the requirement of the Holding Three (H 14) zone symbol from these same portions of the property municipally known as 182 Erie Street.
The effect of amending Zoning No. 2012-120 is to expand the existing medical clinic.
Property Description
The subject lands are located on the south side of Erie Street and are further described as Lots 3, 4 & 5; Part Lots 1, 2, 6 & 7, Registered Plan No. 282, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe 9 and is municipally described as 182. & 186 Erie Street. The lands are approximately 6,883.1 metres squared (1.7 acres) in lot area and are improved with an existing medical clinic and parking lot.
Page 1 of 5 123 of157 CJI0008049
Public Meeting
Council held a public meeting regarding the proposed changes to the Zoning By-law on October 22, 2012.
Parties who submitted comments included the Nottawasaga Conservation Authority (NVCA), Simcoe County District School Board, Breaking Down Barriers and Rogers Communications.
Matters of Provincial Interest
Section 2 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c .P. 13, as amended, provides that Council in carrying out their responsibilities under the Planning Act sha ll have regard to matters of provincial interest
Planning Services staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012.-120, if enacted and passed, shall not offend any matters of provincial interest.
Provincial Policy Stat~ment {PPS - 2005}
Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c .P. 13, as amended, provides that the Council of a municipality, in exercising any authority that affects a planning matter, shall ensure that those powers are exercised in a manner that is consistent with the policy statements issued by the Province.
Planning Services staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-120, if enacted and passed, will be consistent with the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement.
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, provides that the Council of a municipality, in exercising any authority that affects a planning matter shall conform to the provincial plans that are in effect, or shall not conflict with them, as the case may be. The Growth Plan plans and manages growth to support a strong economy and to build complete communities, while encouraging intensification.
Planning Services staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-faw No. 2012-120, if enacted and passed, will conform to the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
County of Simcoe Official Plan
Schedule 5.1 entitled Land Use Designations of the County of Simcoe Official Plan, as amended, identifies the Town of Collingwood as a Settlement Area. The County of Simcoe Official Plan contains policies encouraging development of those areas that are designated as Settlement.
The County of Simcoe Planning Division has provided no specific comments with respect to this proposed Zoning By-law Amendment. However, Planning staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-120, if enacted and passed, will conform to the general intent and purpose of the County of Simcoe Official Plan.
Page 2 of 4 124of157 CJI0008049
Town of Collingwood Official Plan
Schedule "A" entitled Land Use Plan of the Town's Official Plan identifies that the subject property is within the Low Density Residential designation with a Special Policy - Health Services (OPA #12) overlay. The purpose of the Special Policy - Health Services designation is to identify that The Town of Collingwood functions as a regional service centre encompassing health care. The Collingwood General and Mari.ne Hospital on Hume Street provides health care to residents of Collingwood and the surrounding municipalities.
It is a policy of this Official Plan to encourage a broader range of health services to be located on lands that are close to the hospital.
Permitted uses include a broad range of health care services, which include medical clinics.
Planning staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-120, if enacted and passed, will conform to the general intent and purpose of the County of Simcoe Official Plan.
Amending Zoning Bx:-law No. 2012-120
Schedule "A" of the Collingwood Zoning By-law identifies that the subject lands at 182 Erie Street are zoned Holding Fourteen Residential Second Density Exception Twenty ((H14) R2-20) and at 186 Erie Street Community Services Exception Six (CS-6).
Amending Zoning By-law No.2012-120, if enacted and passed, will rezone the entire properties of 182 and 186 Erie Street to Community Services Exception One (CS-1) Zone.
Furthermore, Planning staff would recommend the removal of the Holding Three (H14) zone symbol from the property municipally known as 182 Erie Street. Originally, the H14 holding zone was applied to adopt an authorization by-law for a site plan control agreement. Since this property will be merging with 186 Erie Street (Deeming By-law Town File No. 01207312) the applicant has filed for an amendment to the existing site plan agreement (Site Plan Amendment Town File No. 011712) for the expansion to the medical cli nic over the lands at 182 Erie Street.
Parking is sufficient on the subject property for the intended expansion to the medical cl inic. The CS-1 zone provisions regarding lot area, lot frontage and required setbacks will remain unchanged.
Recommendation
It is the opinion of Planning Services staff that this proposal represents good land-use planning. Planning Services staff recommends that Council amend Zoning By-law No. 2012-120 (see Appendix "A").
3. DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW:
• This Staff Report was forwarded to Department Heads on Tuesday November 20, 2012 for comment and it was recommended that this report proceed to Council for consideration and direction.
Page 3 of 4 125of157 CJI0008049
4. EFFECT ON TOWN FINANCES:
• Current Year: None
• Future Years: None
5. APPENDICES:
D None ~ Attached
1. Appendix "A" -Orthographic Photo 2012
2. Appendix "B" -Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-120
Respectfully submitted,
Prepared by:
Kandas Bondarchuk, BA, CPT Planner - Technician
Page 4 of4 126of157 CJI0008049
Schedule 'A' - Orthographic Photo 2012
Page 5 of 5 127of157 CJI0008049
EXPLANATORY NOTE TO THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD BY-LAW No. 2012-120
By-law No. 2012-116 is a by-law under the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, for prohibiting the use of land for or except for such purposes as may be set out in the by-law;
The purpose of the zoning by-law amendment is to allow the expansion of the existing medical clinic ..
128 of 157 CJI0008049
BY-LAW No. 2012-120
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOO.D
BEING A BY-LAW UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, C. P.13, AS AMENDED
WHEREAS Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, permits a Council to pass a by-law prohibiting the use of land, buildings or structures within a defined area or areas, and to authorize the temporary use of land, buildings or structures for any purpose set out therein that is otherwise prohibited by the by-law;
AND WHEREAS Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is the governing By-law of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood and such was finally passed by the Council of the Town of Collingwood on April 121h, 2010;
AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood has deemed it advisable to amend Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, and thus implement the Official Plan of the Town of Collingwood;
AND WHEREAS Council deems that adequate public notice of the public meeting was provided and adequate information regarding this Amendment was presented at the public meeting held October 22rt1.1. 2012, and that a further public meeting is not considered necessary in order to proceed with this Amendment;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. THAT Schedule "A" of Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, as amended, is hereby further amended as it pertains to lands shown more particularly on Schedule 'A' affixed hereto and forming part of this by-law, by rezoning said lands of 182 Erie Street from HOLDING FOURTEEN RESIDENTIAL SECOND DENSITY EXCEPTION TWENTY ((H14) R2-20) ZONE to COMMUNITY SERVICES EXCEPTION ONE (CS-1) ZONE and 186 Erie Street from COMMUNITY SERVICES EXCEPTION SIX (CS-6) ZONE to COMMUNITY SERVICES EXCEPTION ONE (CS-1) ZONE.
2. THAT Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is hereby amended to give effect to the foregoing, but that Collingwood Zoning By-law 2010-040 shall in all other respects remain in full force and effect.
3. THAT this By-law shall come into force and effect on the date it is enacted and passed by the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood, subject to notice hereof being circulated in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act and Ontario Regulation 545/06, and if required as a resu lt of such circulation the obtaining of the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board.
ENACTED AND PASSED this 261h day of November, 2012.
MAYOR
CLERK
129 of 157 CJI0008049
l.EGEHD lan!Cls to be 1remned from the HOLDING FOURTEEN RESWEHTIAL SECOND DBISITY EXCEPTION TWENTY ((H14) R.2-20) ZONE to COMMUNITY SBMCES EXCEPTION OOE (CS-1} ZONE
lan ~·Of COlUNIGWOOO This• Schedule 'A' to By-law·No •.2012-120 1 en~ed and 1Pl111mir19 S«Ykff; pnised 'CM- 26th dey Qf N 130 of 157 CJI0008049 STAFF REPORT REPORT #: 2012-39 -···--~····· ·· ··· ·· ·· ··· ·· ~- ·~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~·~~ 1 DATE: November 19, 2012 SUBMITTED TO: Mayor & Members of Council Nancy Farrer - Director of Planning Services Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116 Town File: 014612 SUBJECT: Legal Description: Lot 2.8, Registered Plan No. 73 Municipal Address: 154 Maple Street A licant: Scott Williams ..____~ ~ - ··-· ~ ·· · -·-----''--' 1. RECOMMENDATION: THAT Council enact and pass amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116 for a Temporary Use (154 Maple Street). 2. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: Synopsis gf Proposal Proposed amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116 would allow a dwelling unit within a portion of a detached accessory building, as a temporary use. Property Description The subject lands are located on the west side of Maple Street and are further described as Part Lot 28, Registered Plan No. 73 and is municipally known as 154 Maple Street. The lands are approximately 1017.9 metres squared (0.25 acres) in lot area and are improved with an existing single detached dwelling unit. The surrounding land uses are Residential and Community Services (Trinity United Church). Pybllc Meeting Council held a public meeting regarding the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment on October 151 ,. 2012. Parties who submitted comments included external agencies, Nottawasaga Conservation Authority (NVCA) and Simcoe County District School Board. Internal comments were received from the fire department and engineering department. The following local residents submitted written letters of opposition: Katherine R. Norris, Braden and Claire Crane - 148 Maple Street Page 1 of 6 131 of157 CJI0008049 Ken Richards - 153 Maple Street Don Wright - 143 Maple Street Melanie Milczynski and Darren McFarland - 133 Maple Street After the public meeting the Georgian Triangle Housing Resource Centre submitted a letter on October 241h, 2012 in support of the proposed Temporary Use. Matters of Provincial Interest Section 2 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c .P. 13, as amended, provides that Council in carrying out their responsibilities under the Planning Act shall have regard to matters of provincial interest including the provision of affordable housing. Section 16 of the Planning Act, as amended, states that official plans shall contain polices that authorize "the use of a residential unit in a building or structure ancillary to a detached house ... if the detached house contains a single residential unit." The Planning Act has also been amended to remove the right of appeal on second unit policies. Planning Services staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116, if enacted and passed, shall not offend any matters of provincial interest. Provincial Policy Statement {PPS - 2005) Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c .P. 13, as amended, provides that the Council of a municipality, in exercising any authority that affects a planning matter, shall ensure that those powers are exercised in a manner that is consistent with the policy statements issued by the Province. The Provincial Policy Statement generally promotes intensification, in that municipalities are required to identify and promote opportunities for intensification and redevelopment where this can be accommodated taking into account existing building stock or areas, and the availability of suitable existing infrastructure and public service facilities through the establishment of policy in Official Plans. Section 1.4.3 also identifies, among other things that municipalities shall provide for an appropriate range of housing types and densities to meet growth projections of current and future residents by permitting and facilitating all forms of residential intensification and redevelopment. Planning Services staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116, if enacted and passed, will be consistent with the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement. Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Section 3(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, provides that the Council of a municipality, in exercising any authority that affects a planning matter shall conform to the provincial plans that are in effect, or shall not conflict with them, as the case may be. The Growth Plan plans and manages growth to support a strong economy and to build complete communities, while encouraging intensification. Further, the Growth Plan, in keeping with the thrust of the Provincial Policy Statement, seeks to maximize the use of existing infrastructure - avoiding development of greenfield areas by focusing development within built-up areas. Collingwood is fortunate as there are a number of opportunities for intensification within our built boundary where the lands are currently fully Page2of6 132 of 157 CJI0008049 serviced and where their development would contribute to Collingwood being a more complete community. These lands are within the Town's identified Building Boundary (2006). Planning Services staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116, if enacted and passed, will conform to the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. County of Simcoe Official Plan Schedule 5.1 entitled Land Use Designations of the County of Simcoe Official Plan, as amended, identifies the Town of Collingwood as a Settlement Area. The County of Simcoe Official Plan contains policies encouraging development of those areas that are designated as Settlement. The County of Simcoe Planning Division has provided no specific comments with respect to this proposed Zoning By-law Amendment. However, Planning staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116, if enacted and passed, will conform to the general intent and purpose of the County of Simcoe Official Plan. Town of Collingwood Official Plan Schedule 'A', titled Land Use Plan of the 2004 Official Plan designates the subject lands Residential and Schedule 'C', titled Residential Density Plan identifies the lands are within a Low Density Residential category. Sections 4.3.4.9 and Section 4.3.4.11, of the Official Plan, entitled Residential Intensification, and Residential Impact Studies, provide criteria for encouraging residential intensification development proposals and reviewing the appropriateness of proposed residential development, including residential infilling or vacant or underdeveloped lots. Planning Services staff is of the opinion that this zoning by-law amendment proposal meets the criteria. Additionally, the Official Plan also indicates that when considering residential intensification and infill full consideration needs to be given to innovative planning approaches while ensuring wherever possible that the design of new infill dwellings shall maintain consistency with the general character of the surrounding neighbourhood. With the stated goal of maximizing the availability of affordable and/or interesting housing, conversion of under-utilized non-residential buildings or spaces for residential use, reduced minimum yard standards including zero lot lines and the use of non-traditional methods of access such as rear lanes are all mentioned as potential planning innovations. Section 8.2.5 of the Official Plan, titled Temporary Use By-law provides criteria for allowing Temporary Uses in order to safeguard the wider interests of the public. Planning Services staff is of the opinion that this zoning by-law amendment proposal meets the criteria. Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116 Schedule "A" of the Collingwood Zoning By-law identifies that the subject lands are zoned Residential Second Density. On lands zoned R2 uses permitted shall include: duplexes, single detached, semi-detached and boarding homes. Section 39 (1) of the Planning Act is titled: Temporary Use Provisions - The council of a local municipality may, in a by-law passed under Section 34, authorize the temporary use of land, buildings or structures for any purpose set out therein that is otherwise prohibited by the by-law. Page 3 of 6 133 of 157 CJI0008049 Section 39.1 (3) of the Planning Act is titled: Area and time in effect - of which a by-law for temporary use shall not exceed 20 years for the day of the passing of the by-law. Planning Services staff is of the opinion that 10 years for this temporary use will be a sufficient amount of time of this temporary use. In addition, Planning Services is currently reviewing coach house uses as a means of residential intensification as part of the Residential Policy Review. Amending Zoning By-law No.2012-116, if enacted and passed, will allow the temporary use of a dwelling unit within a detached accessory building. Parking is sufficient on the subject property for the intended secondary dwelling unit. The R2 zone provisions regarding lot area, lot frontage and required setbacks will remain unchanged as there is no proposed redevelopment. The Town currently allows accessory apartments in single detached dwelling units as a way of addressing housing affordability and allowing for a degree of intensification. The incorporation of additional opportunities for secondary suites, such as dwelling units in detached accessory residential buildings (coach houses), in Lower Density Residential Areas has been considered as part of the Town's Residential Policy Review. Planning Services anticipate that criteria for establishing coach houses would include standard requirements such as provision of adequate parking, but also the ability of the lot to accommodate an adequate amenity area for the primary residential unit and the accessory residential unit and to meet appropriate urban design standards. Accordingly, It is anticipated that coach houses would only be permitted on lots with a minimum of 15 metres of frontage and a minimum lot area of 750 square metres. Recommendation It is the opinion of Planning Services staff that this proposal represents good land-use planning. Planning Services staff recommends that Council amend Zoning By-law No. 2012-116 (see Appendix "A") to permit a Temporary Use. The abutting lands to the north of the subject property, owned by the Estate of Mary E. Norris, share the driveway access with the applicant, Mr. Scott Williams. The use of the shared driveway access is a civil matter as there is an easement over the existing driveway. 3. DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: • This Staff Report was forwarded to Department Heads on Tuesday November 5th, 2012 for comment and it was recommended that this report proceed to Council for considerati.on and direction. 4. APPENDICES: D None ~ Attached 1. Appendix "A" - Orthographic Photo 2012 2. Appendix "B" - Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-116 Page 4 of 6 134 of 157 CJI0008049 Respectfully submitted., Prepared by, .. Kandas Bondarchuk, BA, CPT Planner - Technician Page 5 of 6 135 of 157 CJI0008049 Schedule 'A' - Orthographic Photo 2012 Page 6 of 6 136 of 157 CJI0008049 EXPLANATORY NOTE TO THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD BY-LAW No. 2012-116 By-law No. 2012-116 is a by-law under the provisions of Sections 34 & 39 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, for prohibiting the use of land for or except for such purposes as may be set out in the by-law, and to authorize the temporary use of land, buildings or structures for any purpose set out therein that is otherwise prohibited by the by-law. The purpose of the zoning by-law amendment is to allow a dwelling unit within a portion of a detached accessory building, as a temporary use. 137of157 CJI0008049 BY-LAW No. 2012-116 OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD BE ING A BY-LAW UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTIONS 34 & 39 OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, C. P.13, AS AMENDED WHEREAS Sections 34 & 39 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, permits a Council to pass a by-law prohibiting the use of land , buildings or structures within a defined area or areas, and to authorize the temporary use of land, buildings or structures for any purpose set out therein that is otherwise prohibited by the by-law; AND WHEREAS Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is the governing By-law of the Corporation of the Town of Colliingwood and such was finally passed by the Council of the Town of Collingwo!od on Aprill 12111 , 201 o~ AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood has deemed it advisable to amend Coll ingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, and thus implement the Official Plan of the Town of Collingwood; AND WHEREAS Council deems that adequate public notice of the public meeting was provided and adequate information regarding this Amendment was presented at the public meeting held October 151, 2012, and that a further public meeting is not considered necessary in order to proceed with this Amendmenti NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD ENACTS ASFOLLOWS: 1. THAT Schedule "A" of Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, as amended, is hereby further amended as it pertains to lands shown more particularly on Schedule 'A' affixed hereto and forming part of this by-law, by rezoning said lands from the RESIDENTIAL SECOND DENSITY ZONE to the RESIDENTIAL SECOND DENSITY EXCEPTION TWENTY FIVE- R2-25 "T" ZONE; 1. THAT Section 6.5 titled Residential Exception Zones of the Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, as amended, is hereby amended by adding the following new paragraph entitled RESIDENTIAL SECOND DENSITY (R2) EXCEPTION TWENTY FIVE- (R2-25 "T") ZONE in proper sequence to read as follows; "RESIDENTIAL SECOND DENSITY EXCEPTION TWENTY FIVE- (R2-25 "T") ZONE A dwelling unit in a portion of a detached accessory building for a maximum period of ten (10) years from November 26, 2012." 2.. THAT Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is hereby amended to give effect to the foregoing, but that Collingwood Zoning By-law 2010-040 shall in all other respects remain in full force and effect. 3. THAT this By-law shall come into force and effect on the date it is enacted and passed by the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood, subject to notice hereof being circulated in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act and Ontario Regulation 545/06, and if required as a result of such circulation the obtaining of the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. 138 of 157 CJI0008049 ENACTED AND PASSED this 261h day of November, 2012. MAYOR CLERK 139 of 157 CJI0008049 l!GSID ~ Lands to be m-ezonedfrom the RESIOENTIAl..SECOlllHlENSllY {R2) ZONE MAYOR TOWN O:f COUJHGWOOD This i:ll Sti:lh"* •A• to Bv..taw No. 20'12-116 enaded and Planning. Serv.ilc.e$ passed Diie 26fb. dliy of tlovembef, iM2. El~~ IMIW•26..21!<12 li'ill:E l!m.: lil!'d.fit2: ti'iJl ~ 140of157 CJI0008049 I S\ ' REPORT#: P2012-40 DATE: November 26, 2012 SUBMITTED TO: Council SUBMITTED BY: Nancy Farrer, Director of Planning Services SUBJECT: Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118 Removal of the Holding "H" symbol Town File No. D14812 Project Name: Lotco II (Mountaincroft) Location: Registered Plan 51 M-920 Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe 7508 Poplar Sideroad 1. RECOMMENDATION: • That Council enact and pass amending Zoning By-law No, 2012-118 to remove the Holding "H" symbol from a portion of the residential zones of the Mountaincroft Plan of Subdivision and thus permit construction of single detached dwelling units. 2. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: Synopsis of Proposal The purpose of Zoning By-law No. 2012-118 is to remove the Holding "H" symbol from those lands currently zoned Holding Twelve Residential Third Density (H 12) R3, Holding Twelve Residential Third Density Exception Three (H12) R3-3 and Holding Twelve Residential Third Density Exception Thirty-Six (H 12)-R3-36. The effect of the By-law is to permit the construction of 80 single detached dwellings in the Mountaincroft Registered Plan of Subdivision. In accordance to Zoning By-law No. 2010-40, in order for the Holding "H" provision to be removed from the applicable zone, it must be confirmed that there are adequate and functional municipal services for the associated lands. Page 1 of 8 141 of157 CJI0008049 Property Description The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment pertains to 80 lots for single detached dwellings within the 374 unit Mountaincroft subdivision (Town File No. SDR - 2004-07) located on the north side of Poplar Sideroad and east of High Street. The subject lands are legally described as Lots 62-125 Registered Plan 51 M-920, and Parts 1 - 72, Reference Plan 51 R-38347, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe, and fronting onto Garbutt Crescent. The subject lands are owned by Lotco II Limited, the Applicant for the Zoning By-law Amendment. The plan of subdivision, 51 M-920, was registered on September 26th, 2008 (Instrument no. SC685425). --Notice Notice regarding this amending Zoning By-law application was provided as required under the Planning Act on Friday November 16, 2012. Matters of Provincial Interest Section 2 of the Planning Act requires that regard be given to matters of provincial interest. Upon having regard to the criteria itemized in Section 2 of the Planning Act it is the opinion of Senior Staff that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118, if enacted and passed, would have proper regard for this subsection of the Planning Act. Provincial Policy Statement (2005) Section 3(5) of the Planning Act states that any planning decision rendered must be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). It is the opinion of Senior Staff that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118, if enacted and passed, is consistent with the PPS. Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe area plans and manages growth to support a strong economy and to build complete communities, while emphasizing intensification. Senior Staff is satisfied that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118, if enacted and passed, is consistent with the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe area. County of Simcoe Official Plan Schedule 5.1 entitled Land Use Designations of the County of Simcoe Official Plan, as amended, identifies the Town of Collingwood as a Settlement. The County of Simcoe Official Plan contains policies encouraging development to occur in areas designated as Settlement. Generally, the County of Simcoe does not provide any comments related to site specific Zoning By-law Amendment proposals within registered plans of subdivision within municipal settlement areas. However, Planning Services Staff is of the opinion that Page 2 of 8 142of157 CJI0008049 amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118, if enacted and passed, will maintain the general intent and purpose of the County of Simcoe Official Plan. Town of Collingwood Official Plan Schedule "A" entitled Land Use Plan of the Town of Collingwood Official Plan identifies the subject property as being designated Residential and further defined as Low Density on Schedule 'C' entitled Residential Density Plan in the Town of Collingwood Official Plan, as amended. Senior Staff advise that amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118, if enacted and passed, will maintain the general intent and purpose of the Town of Collingwood Official Plan. Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118 As noted, the subject lands are zoned Holding Twelve Residential Third Density (H12) R3, Holding Twelve Residential Third Density Exception Three (H12) R3-3 and Holding Twelve Residential Third Density Exception Thirty-Six (H 12)-R3-36 Once the Holding "H" symbol is removed (if amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118 is approved and enacted - see Appendix "A") the applicable zoning would be Residential Third Density (R3), Residential Third Density Exception Three (R3-3) and Residential Third Density Exception Thirty-Six (R3-36). Conditions to Remove the Holding Zone In order for the Holding "H" provision to be removed from the Residential Third Density (R3), Residential Third Density Exception Three (R3-3) and Residential Third Density Exception Thirty-Six (R3-36) zones, thereby permitting the development of the subject property; Council must first be assured that the condition has been satisfied: 1. confirmation of adequate and functional municipal services capacity for the associated lands. Confirmation has been provided by Engineering Services that servicing capacity is available for the subject lands and that all services have been constructed and are operational to or on the site. Based on the above analysis and the satisfactory fulfillment of the Holding provision condition, Senior Staff can advise Council that it is now appropriate to remove the Holding "H" symbol from those lands currently zoned Residential Third Density (R3), Residential Third Density Exception Three (R3-3) and Residential Third Density Exception Thirty-Six (R3-36) (as identified on Schedule "A", Map 19 of Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, as amended. It is recommended that Council enact and pass amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118. Page 3 of 8 143of157 CJI0008049 3. DISCUSSION: • The Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118 has proceeded under the requirements of the Planning Act and in conformity with the Town of Collingwood Official Plan. • The Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118 will allow the applicant to constructing single detached dwelling units within a portion of the Mountaincroft Plan of Subdivision. • There are no risks anticipated with this Amending Zoning By-law proceeding. 4. DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: This Staff Report was discussed by Department Heads on November 20th, 2012 for comment. Senior Staff did not identify any concerns and it was recommended that the Report be forwarded to Council for consideration. 5. EFFECT ON TOWN FINANCES: • Current Year: None • Future Years: building permit fees, development charges, municipal taxation - • Costs associated with the development are borne by the developer. 6. DISPOSITION: • The proposed amending of the Zoning By-law Amendment for the Mountaincroft subdivision to remove the Holding 'H' provisions assist in implementing the policies of the Town of Collingwood Official Plan which has identified this area as being suitable for residential development. Monitoring of the development will be controlled through the provisions of the pending Subdivision Agreement. 7. APPENDICES: D None 1:8] Attached • A Location Map • B Amending Zoning By-law No. 2012-118 Page 4 of 8 144of157 CJI0008049 Respectfully submitted, NaiiC0rre~~~ Cl P, RPP Director of Planning Services Prepared by : Mark Bryan, MCIP, RPP Community Planner Page 5 of 8 145of157 CJI0008049 Appendix A Location Map Page 6 of 8 146of157 CJI0008049 Appendix B : Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment BY-LAW No. 2012-118 OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD BEING A BY-LAW UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTIONS 34 AND 36 OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S .O. 1990, C. P.13, AS AMENDED WHEREAS Section 34 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, permits a Council to pass a by-law prohibiting the use of land, buildings or structures within a defined area or areas; AND WHEREAS Section 36 of the Planning Act, R.S .O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, permits a Council to pass a by-law to specify the use to which lands, buildings or structures may be put at such time in the future as the holding symbol is removed by amendment to the by-law; AND WHEREAS Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is the governing By-law of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood and such was finally passed by the Council of the Town of Collingwood on April 1ih, 2010; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood has deemed it advisable to amend Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, and thus implement the Official Plan of the Town of Collingwood; AND WHEREAS it has been confirmed to Council that all of the conditions required for the orderly development of the subject lands has been completed to the satisfaction of the Town; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT Schedule "A", Map 19 of Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is hereby amended in accordance with Schedule 'A' attached hereto, by removing the holding twelve "H12" provision in front of the, RESIDENTIAL THIRD DENSITY EXCEPTION THREE R3-3 ZONE, RESIDENTIAL THIRD DENSITY EXCEPTION THIRTY SIX-R3-36 ZONE AND RESIDENTIAL THIRD DENSITY (R3) ZONE. 2. THAT Zoning By-law No. 2010-040 is hereby amended to give effect to the foregoing, but Zoning By-law 2010-040 shall in all other respects remain in full force and effect. 3. THAT this By-law shall come into force and effect on the date it is enacted and passed by the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood. ENACTED AND PASSED this 261h day of November, 2012. MAYOR CLERK Page 7 of 8 147of157 CJI0008049 \\ \ \ LEGEND N m Removal of the Holding "H" Symbol from the subject lands. MAYOR CLERK TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD This is Schedule 'A' to By-law No. 2012-118 enacted and Planning Services passed the 26th day of November 2012. DWG DATE: November 2·1 , 2012. FILE NO 01 4812 (RS} Page 8 of 8 148of157 CJI0008049 · ~· '*"" REPORT#: P2012-42 DATE: November 26, 2012 """""'"==" """"""' ='•' '"""~ SUBMITTED TO: Mayor & Members of Council I SUBMITTED BY: Nancy Farrer, Director of Planning Services """"'" =' """"' Deeming By-law No. 2012-119 File No. D1207312 SUBJECT: Owner: Healthcare Properties Holdings Inc. Municipal Address: 182 & 186 Erie Street, Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe 1. RECOMMENDATION: THAT Council enact and pass Deeming By-law No. 2012-119, to deem the lots owned by Healthcare Properties Holdings Incorporated at 182 & 186 Erie Street, a single parcel. 2. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: The subject property is located south of Erie Street and is legally described as Lots 3, 4 & 5; Part Lots 1, 2, 6 & 7, Registered Plan No. 282, Town of Collingwood in the County of Simcoe. The purpose of this By-law is to ensure that the lot municipally addressed as 182 and 186 Erie Street are merged into one ( 1) parcel of land; thus preventing these lots from being separately conveyed, without an approved Consent (severance) or a Plan of Subdivision. Town of Collingwood Official Plan, as amended Schedule "A" titled Land Use Plan of the Town of Collingwood Official Plan designates the subject property as Residential with a Special Policy - Health Services overlay. Schedule "C" titled Land Use Density Plan of the Town of Collingwood Official Plan designates the subject property as Low Residential Density. CJI0008049 Town of CoUingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-04(), as amended Schedule "A" - Map 26 of the Town of Collingwood Zoning By-law No. 2010-040, as amended, zones the subject lands located at 182 Erie Street as Holding Fourteen Residential Second Density Exception Twenty ((H14) R2-20) and the lands located at 186 Erie Street as Community Services Exception Six (CS-6). There is a related Zoning By-law Amendment File No. D14712 to rezone both properties to Community Services Exception One (CS-1) Zone. Deeming Bv-law No. 2012-119 Registered Plan No. 282 was registered in the late 1880's at the Land Registry Division of Simcoe County. In accordance to subsection 50(4) of the Planning Act, a plan, or part of a plan, may be deemed not to be a plan of subdivision provided that it has been registered for eight (8) years or more. Registered Plan No. 282 has been registered for approximately one hundred and twenty four (124) years. The purpose of this By-law is to ensure that the lot municipally addressed as 182 and 186 Erie Street is merged into one (1) parcel of land; thus preventing these lots from being separately conveyed, without an approved Consent (severance) or a Plan of Subdivision. This Deeming By-law (once enacted and passed by Council) will be forwarded to the Town's Solicitor to be registered on title. Once registered on title, Deeming By-law No. 2012-119 (see Appendix "B") will effectively: 1) prevent the separate conveyance of the individual parcels, and 2) permit the development of the expansion to the existing medical clinic. Conclusion. Planning Services recommends that Council enact and pass Deeming By-law No. 2012-119. 3. DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: • Staff Report P2012-42 was reviewed at the November 20th Department Heads meeting. The Director of Planning Services recommended that the Staff Report and By-law No. 2012-119 proceed forward to Council on November 26th, 2012 for consideration. 4. EFFECT ON TOWN FINANCES: • The costs incurred for processing the application and registration of the document on title is borne by the Town. 5. APPENDlCES: D None ~ Attached CJI0008049 • Appendix "A" - Aerial photograph 2012 • Appendix "B" - Deeming By-law No. 2012-119 Respectfully Submitted, . tJA. ' t~~ Nancyarf;~~ 1 Pa, RPP Director of Planning Services Prepared By: Kandas Bondarchuk, BA, CPT Planner - Technician Page 3 of 4 151 of157 CJI0008049 Schedule 'A' - Orthographic Photo 2012 CJI0008049 EXPLANATORY NOTE THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD BY-LAW No. 2012-119 By-law No. 2012-119 is a by-law under subsection 50(4) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, to deem a part of a plan of subdivision not to be a registered plan of subdivision for the purposes of subsection 50(3). 182 & 186 Erie Street is legally described as the following: PIN: 58293-0039 Lot 4, Part Lots 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7, Part Reserve G, Plan 282; Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe This Deeming By-law will ensure that the lands cannot be separately conveyed without an approved consent (severance) and will facilitate the expansion of the existing medical clinic (Town File Nos. 01207312). BL2012-119 Deeming- Town of Collingwood 153 of 157 CJI0008049 BY-LAW No. 2012-119 OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD BEING A BY-LAW TO DESIGNATE A PLAN OF SUBDIVISION, OR PART THEREOF, NOT TO BE A REGISTERED PLAN OF SUBDIVISION FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION 50(3) OF THE PLANNING ACT WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Collingwood has authority pursuant to subsection 50(4) the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, to designate a Plan of Subdivision, or part thereof, to be deemed not to be lots in a registered Plan of Subdivision for the purpose of subsection 50(3) of Planning Act; AND WHEREAS the lands described below are currently lots within a registered plan of subdivision; AND WHEREAS Registered Plan No . 282 has been registered in the Registry Office for the Registry Division of the County of Simcoe for eight (8) years or more; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT the lands described below and shown more particularly on Schedule "A" as affixed hereto are hereby deemed not to be separate lots within a registered Plan of Subdivision of the purposes of Subsection 50(3) of the Planning Act: PIN: 58293-0039 - 182 and 186 Erie Street Lot 4, Part Lots 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7, Part Reserve G, Plan 282; Town of Collingwood, County of Simcoe 2. THAT th is By-law shall come into full force and take effect on the date it is passed by the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Collingwood, subject to the provisions of subsection 50(27) of the Planning Act. 3_ THAT this By-law be registered in the Registry Office for the Registry Division (51) of the County of Simcoe. ENACTED AND PASSED this 26th day of November 2012. CLERK BL2012-119 Deeming - Town of Collingwood 154of157 CJI0008049 Deeming By-law 201 2-119 -Schedule 'A' lEGE1ND Utnds c:iMmed 'IXltw bfi,aregishfedphm of s\lbdVlsion for ~~es of CJ ~on 50[3) of the Pllanmno Act. CLERK TOWN OF C.OLL1N\GWOOD Schedule 'A• to By.JJaw No. 2012-119 enacted and Plann:ing.Services passed the 26th day of November 2012 OW& DATE.: November!!&, 21.'H2{KS~ Rl.E NO: 012lmf2 --D0frD tt-flmo!Cl2al',~~-~ BL2012-119 Deeming - Town of Collingwood 155 of 157 CJI0008049 CJI0008049 BY-LAW No. 2012-121 OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD BEING A BY-LAW TO CONFIRM THE PROCEEDINGS OF COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD WHEREAS the Municipal Act 2001, S.O. 2001, c 25, Section 5(1), provides that the powers of a municipality shall be exercised by its council; AND WHEREAS the Municipal Act 2001 , S.O. 2001, c 25, Section 5(3), provides a municipal power, including a municipality's capacity, rights, powers and privileges under section 9, shall be exercised by by-law unless the municipality is specifically authorized to do otherwise; AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient that the actions of all meetings of Council of The Corporation of the Town of Collingwood be confirmed and adopted by by-law; NOW THEREFORE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORA TJON OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THA Tthe actions of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Collingwood in respect of: a) each recommendation in the reports of the Committees; b) each motion, resolution or other action passed, taken or adopted at the meetings listed below are hereby adopted, ratified, and confirmed as if same were expressly included in this by-law, provided that such adoption and confirmation shall not be deemed to include the final passing of a by-law that requires the prior approval of a Minister, a Ministry, to the Ontario Municipal Boa rd or any other governmental body: • Council- Planning and Development Meeting of Council held November 191h, 2012 • Regular Meeting of Council held November 261h, 2012 2. THAT the Mayor and the proper officials of The Corporation of the Town of Collingwood are hereby authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to the action of the Council referred to in Section 1. 3. THAT the Mayor, or in the absence of the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor, and the Clerk, or in the absence of the Clerk, the Chief Administrative Officer; a) are authorized and directed to execute all documents to the action taken by Council as described in Section 1; b) are authorized and directed to affix the seal of The Corporation of the Town of Collingwood to all such documents referred to in Section 1. 4. THAT this by-law shall come into effect upon the passing thereof. ENACTED AND PASSED this 261h day of November, 2012. MAYOR CLERK BL 2012-121 Confirmatory 157of157