Agenda Committee of the Whole July 23, 2020 – Following Council Electronic Participation Council Chambers, Grey County Administration Building
1. Call to Order 2. Declaration of Pecuniary Interest 3. Delegations 9:45 AM Kim Earls, Executive Director South Central Ontario Region Economic Development Corporation Southwest Community Transit Initiative
10:30 AM Tim Allen and Dave Ernest Dufferin Grey ATV Club
Side by Side extension
4. Determination of Items Requiring Separate Discussion 5. Consent Agenda
That the following Consent Agenda items be received; and
That staff be authorized to take the actions necessary to give effect to the recommendations in the staff reports; and
That the correspondence be supported or received for information as recommended in the consent agenda.
a. Correspondence from the Harmony Centre – Facility Usage
That the correspondence from the Harmony Centre regarding facility usage and the effects of COVID-19 be received for information.
b. Correspondence from the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services – Moving Towards a More Digital Focused Service Model for Land Registration Services
1 Committee of the Whole July 23, 2020 Page 2
That the correspondence from the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services regarding moving towards a more digital focused service model for land registration services be received for information.
c. FR-CW-18-20 Quarterly Purchasing Report
That Report FR-CW-18-20 regarding the Quarterly Purchasing Report for Quarter 2 of 2020 be received for information. 6. Items For Direction and Discussion
a. CAOR-CW-10-20 Community Transportation Update That report CAOR-CW-10-20 Revised Community Transportation Service Delivery and Budget Proposal be received, and;
That staff be directed to negotiate a single source agreement as per the purchasing policy, with Driverseat Inc. to provide services in fulfillment of the provincial Community Transportation grant and the additional Grey Road 4 route between Durham, Hanover and Walkerton, and;
That once completed to the satisfaction of the Chief Administrative Officer, the Warden and Clerk be authorized to execute the agreement with Driverseat Inc., and;
That the Warden and Clerk be authorized to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with The Corporation of the Township of Southgate, authorizing Grey County to deliver on Southgate’s behalf, a transit service as required by the Provincial Grant awarded to Southgate, and;
That the cost to operate the system from September 1 to December 31, 2020, of $213,911, after recoverable HST (excluding Grey Road 4) be funded as per the 2020 budget, and;
That should Council wish to proceed with the Grey Road 4 route, the cost to operate the route for the period of September 1 to December 31, 2020 is $30,606, after recoverable HST, to be funded from the One-Time Funding Reserve, with 2021 and 2022 to be included in the annual budget, and;
That County Council direct staff to continue working to develop an on- demand system in Grey County, and;
That the Warden and Clerk be authorized to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Southwest Community Transit (SCT)
2 Committee of the Whole July 23, 2020 Page 3
Association
b. CCR-CW-04-20 Hanover – Owen Sound Task Force
That Report CCR-CW-04-20 regarding the Terms of Reference for the Hanover – Owen Sound Task Force be received; and
That the Terms of Reference be endorsed as presented; and
That the following Members be appointed to the Hanover-Owen Sound Task Force:
Councillors Hicks, O’Leary (plus two additional members) Warden McQueen
c. CCR-CW-05-20 Fees and Services By-law Update
That Report CCR-CW-05-20 regarding an update to Grey County’s Fees and Services Schedule be received; and
That the approved changes be incorporated into the Fees and Services Schedule; and
That an automatic increase on January 1 annually be added to manage the average annual increase in the Statistics Canada Consumer Price Index for Ontario as of September 30th of the previous year, if the Consumer Price Index shows an average increase; and
That fees that are set by legislation or by contract would be exempt from this annual increase; and
That a by-law be brought forward for Council’s consideration.
d. Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 Davenport Subdivision
That Report Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 be received; and That all written and oral submissions received on plan of subdivision 42T- 2017-05 known as Davenport were considered; the effect of which helped to make an informed recommendation and decision; and
That in consideration of the draft plan of subdivision application 42T-2017-05, for lands described as Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak, Township of Georgian Bluffs, the Grey County Committee of the Whole approves this plan of subdivision to create a total of twenty eight residential lots (Lots 1 to 28) and a future development block
3 Committee of the Whole July 23, 2020 Page 4
(Block 31), subject to the conditions set out in the Notice of Decision.
e. FR-CW-19-20 Development Charges Deferral and Payment Plan Interest Rate.
That Report FR-CW-19-20 be received which provides information regarding interest rates for Development Charge deferral payment plans (section 26.1) and rate freezes (section 26.2) as required by the Development Charges Act; and
That Council approve the charging of interest pursuant to sections 26.1 and 26.2 of the Development Charges Act, 1997:
a. Effective as at January 1, 2020
b. At a rate of 3.5% compounded annually
c. Notwithstanding Recommendation 2b, a rate of 0% be used for payments under section 26.1, beginning at time of building permit, to help encourage these rental housing and non-profit housing developments; and
That authorization be given to the Director of Corporate Services and the Director of Planning to execute agreements related to the administration of the Development Charges By-laws for Payment Plans and Rate Freezes as required by the Development Charges Act; and
That the Development Charges Interest Policy included as an attachment in this report be approved.
f. CAOR-CW-12-20 Face Mask Requirements
That Report CAOR-CW-12-20 Enacting a Public Non-Medical Masking Bylaw be received; and
That Council direct staff to consult with the Medical Officer of Health and Bruce County and bring forward a bylaw for consideration at a future Council meeting, should conditions warrant.
7. Closed Meeting Matters
That Committee of the Whole does now go into closed session pursuant to Section 239 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 as amended to discuss:
i. Advice that is subject to solicitor client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose (Face mask requirements) 8. Other Business
4 Committee of the Whole July 23, 2020 Page 5
9. Notice of Motion 10. Adjournment
5 6
Ministry of Government and Ministère des Services gouvernementaux et Consumer Services des Services aux consommateurs
ServiceOntario ServiceOntario
Regulatory Services Branch Direction de la réglementation
20 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor 20, rue Dundas Ouest, 4e étage Toronto ON M5G 2C2 Toronto ON M5G 2C2
Email to all Municipalities of Ontario
Date: July 6, 2020
To: All Municipalities of Ontario
From: Jeffrey W. Lem, Director of Titles for the Province of Ontario
Subject: Moving Towards a More digital-focused Service Model for Land Registration Services ______
I am pleased to share information about how ServiceOntario’s land registration services will be delivered effective October 13, 2020, in keeping with our government’s approach to move towards digital online services for Ontarians. Effective October 13, 2020, the Ontario government will be discontinuing land registration counter services currently delivered at all 54 Land Registry Offices (LROs).
Land registration is a segment of government services where many of our customers have already adopted the digital channel as its preference. Our data shows that 99% of land registration documents are registered online, 87% of searches are conducted online and 98% of surveyors submit plans for pre-approval via email. Ontario’s land registration system was established in 1795 and has undergone several transformations in its 225 years of existence.
Moving toward a more digital-focused service model is part of the evolution of this sector, which is timely and will benefit all customers. For most services, it will no longer be necessary to visit a local LRO. In some cases, where customers need hard copies, ServiceOntario will have processes in place until longer term solutions are developed. Our goal is to ensure that we maintain a modern and efficient organization, focused on the needs and expectations of our staff and customers, while ensuring the integrity of the land registration system.
For many Municipalities this will be a seamless change, as Teraview is already being used to both file documents and search title. For those Municipalities that file 7 documents in paper, both Teraview and OnLand will be improved to accept digital versions of paper documents.
Please feel free to contact me at [email protected] should you have any questions regarding this communication.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey W. Lem Director of Titles for the Province of Ontario
8 Committee Report
To: Warden McQueen and Members of Grey County Council Committee Date: July 23, 2020 Subject / Report No: FR-CW-18-20 Quarterly Purchasing Report Title: Quarterly Purchasing Report – Quarter 2 2020 Prepared by: Mike Alguire, Purchasing Manager Sharon Melville, Buyer Reviewed by: Kim Wingrove Lower Tier(s) Affected: None Status:
Recommendation 1. That Report FR-CW-18-20 regarding the quarterly purchasing report for Quarter 2 of 2020 be received for information. Executive Summary Grey County’s purchasing policy 7-1-2020, as endorsed by County Council on January- 9, 2020 through By-law 5074-20 gives Directors the authority to award items and services up to $500,000 that have prior budget approval. This policy requires Directors to provide a summary of all purchases between $75,000 and $500,000 on a quarterly basis. Background and Discussion The attached chart summarizes all purchases made between $75,000 and $500,000 by Departments between April 1, 2020 and June 30, 2020.
9 FR-CW-18-20 Date: July 23, 2020 Department – Transportation
Awarded # of Approved Contract Description Awarded Bid Amount Bids Amount (excl. HST)
Grey Road 2 Duncor RFT-TS-07-20 2 $306,000.00 $272,449.50 Microsurfacing Enterprises
Miller RFT-TS-18-20 Symbol Painting 1 $445,000.00* $136,315.25 Maintenance
19/34 Shared Expanded Asphalt Projects (Simcoe 3 Rotomill $257,600.00** $236,170.00 Recycling Lead) Schedule 1
19/34 Shared Projects (Simcoe Hot Mix Paving 4 Coco Paving $360,000.00** $327,175.75 Lead) Schedule 2 *Approved budget includes both line painting and symbol painting. If there are overages, maintenance has funds available within other line items. **Approved total project was $617,600.00 Department – Planning
Awarded # of Approved Contract Description Awarded Bid Amount Bids Amount (excl. HST)
Leading Edge RFT-PCD-01-20 Culvert C80 3 $250,000.00 $215,706.90 Earthworks
Legal and Legislated Requirements None Financial and Resource Implications None. Relevant Consultation ☒ Internal
☐ External
10 FR-CW-18-20 Date: July 23, 2020 Appendices and Attachments None
11 FR-CW-18-20 Date: July 23, 2020 Committee Report
To: Warden McQueen and Members of Grey County Council Council Date: July 23, 2020 Subject / Report No: CAOR-CW-10-20 Title: Revised Community Transportation Service Delivery and Budget Proposal Prepared by: Stephanie Stewart, Manager, Community Transportation Reviewed by: Kim Wingrove, CAO Lower Tier(s) Affected: Grey County wide Status: Recommendation 1. That report CAOR-CW-10-20 Revised Community Transportation Service Delivery and Budget Proposal be received, and; 2. That staff be directed to negotiate a single source agreement as per the purchasing policy, with Driverseat Inc. to provide services in fulfillment of the provincial Community Transportation grant and the additional Grey Road 4 route between Durham, Hanover and Walkerton, and; 3. That once completed to the satisfaction of the Chief Administrative Officer, the Warden and Clerk be authorized to execute the agreement with Driverseat Inc., and; 4. That the Warden and Clerk be authorized to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with The Corporation of the Township of Southgate, authorizing Grey County to deliver on Southgate’s behalf, a transit service as required by the Provincial Grant awarded to Southgate, and; 5. That the cost to operate the system from September 1 to December 31, 2020, of $213,911, after recoverable HST (excluding Grey Road 4) be funded as per the 2020 budget, and; 6. That should Council wish to proceed with the Grey Road 4 route, the cost to operate the route for the period of September 1 to December 31, 2020 is $30,606, after recoverable HST, to be funded from the One-Time Funding Reserve, with 2021 and 2022 to be included in the annual budget, and; 7. That County Council direct staff to continue working to develop an on-
CAOR-CW-10-20 12 July 23, 2020 demand system in Grey County, and; 8. That the Warden and Clerk be authorized to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Southwest Community Transit (SCT) Association Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with a new service delivery option and associated costing for the Community Transportation project and to seek direction regarding next steps for developing transportation services. Background and Discussion
On May 28th, 2020 staff presented CAOR-CW-05-20 to County Council updating the status of the Community Transportation project. The project had not moved ahead as planned due to the COVID-19 shutdown. Given the effects of the pandemic on the economy and physical distancing requirements, it did not make financial sense to move forward with the earlier recommended service delivery model which was scaled to a larger number of riders than can reasonably be expected. Upon reviewing the report mentioned above, Driverseat, a transportation solution company that has a franchise in Owen Sound, contacted staff. Driverseat proposed a service model that is responsive to current conditions and that staff feel would meet the needs of residents while achieving all grant requirements. Driverseat has continued to operate safely throughout the pandemic and have policies and procedures in place for infection prevention. Furthermore, staff are recommending that County Council direct staff to single source the contract to Driverseat. Driverseat will provide Grey County with transit operators, six - 10 passenger vehicles and an electronic fare payment platform. Transit Route Requirements in the Provincial Grant In order to fulfill the requirements of the grant, Grey County is required to operate a conventional transit system twice a day with scheduled routes and stops. Routes operating on Highway 26 and 10 are required to operate five days per week, while the Highway 6 route from Owen Sound to Wiarton is required to operate three days per week. Additionally, Grey County staff will establish an MOU with Southgate to authorize Grey County to execute the Provincial Grant and deliver a service on Southgate’s behalf. The first route would operate along Highway 26 from Owen Sound to the Town of The Blue Mountains, five days a week, Wednesday to Sunday. Staff are recommending operating Wednesday to Sunday as these are the busiest days for commercial and tourist activity. Additionally, many businesses are closed in Meaford and Thornbury on Monday and Tuesday. Staff recognize that there is a future need for service on Friday
CAOR-CW-10-20 13 July 23, 2020 and Saturday evenings to provide residents with access to employment and entertainment at Blue Mountain Resort. This need will be monitored closely, and proposed schedule revisions and costing brought back for Council consideration when appropriate. The second route would operate along Highway 10 from Owen Sound to Orangeville, five days a week Monday to Friday. Buses will depart Owen Sound at appropriate times to ensure riders can arrive on time for employment in Grey Highlands or continue travelling to Dundalk, Shelburne and Orangeville. The third route would operate along Highway 6 from Owen Sound to Wiarton, three days a week, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. Staff will re-evaluate ridership regularly to determine if an increase of service is needed, as well, staff will look for future partnerships with South Bruce Peninsula to extend the route to Sauble Beach during the summer of 2021. Staff reviewed feedback from County Council, community stakeholders, survey respondents, municipal partners and employers to design a thoughtful and effective transit system. Staff considered shift start and end times, Georgian College class start times, evening entertainment at Blue Mountain Village, connections to Owen Sound Transit, Greyhound, City of Guelph, Orangeville Transit, Go Transit, Simcoe County Linx and Colltrans.
Transit Route along Grey Road 4 In consultation with Hanover and West Grey, staff learned that residents in West Grey access a variety of medical, employment and recreational services offered in Hanover and Walkerton. Residents with no access to a vehicle rely on family/friends or use alternative types of transportation. Staff learned about the positive environmental impacts that could be achieved by offering transit during peak travel times, as many residents commute to work along Grey Road 4, between Flesherton, Durham, Hanover, and Walkerton. As per County Council’s direction staff have considered a route on Grey Road 4. It is the recommendation of staff to implement a route running between Flesherton, Durham, Hanover, and Walkerton. If County Council support development of a route along Grey Road 4, staff would recommend that the route be implemented as the fourth phase of the Grey Transit Route, once all provincial grant requirements for service have been achieved. An alternative option to a conventional transit route would be an on-demand model like Uber or RIDE WELL.
CAOR-CW-10-20 14 July 23, 2020 Proposed Grant Service Level and Cost
Proposed Grant Service *
Operating Trips per Cost per Cost per Annual Cost Route Service Days Day trip day Highway 26 Five days Wednesday Four trips $ 110.57 $ 442.26 $ 115,000 Owen Sound to a week to Sunday per day Meaford Highway 26 Five days Wednesday Four trips Meaford to $ 116.44 $ 465.75 $ 121,100 Blue a week to Sunday per day Mountains Highway 10 Five days Monday to Three trips $ 228.31 $ 684.92 $ 178,100 Owen Sound to a week Friday per day Dundalk
Highway 10 Five days Monday to Five trips $ 134.64 $ 673.18 $ 175,000 Dundalk to a week Friday per day Orangeville
Highway 6 Three Tuesday Two trips $ 208.74 $ 417.48 $ 65,100 Owen Sound to days a Wednesday per day Wiarton week & Thursday
Total Annual Cost $ 654,300
*Additional expenses for maintenance, marketing and administration not included.
Cost to operate Grey Road 4
Operating Trips per Cost per Cost Route Service Annual Cost Days Day trip per day Grey Road 4 Two Monday & Five trips days a $ 180.04 $ 900.18 $ 93,600 Durham to Friday per day Walkerton week
The cost for Driverseat to operate the proposed service as per the Transfer Payment
CAOR-CW-10-20 15 July 23, 2020 Agreement, for the period of September 1 to December 31, 2020 is $213,911, after recoverable HST. The total cost for Driverseat, maintenance, marketing and administration under the proposed model has a cost of $ 2,581,939, after recoverable HST over three years as compared to the amount of grant remaining of $2,511,379, after recoverable HST, resulting in a shortfall of $70,560. This will need to be considered in the 2021 and 2022 annual budget process.
Staff recommends that the cost to operate a Grey Road 4 service, which is beyond the scope of the grant, for the period of September 1 to December 31, 2020 is $30,606, after recoverable HST, to be funded from the One-Time Funding Reserve. The total cost for Driverseat for Grey Road 4 is $280,857, after recoverable HST for a three-year term, with 2021 and 2022 to be included in the annual budget.
The cost to operate both services does not include fare box revenue; depending on ridership this will offset operating costs.
Funding Opportunities
Potential funding opportunities to increase revenue/offset expenditures are as follows:
Federal and Provincial gas tax funding is used by transit agencies to improve transit in their communities; for example: o The City of Mississauga invested their gas tax funding to replace, platforms, roofs and ramps at various transit facilities. o The City of Brampton invested their gas tax funding to upgrade transit scheduling software, automated vehicle maintenance monitoring system, and refurbish buses. o The City of Kingston invested their gas tax funding to complete a downtown terminal feasibility study and construction.
Financial contributions from Grey County member municipalities to improve service levels specific to their communities
Financial contributions from Bruce and Dufferin County to extend services
Commercial sponsorship
On vehicle advertising
Employer fare contributions
Fare box revenue
CAOR-CW-10-20 16 July 23, 2020 Implementation of an On-Demand Transit System An on-demand transit system would pick people up at a location of their choosing and deliver them to their desired destination. Grey County staff connected with Wellington County to learn about the initial successes, challenges and early wins of the RIDE WELL pilot. Wellington County shared that it is challenging to meet the requests and needs of all riders. Having access to accurate data regarding travel patterns is key to understanding the rider and it takes time to build ridership. The development of an on-demand system would be of benefit to many Grey County residents. However, it would be expensive. The costs associated with operating an on-demand transit system like the RIDE WELL pilot would include a one-time set up fee of approx. $25,000, an annual Project fee of approx. $ 48,000 and a Per vehicle fee: $2.00 – $ 2.50 per day. It is important to note that staff wages and vehicle costs have not been included. Wellington County’s RIDE WELL transit system is using four door sedan vehicles with a maximum capacity of four passengers and one driver. RIDE WELL fares are charged per person. Fares are set at $0.60 per kilometer, with a minimum fare of $5.00 and a maximum fare of $40.00 each way. The system does not operate on a break-even basis and Wellington County is subsidizing it with additional resources beyond their provincial grant.
Additionally, Grey County has begun preliminary discussions with Uber. Staff feel that there is an opportunity for ridesharing in Grey County and the introduction of Uber would afford many benefits for all residents. Residents would have the opportunity to earn additional income and as independent operators. Staff feel there is an opportunity for cross county collaboration and will be working with Bruce and Dufferin County to discuss the idea of creating the appropriate regulatory framework for Uber to operate in all three counties.
With the introduction of a new style of transit in more rural areas, residents may be concerned about safety. Uber is committed to safety and has the following safety features built into their business model to ensure confidence for all users:
● In-App Safety Toolkit: Passengers have immediate access to the Uber app’s safety features all in one place, including the ability to share your trip status with friends and family in real time, 24/7 incident support, and an emergency assistance button to call to get help if you need it. The app displays your location and trip details, so you can quickly share them with the emergency dispatcher.
● Uber works very closely with law enforcement.
● Check your ride, every time: Users can double-check the app for their driver’s information to ensure they are getting in the right car by matching the license plate number, the car make and model and driver’s photo to the information in the app. Uber’s newest feature is PIN verification. On some trips, riders will be asked to provide
CAOR-CW-10-20 17 July 23, 2020 their driver with a unique 4-digit PIN before the trip can start.
● RideCheck: By using sensors and GPS data, RideCheck can help detect if a trip goes unusually off-course or if a possible crash has occurred. If the app alerts Uber to anything out of the ordinary, they’ll reach out to provide riders with the tools to get help.
● Commitment to keeping women safe: In Canada, Uber works with experts like YWCA Canada, Woman Abuse Council of Toronto, Toronto Rape Crisis Centre, and the Canadian Centre to End Human Trafficking to help keep people safe and end gender-based crimes in our country.
● Keeping drivers safe. All the above safety features, including 24/7 support and the emergency button are available to drivers as well as features like speed limit alerts. Southwest Community Transit Partnership Grey County has been approached by SCOR (South Central Ontario Region Economic Development Corporation) to be a part of the Southwest Community Transit (SCT) association. SCT’s mandate is to coordinate the delivery of inter-community public transportation services in southwest Ontario, share information and develop best practices, identify economies of scale through shared purchasing and operating agreements, and act as a common voice to support long-term sustainable transit funding. It would be beneficial for Grey County to join the SCT and support the development of a seamless experience for riders including; routes and schedules, fare structures, polices, signage, technology, marketing and promotions. In addition to Grey County, the following municipalities are considering joining SCT: Brant County, Municipality of Lambton Shores, Middlesex County, Norfolk County, City of Owen Sound, Oxford County, Perth County, City of Stratford, Township of Strathroy-Caradoc and the Town of Tillsonburg. On July 2nd, an article was published in the Woodstock Sentinel- Review discussing the Southwest Community Transit initiative. Next Steps Upon County Council direction, staff will draft an agreement with Driverseat and begin promoting the new service. Legal and Legislated Requirements
While the provision of transit services is normally a matter reserved exclusively to lower-tier municipalities, the Provincial Grant awarded to the County gives the County the power, as an upper-tier municipality, to offer transit services as provided for by the Grant (per s. 22 of the Municipal Act) both within and beyond the County's borders
CAOR-CW-10-20 18 July 23, 2020 The MOU with Southgate is necessary to give the County the power to operate in the area covered by Southgate's grant but not the County's grant (per s. 22 and s. 20 of the Municipal Act) It is necessary to have MOUs with the Grey lower-tiers that aren't part of the provincial grants (per s. 20 of the Municipal Act) so that the County will have the power to deliver the service in those municipalities It is necessary to have MOUs with any non-Grey municipality that the provincial grants don't authorize service to (per s. 19(2) of the Municipal Act) Financial and Resource Implications
The cost for Driverseat to operate the proposed service as per the Transfer Payment Agreement, for the period of September 1 to December 31, 2020 is $213,911, after recoverable HST. The total cost for Driverseat, maintenance, marketing and administration under the proposed model has a cost of $ 2,581,939, after recoverable HST over three years as compared to the amount of grant remaining of $2,511,379, after recoverable HST, resulting in a shortfall of $70,560. This will need to be considered in the 2021 and 2022 annual budget process.
Staff recommends that the cost to operate a Grey Road 4 service, which is beyond the scope of the grant, for the period of September 1 to December 31, 2020 is $30,606, after recoverable HST, to be funded from the One-Time Funding Reserve. The total cost for Driverseat for Grey Road 4 is $280,857, after recoverable HST for a three-year term, with 2021 and 2022 to be included in the annual budget. Relevant Consultation Grey County Legislative Services, Finance Department & Transportation Services Grey County and City of Owen Sound Accessibility Committees Grey County
Municipality of Chatsworth Municipality of Georgian Bluffs Municipality of Grey Highlands Municipality of Southgate Municipality of West Grey Municipality of Meaford The Town of Blue Mountains The Town of Hanover City of Owen Sound
Bruce County
Municipality of South Bruce Peninsula
CAOR-CW-10-20 19 July 23, 2020 Municipality of North Bruce Peninsula
Dufferin County
Town of Orangeville Town of Shelburne
Simcoe County Appendices and Attachments
CAOR-CW-10-20 Community Transit Update- Route Details Project Summary to Date
CAOR-CW-10-20 20 July 23, 2020 Committee Report
To: Warden McQueen and Members of Grey County Council Committee Date: July 23, 2020 Subject / Report No: CCR-CW-04-20 Title: Terms of Reference – Hanover – Owen Sound Task Force Prepared by: Tara Warder and Heather Morrison Reviewed by: Kim Wingrove Lower Tier(s) Affected: All Status: Recommendation
1. That Report CCR-CW-04-20 regarding the Terms of Reference for the Hanover – Owen Sound Task Force be received; and
2. That the Terms of Reference be endorsed as presented; and
3. The following Members be appointed to the Hanover-Owen Sound Task Force:
Councillors Hicks, O’Leary (plus two additional members)
Warden McQueen Executive Summary At the January 9, 2020 Committee of the Whole meeting, a notice of motion was passed to establish a Hanover-Owen Sound Task Force to analyze economic and social conditions in the Town of Hanover and City of Owen Sound and their impact on Grey County as a whole. It is anticipated the Task Force will make recommendations for enhancements or improvements to these conditions. Terms of Reference were also requested and are included in this report.
CCR-CW-04-20 211 Date: July 23, 2020 Background and Discussion At the January 9, 2020 Committee of the Whole meeting, a notice of motion was supported to establish a Hanover Owen Sound Task Force to analyze issues related to the overall economic and social conditions of the two urban areas through several lenses including but not limited to labour force, social issues and supports, transportation and housing. The Task Force will look at these conditions and develop a report providing recommendations and a workplan for Council’s consideration to address opportunities and areas of concern that benefit not only Hanover and Owen Sound but also provide an overall benefit to Grey County as a whole.
Also requested through the notice of motion was a draft Terms of Reference. These have been developed and are included with this report for consideration. Legal and Legislated Requirements This Task Force will be bound by the Municipal Act, 2001, Grey County Procedural By- law, Code of Conduct and any other relevant provincial or federal legislation or other County policies as applicable. Financial and Resource Implications There will be small financial considerations relating to the establishment of the task force including mileage and per diems. Every attempt will be made to hold these meetings in conjunction with another County meeting to reduce financial costs. Relevant Consultation ☒ Internal-CAO, Planning, Housing, Social Services, Economic Development
☐ External
Appendices and Attachments Terms of Reference Hanover-Owen Sound Task Force
CCR-CW-04-20 221 Date: July 23, 2020 Terms of Reference
Town of Hanover - City of Owen Sound Task Force Mission/ Purpose: This Task Force is responsible for analyzing economic and social conditions in the Town of Hanover and the City of Owen Sound and their impact on Grey County as a whole and making recommendations for enhancements or improvements to these conditions.
Objectives:
1. To assess the available social and economic data for the Town of Hanover and City of Owen Sound, including trend analysis and forecasting.
2. To develop a report which will contain recommendations and a workplan for Council’s consideration to address opportunities and areas of concern, for the benefit of both the two municipalities and the County as a whole.
Governance roles and responsibilities: As the only two wholly designated primary settlement areas in Grey County, the Town of Hanover and the City of Owen Sound have some unique circumstances that require attention in order to ensure the health of Grey County and the goals of the Official Plan are met.
The Hanover – Owen Sound Task Force will examine challenges and opportunities that the Town of Hanover and the City of Owen Sound may have in common, including but not limited to:
Housing availability, employment (job creation, unfilled positions), transportation, labour force attraction, and social issues that affect policing in the two communities such as mental health, addictions and poverty.
Membership Members of the Hanover – Owen Sound Task Force are appointed by Council and will include four members of Council and the Warden. At least one member will be appointed from each of the two subject municipalities.
CCR-CW-04-20 231 Date: July 23, 2020 Members will remain on the Task Force for its duration.
Each member of the Task Force shall:
1. Exercise the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances. 2. Become informed about the issues affecting the Town of Hanover and the City of Owen Sound and how they affect Grey County as a whole. 3. Be committed to achieving and maintaining the vision, mission and values of Grey County
Advice to Council The Task Force will make recommendations to Committee of the Whole on the following matters, for which Council retains the decision-making role:
1. Suggestions, ideas and projects the County could undertake to promote the community well-being and economic prosperity of the two communities to continue to benefit Grey County in all aspects.
2. Considerations related to the above related to financial, time frame and priorities.
Chair and Vice Chair The Chair and Vice-Chair will be elected by the Task Force members at the first meeting. The Chair and Vice Chair will retain these positions until the Task Force is dissolved.
Meetings The Task Force will meet at the call of the Chair.
Quorum A quorum is more than 50% of the membership of the Task Force.
Duration The Task Force will meet for a maximum of eight (8) months.
Statutory Authority The Task Force is guided by Grey County’s Procedural By-law, Council’s Code of Conduct, Provincial Acts and regulations, and other Grey County Policies as applicable. Reporting Relationship The Task Force reports to Grey County Committee of the Whole.
CCR-CW-04-20 241 Date: July 23, 2020 Committee Report
To: Warden McQueen and Members of Grey County Council Committee Date: July 23, 2020 Subject / Report No: CCR-CW-05-20 Title: Update to Fees and Services Prepared by: Heather Morrison Reviewed by: Kim Wingrove, Kevin Weppler Lower Tier(s) Affected: Status: Recommendation
1. That Report CCR-CW-05-20 regarding an update to Grey County’s Fees and Services Schedule be received; and
2. That the approved changes be incorporated into the Fees and Services Schedule; and
3. That an automatic increase on January 1 annually be added to manage the average annual increase in the Statistics Canada Consumer Price Index for Ontario as of September 30th of the previous year, if the Consumer Price Index shows an average increase; and
4. That fees that are set by legislation or by contract would be exempt from this annual increase; and
5. That a by-law be brought forward for Council’s consideration. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to bring forward recommended changes to the County’s Fees and Services Schedule for Council’s consideration.
CCR-CW-05-20 251 Date: July 23, 2020 Background and Discussion Fees and services related to various County operations were introduced in 2003 and are required under Section 391 of The Municipal Act, 2001. The last time a fulsome review of the by-law was completed was 2011. Since then numerous reports have been presented and endorsed by Council permitting additions and modifications to the current fees and service schedule as County operations have shifted and realigned over the years. These changes have been incorporated annually into an updated Fees and Services Schedule.
At this time there are several changes to be included in the Fees and Services Schedule based on changing operations and additions to County operations. The additions are in red and the deletions have a strikethrough for ease of reference.
Some of the highlighted changes include:
Removal of rental fees for non-profit organizations using meeting rooms within the Grey County Administration Building during office hours Availability to reduce/waive fees for municipally approved Community Improvement Plans Realignment of Planning fees to better reflect current processes and to be reflective of the average time spent on applications Addition of Economic Development fees including those necessary for Sydenham Campus use Removal of Tourism related fees as they are no longer relevant to the workplan and working group partnerships Update of fees associated with Grey Roots and its various operations due to increased cost of operations Planning Fees Background Council will note that there are several significant changes to the fees related to Planning. Changes to the Planning Act related to application timelines has reduced the timeframes for Official Plans or Official Plan Amendments (OPAs) from 210 days to 120 days, Zoning By-laws and Amendments or Holding Provisions from 150 days to 90 days and Plans of Subdivision from 180 days to 120 days. With these changes in mind, planning staff are reviewing internal processes to better streamline development applications, in part by ensuring our fee structure accurately reflects time spent on applications and identifying whether there are fees and application types that are no longer needed.
Application fees do not necessarily cover 100% of the cost of staff time but reflect an average cost for a standard application. Planning staff are recommending removal of
CCR-CW-05-20 262 Date: July 23, 2020 the Major and Municipality Initiated OPA sections and replacing them with a more well- defined Major and Minor OPA section which will provide further definitions of what is considered a Major OPA and what is a Minor OPA. This change will also include a decrease in the Peer Review deposits for Minor OPAs.
Another change for the Planning section relates to the adjustment of the County’s baseline fee and per unit fee for subdivision/condominium applications. Currently these are broken down into five categories based on units or blocks. Staff are recommending that a baseline fee of $6,610 be added and then a set unit fee of $102 up to a maximum of $11,220 at 110 units, or a total maximum fee of $17,830.
A few further adjustments to the Planning section are also recommended. These include adjusting the Special Notes section of Major Draft Revisions to include the ability to request additional peer review fees. As well there is a new inclusion related to fees for road-side development signs of $180.00. This relates to the costs of the signs (labour and materials) and additional vinyl patches that may be applied for public meeting information if not already determined at the time of sign manufacturing.
Staff have also removed the fee for municipally initiated County Official Plan Amendments (Major & Minor). In the past, there have been very few submissions of this nature, as County planning staff typically account for the requested changes at the time of a County Official Plan review or update. Another noted change is an increase in fees for Local Official Plan Amendments. County staff are aiming to better account for staff time spent on these application types with a proposed increase in fees from $885 to $1,100.
Finally, there is a recommendation to increase the fee related to retrieval of files from off-site storage. Currently Planning stores older permanent files at an off-site location. It is recommended that the charge for retrieval of boxes be increased from $29.25 to $32.56 per box to account for the increased fees of the storage facility. Addition of Economic Development Fees Council will note that there is a new tab included in the Schedule. This relates to Economic Development and specifically the Sydenham Campus. Fees have been included in there related to rental and lease availabilities at the campus as well as parking fees. Legal and Legislated Requirements Section 391 of The Municipal Act, 2001 requires every municipality to implement a Fees and Services By-law.
CCR-CW-05-20 273 Date: July 23, 2020 Financial and Resource Implications Fees and services are implemented departmentally and included as part of the respective operating budgets annually.
With respect to the changes made to the Planning departments fees and services, staff are expecting to see a general increase in funds received for planning service and delivery. The two main sections staff are anticipating an increase in fees received pertains to Major County Official Plan Amendments and Subdivision/Condominium applications. Previous interpretations of major application types apply to those where a secondary plan or comprehensive review is required or where the OPA applies to more than a site-specific area. Minor applications have included the remainder of county official plan amendment application types regardless of the complexity of the file (i.e. larger site-specific development application types - pits/quarries, wineries, etc. and smaller development application types – facilitating lot additions or severances that do not meet the exact provisions of the Plan). Through this change in definition, there will likely be an increase in ‘Major’ County Official Plan Amendment application types, resulting in an increase in overall fees received.
When comparing the old fee schedule for subdivision/condominium applications to the newly proposed schedule, staff are aiming to eliminate a multiple-tiered financial framework where price continues to increase per lot/unit or block proposed, without a maximum fee limit. The revised fee proposal will result in an increase in fees collected for subdivision/condo applications with 148 units or less but will result in a decrease in fees collected for subdivision/condo applications larger than 148 units. As the subdivision/condo unit count continues to increase, the application processing requirements do not see a similar proportional increase.
CCR-CW-05-20 284 Date: July 23, 2020 Grey County Sum Unit Fees & Sub/Condo Fees (2020) Comparison $24,000 $21,000 $18,000 $15,000 $12,000 $9,000 $6,000 $3,000 $0 Grey County (2020) Sum Unit Fees & Revised Grey County (2020) Sum Unit Fees Sub/Condo Fees & Sub/Condo Fees
10 units 30 units 50 units 70 units 90 units 110 units 130 units 150 units 170 units 190 units 210 units 230 units 250 units 270 units 290 units 310 units 330 units 350 units
It should be noted that fees will no longer be collected for municipally initiated County Official Plan Amendment applications, and there is a smaller peer review deposit required for Minor County OPA’s. Relevant Consultation ☒ Internal Senior Management Team, Finance department
☐ External none Appendices and Attachments Draft Fees and Services Schedule
CCR-CW-05-20 295 Date: July 23, 2020 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE CHARGES SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment ApplicableTax HST on 2020 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Rate 2020 Base Fee Base Fee Including HST Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "A" - GENERAL FEES Room Rental - County Building Half Day Per Room Yes 13% $88.50 $11.51 $100.01 Yes Non- Profit Full Day Per Room Yes 13% $177.50 $23.08 $200.58 Yes Local municipalities exempt from this fee. Not For Profit no charges if used Room Rental - during regular business hours. County Building Half Day Per Room Yes 13% $177.50 $23.08 $200.58 Yes Commercial Full Day Per Room Yes 13% $324.00 $42.12 $366.12 Yes
Commissioning Documents Each Yes 13% $28.10 $3.65 $31.75 Yes No charge if document relates to County business Legislative Authority - Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection Act Freedom of Information Each No 0% $5.00 $0.00 $5.00 Yes Section 24 (1) Minor Exemption Application - Forestry Management Each No 0% $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 Yes
General NSF - Each No 0% $41.25 $0.00 $41.25 Yes N.S.F. Cheques Legislative Authority - Financial Administration Act Ontario Regulation POA NSF - Each No 0% $35.00 $0.00 $35.00 Yes 754/92 Photocopy/Scanned Image - 8 1/2 " x 11" and 8 1/2 " x 14" (black and white Each Yes 13% $0.58 $0.08 $0.66 Yes Photocopy/Scanned Image - 11" x 17" (black and white) Each Yes 13% $0.74 $0.10 $0.84 Yes Colour Copies/Scanned Image - 8 1/2 x 11" and 8 1/2 x 14" Each Yes 13% $1.26 $0.16 $1.42 Yes Colour Copies/Scanned Image- 11" x 17" Each Yes 13% $2.40 $0.31 $2.71 Yes Not Requiring Certification - Per Page No 0% $1.00 $0.00 $1.00 Yes Legislative Authority - Ontario Court of Justice - Fees O. Reg. 210/07 POA Copies Requiring Certification - Per Page No 0% $3.50 $0.00 $3.50 Yes Legislative Authority - Ontario Court of Justice - Fees O. Reg. 210/07 Colour Maps - Large Size If necessary - Postage and Handling Fee of $6.00 plus HST will be from Plotter Each Yes 13% $17.30 $2.25 $19.55 Yes assessed Black and White Maps from If necessary - Postage and Handling Fee of $6.00 plus HST will be Plotter Each Yes 13% $11.35 $1.48 $12.83 Yes assessed Scanned Image greater than 11" x 17" Each Yes 13% $11.35 $1.48 $12.83 Yes Air Photo Plots (11" x 17" or smaller) Each Yes 13% $11.35 $1.48 $12.83 Yes Air Photo Plots (greater than If necessary - Postage and Handling Fee of $6.00 plus HST will be 11" x 17") Each Yes 13% $33.50 $4.36 $37.86 Yes assessed Preparation of Digital Map File (PDF, jpeg, etc.) Each Yes 13% $11.35 $1.48 $12.83 Yes Information available on GIS site for users to access If necessary - Postage and Handling Fee of $6.00 plus HST will be CD/DVD Fee Each Yes 13% $5.95 $0.77 $6.72 Yes assessed No longer used
30 Schedule A
Page 6 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE CHARGES SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment ApplicableTax HST on 2020 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Rate 2020 Base Fee Base Fee Including HST Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "A" - GENERAL FEES
Fee per tile charged in Variable - Based accordance with Digital Georeferenced Air on number of tiles Data is considered Open Data after the SWOOP agreement expires Per Tile Yes applicable Variable Yes Photo Tiles required (See (historically 2 years) SWOOP Note) participation agreement 13% Fee per square Fee per square kilometre in kilometre in accordance with accordance with Memorandum of Memorandum of No charge for sharing LiDAR data with local municipalities, for consultants Understanding Understanding doing work on behalf of County/local municipalities, and no charge if data is LiDAR Data Per Square Km Yes Variable Yes with Grey Sauble with Grey Sauble used for educational purposes. Any LiDAR requests within Town of The Conservaton Conservaton Blue Mountains will be referred to the Town. Authority and Authority and Town of The Blue Town of The Blue 13% Mountains Mountains
Faxes Each Yes 13% $1.15 $0.15 $1.30 Yes
Tender Packages Each Yes 13% $31.50 $4.10 $35.60 Yes Hardcopy tender package including documents and large drawings
County Flag Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery $0.00 Cost Recovery Yes Monthly fee per Antenna connected to tower - $60.00 x Height Factor plus HST Height Factor Adjustment for Antenna Fee: Rental Fees for Tenants on Variable - See Variable - See 300 feet or higher 2.0 Each Tower Monthly Yes 13% Variable Yes Communication Towers Note Note 200 feet or higher 1.5 100 feet or higher 1.25
Monthly fee for 8U of rack space and hydro - $60.00 plus HST Network Connection License - Access to GIS site for external partners (municipal Municipalities Each Annually No 0% Cost Recovery $0.00 Cost Recovery Yes only) Information Technology - Based on 2007 salary and benefit costs plus 10% administration (municipal lower tier support Hour No 0% $71.50 $0.00 $71.50 Yes only) To be dealt with as requested via MOU Information Technology - software Each No 0% Cost Recovery $0.00 Cost Recovery Yes For lower tier municipalities in Grey County only Defaulted Provincial Offences Fine Each Yes 13% $29.75 $3.87 $33.62 Yes For Community Improvement Projects that have been approved under a Approved Community local municipal Community Improvement Plan that aligns with the County Improvement Plan Project - Community Improvement Plan Program, any fee or service charge in this By- reducing and waiving Variable - See Variable - See law could be waived or reduced in accordance with the municipal fees/service charges Each No 0% Note 0.00% Note N/A Community Improvement Plan.
31 Schedule A
Page 7 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment Applicable HST on 2020 Base 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Fee Including HST Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "B" - TRANSPORTATION Wide Load Permit - Single Use Each No 0% $29.80 $0.00 $29.80 Yes Wide Load Permit - Annual (calendar year) Each No 0% $117.50 $0.00 $117.50 Yes
Entrance Permit - Residential Each No 0% $565.00 $0.00 $565.00 Yes $300.00 refundable upon completion and County approval
Entrance Permit - Field Each No 0% $565.00 $0.00 $565.00 Yes $300.00 refundable upon completion and County approval Entrance Permit - Commercial Each No 0% $5,650.00 $0.00 $5,650.00 Yes $4,000.00 refundable upon completion and County approval Entrance Permit - Change of Usage Each No 0% $565.00 $0.00 $565.00 Yes $300.00 refundable upon completion and County approval
Entrance Permit -Change of Design Each No 0% $565.00 $0.00 $565.00 Yes $300.00 refundable upon completion and County approval
Entrance Permit -Temporary Each No 0% $565.00 $0.00 $565.00 Yes $300.00 refundable upon completion and County approval
Encroachment Permit Each No 0% $565.00 $0.00 $565.00 Yes Municipalities are exempt from Encroachment Permit fee Single Guidepost $158.00 Cost Replacement Fee Each Yes 13% Recovery Variable Variable Yes Guidepost Replacement $60.00 Cost Billing/Administration Fee Each Yes 13% Recovery Variable Variable Yes Tire Pick Up (16" and under) Rims removed and clean Each Yes 13% $2.97 $0.39 $3.36 Yes Service available within Grey County Gravel testing at Chatsworth depot Each Test Yes 13% $47.50 $6.18 $53.68 Yes Service available to other government agencies Inspection for crack filling, asphalt resurfacing, etc. Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes Service available to other government agencies Sign manufacturing at Service available to other government agencies; Depends on size, Clarksburg Depot Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes material, etc.
Survey and Design Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes Service available to other government agencies Bridge Maintenance and Repair Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes Service available to other government agences
Traffic Counts Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes Service available to other government agencies Bridge Inspection and Washing Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes Service available to other government agencies Snow Plow and Sanding Operations Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes Service available to other government agencies
Accident Replacement Costs Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes
Mobile Speed Sign Each Yes 13% $117.50 $15.28 $132.78 Yes Fee is effective only for non-County roads Tourism Signage: Initial cost sign cost Each Yes 13% $309.00 $40.17 $349.17 Yes Tourism Signage: Annual fee Each Yes 13% $117.50 $15.28 $132.78 Yes Sign Permit - Billboard Each Sign No 0% $11.20/m2 $0.00 $11.20/m2 Yes Sign Permit - Location Each Sign No 0% $23.50/m2 $0.00 $23.50/m2 Yes
32 Schedule B Page 3 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment Applicable HST on 2020 Base 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Fee Including HST Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "B" - TRANSPORTATION Fees will be determined for each training session directly relating to Training Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes cost recovery.
33 Schedule B Page 4 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment Applicable 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Including HST Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "C" - PARAMEDIC SERVICES
Training Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Varible Yes Public Access Defibrillator Program Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Varible Yes Private Dedicated Coverage Fees will be determined on an individual basis for each event directly Fee for Events Each No 0% Cost Recovery Varible Yes relating to cost recovery
34 ScheduleC
Page 5 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment Applicable HST on 2020 Base 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Fee Including HST Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "D" - HOUSING
As determined As determined from time to time from time to time Minimum Rent and Maximum by Provincial by Provincial Legislative Authority -Housing Services Act and Residential Tenancies Act Rent Each No 0% regulation n/a regulation No and Regulations
As determined As determined from time to time from time to time by Provincial by Provincial Legislative Authority - Housing Services Act and Residential Tenancies Act NSF Cheque Each No 0% regulation n/a regulation No and Regulations Transfer to another Unit As determined As determined within the same property from time to time from time to time without grounds or medical by Provincial by Provincial Legislative Authority - Housing Services Act and Residential Tenancies Act requirement Each No 0% regulation $250 n/a regulation $250 No and Regulations
Coin laundry - Washers Each Yes 13% $1.77 $0.23 $2.00 No Available in apartment buildings only.
Coin laundry - Dryers Each Yes 13% $1.77 $0.23 $2.00 No Available in apartment buildings only. Room Rental Common Rooms-Outside Organizations Each Yes 13% $44.25 $5.75 $50.00 No replacement cost only Replacement keys and fobs Each Yes 13% $8.85 $1.15 $10 No replacement cost only Lock Change Each Yes 13% $22.12 $2.88 $25 No replacement cost only
35 Schedule D Page 6 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment Applicable 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Including HST Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "E" - LONG TERM CARE Home has bulk service and these charges to Residents may change based Telephone Each No 0% Cost Recovery Cost Recovery No on market value Home has bulk service and these charges to Residents may change based Cable Television Each No 0% Cost Recovery Cost Recovery No on market value
Accomodation Charges - minimum and maximum rent, Fee set by Fee set by Rate set by Province and adjusted annually, usually July 1 of each year. rate reduction Each No 0% Province Province Yes Legislative Authority - Long Term Care Homes Act and Regulations
36 Page 7 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment Applicable HST on 2020 Base 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Fee Including HST Charges Special Notes SCHEDULE "F" - SOCIAL SERVICES Ontario Works Van Fee One Way Trip No 0% $8.90 $0.00 $8.90 No Legislative Authority - Ontario Works Act or Ontario Disability Support Program Act Round Trip No 0% $17.80 $0.00 $17.80 No
Childcare Fee Subsidy Rates Per Day No 0% As determined As determined No Effective November 1, 2017 provincial Range From from time to time from time to time income testing sliding scale in use. by Provincial by Provincial Legislative Authority - Child Care and regulation regulation Early Years Act, 2014
37 Schedule F Page 8 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment Applicable HST on 2020 Base 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Fee Including HST Charges Special Notes SCHEDULE "H" - PLANNING Copy of County of Grey Official Plan Each Yes 13% $60.00 $7.80 $67.80 Yes Hard Copy Copy of Special Studies and Reports Each Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes Copy costs and admin fee based on cost recovery
Re-Issue of Certificate of Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as Consent Each No 0% $41.00 $0.00 $41.00 Yes amended
Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as Fee for Validation Order Each No 0% $600.00 $0.00 $600.00 Yes amended
Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as Fee for Power of Sale Each No 0% $600.00 $0.00 $600.00 Yes amended $5,000.00 deposit towards cost of Peer Review. $500.00 non refundable Approval of Plan of fee if application is withdrawn during approval process prior to draft Subdivision/Condominium up approval. Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. to 20 lots/units or blocks Each Approval No 0% $3,500.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 Yes 1990, as amended
$5,000.00 deposit towards cost of Peer Review. $500.00 non refundable fee if application is withdrawn during approval process prior to draft Approval of Plan of $3,500.00 plus $3,500.00 plus Subdivision/Condominium up $117.50 per lot/unit $117.50 per lot/unit approval. Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. to 21 to 75 lots/units or blocks Each Approval No 0% $0.00 Yes 1990, as amended $5,000.00 deposit for Peer Review. $500.00 non refundable fee if Approval of Plan of $8,950.00 plus $8,950.00 plus application is withdrawn during approval process prior to draft approval. Subdivision/Condominium 76 $60.00 per lot/unit $60.00 per lot/unit Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as to 150 lots/units or blocks Each Approval No 0% $0.00 Yes amended $5,000.00 deposit for Peer Review. $500.00 non refundable fee if Approval of Plan of $13,200.00 plus $13,200.00 plus application is withdrawn during approval process prior to draft approval. Subdivision/Condominium $29.75 per lot/unit $29.75 per lot/unit Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as 151 to 300 lots/units or blocks Each Approval No 0% or block $0.00 or block Yes amended Approval of Plan of $5,000.00 deposit for Peer Review.$500.00 non refundable fee if subdivision/Condominium $17,750.00 plus $17,750.00 plus application is withdrawn during approval process prior to draft approval. 301 or more lot/units or $12.05 per lot/unit $12.05 per lot/unit Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as blocks Each Approval No 0% or block $0.00 or block Yes amended $6,610 base fee $6,610 base fee plus $102 per plus $102 per $5,000 deposit for Peer Review. $500 non-refundable fee if application is lot/unit/block to a lot/unit/block to a withdrawn during approval; process prior to draft approval. Legislative maximum maximum Authority Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 as amended. The additional fee of additional fee of additional fee for lots/blocks/units only applies to lots/blocks/units that are $11,220 or a total $11,220 or a total to be developed (i.e. blocks for stormwater management, roads, etc. are Approval of Plan of maximum fee of maximum fee of not included in the lot/unit/block count for the purposes of calculating the Subdivision/Condominium Each Approval No No $17,830 $0.00 $17,830 Yes additional fee).
Exemption from Full Approval Process for certain Legislative Authority -Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as condominium Applications Each No 0% $1,210.00 $0.00 $1,210.00 Yes amended Circulation of Revised Documentation/Plans prior to Draft Approval of a Plan of Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as Subdivision/Condominium Each No 0% $295.00 $0.00 $295.00 Yes amended
38 Schedule H Page 90 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment Applicable HST on 2020 Base 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Fee Including HST Charges Special Notes SCHEDULE "H" - PLANNING Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended. $5,000 deposit for Peer Review may be requested by County Planning staff should the proposed changes potentially merit additional Major Draft Plan Revision Each No 0% $1,420.00 $0.00 $1,420.00 Yes technical expertise for review.
Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as Minor Draft Plan Revision Each No 0% $885.00 $0.00 $885.00 Yes amended Stamping Fee for Final Approval of Plan of Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as Subdivision/Condominium Each No 0% $1,190.00 $0.00 $1,190.00 Yes amended
Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as Extension of Draft Approval Each No 0% $885.00 $0.00 $885.00 Yes amended
$295.00 plus $295.00 plus Approval of By-Law to $117.50 per parcel $117.50 per parcel Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as Remove Part Lot Control Each No 0% created $0.00 created Yes amended $5,000 deposit for Peer Review. $500.00 non-refundable if request does not proceed to Public Meeting. Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended. Major includes applications with 3 or more technical study requirements such as, but not limited to a/an planning justification report, stormwater management report, traffic review, servicing review, environmental impact study, noise and vibration study, an County Official Plan archeological assessment report and/or a secondary plan or Amendment - Major Each No 0% $3,500.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 Yes comprehensive review
$5,000 $2,000 deposit for Peer Review. $500.00 non-refundable if request does not proceed to Public Meeting. Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended. Minor includes applications with 2 or less technical studies such as, but not limited to a/an planning County Official Plan justification report, stormwater management report, traffic review, servicing Amendment - Minor (site review, environmental impact study, noise and virbation study, and/or an specific) Each No 0% $1,750.00 $0.00 $1,750.00 Yes archaeological assessment. County Official Plan $500 non-refundable if request does not proceed to Public Meeting. Amendment - if Municipality Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as initiated - Major Each No 0% $2,400.00 $0.00 $2,400.00 Yes amended If a County Official Plan Amendment is also required which is similar to the adopted local official plan amendment, the approval fee for a local official Approval of a Local Official plan amendment will be waived. Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Plan Amendment Each No 0% 885 $1,100 $0.00 $1,100.00 Yes Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended
County Official Plan $500 non-refundable if request does not proceed to Public Meeting. Amendment - if Municipality Legislative Authority - Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as initiated - (site specific) Each No 0% $1,190.00 $0.00 $1,190.00 Yes amended
Retrieval of file from off-site storage Each Yes 13% 32.56 $29.75 $4.23 $36.80 Yes Peer Review of Technical Studies/Reports Each No 0% Cost Recovery $0.00 Cost Recovery Yes Cost Recovery and Admin Fee
Map Books Each Yes 13% $6.35 $0.83 $7.18 Yes
39 Schedule H Page 100 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11 Subject to Late Payment Applicable HST on 2020 Base 2020 Fee Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Fee Including HST Charges Special Notes SCHEDULE "H" - PLANNING If the developer or proponent requires County staff to install the sign(s) on the subject property(ies) there will be an additional charge. This fee will equal the amount required to pay the hourly wage of transportation staff to Roadside Development Signs Each Yes 13% $180.00 $23.40 $203.40 Yes install these signs.
40 Schedule H Page 110 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11
Subject to Late Applicable HST on 2020 2020 Fee Payment Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Base Fee Including HST Interest Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "G" - GREY ROOTS & TOURISM Research Per Hour Yes 13% $33.50 $4.36 $37.86 Yes Members of a municipal history committee may, with an official letter from the municipality Scanning Per Image Yes 13% $23.40 $3.04 $26.44 Yes sponsoring the project, receive a 50% discount. $35.25 plus cost of $39.83 plus cost of Copies of photos made off premise Each Yes 13% copy Variable copy Yes Admission-Non Member: Adult Yes 13% $8.00 $1.04 $9.04 Yes Senior / Student Yes 13% $6.00 $0.78 $6.78 Yes Senior is defined as 65 years of age and older; Student is defined as Age 13+ or with ID Child Yes 13% $4.00 $0.52 $4.52 Yes Child is defined as 5-12 years of age Family Yes 13% $20.00 $2.60 $22.60 Yes Up to 2 adults and Dependent Children Adult + Village Yes 13% $10.50 $1.37 $11.87 Yes To begin in 2021, $2.50 increase during Village operating season usually July - August Senior/Student + Village Yes 13% $8.50 $1.11 $9.61 Yes To being in 2021, $2.50 increase during Village operating season usually July - August Child + Village Yes 13% $6.50 $0.85 $7.35 Yes To begin in 2021, $2.50 increase during Village operating season usually July - August Family + Village Yes 13% $27.50 $3.58 $31.08 Yes To begin in 2021, $7.50 increase during Village operating season usually July - August Archives only: 3 Day Consecutive Pass Yes 13% $15.00 $1.95 $16.95 Yes Per person Archives only - Adult Yes 13% $6.00 $0.78 $6.78 Yes Per person Archives only - Senior Yes 13% $5.00 $0.65 $5.65 Yes Per person Special Event Yes 13% Variable Variable Variable Yes Per person Group Admissions: Adults: With Guide Yes 13% $8.00 $1.04 $9.04 Yes Per person - Minimum guided size is 15 people.
Adult Group: No Guide Yes 13% $6.00 $0.78 $6.78 Yes Per person - Minimum guided size is 15 people, booked in advance
Seniors: With Guide Yes 13% $6.00 $0.78 $6.78 Yes Per person Seniors's Groups: No Guide Yes 13% $5.00 $0.65 $5.65 Yes Per person - Minimum guided size is 15 people, booked in advance Per person - Minimum guided size is 15 people. Children's educational groups require 1 Educational Groups Yes chaperone (free of charge) per 6 children. Educational groups also include Colleges, Adult Yes 13% $5.00 $0.65 $5.65 Learning Centers & Universities Educational: No Guide Yes 13% $5.00 $0.65 $5.65 Yes Per person Children's Groups: Per child - Minimum guided group is 15 children. Outside daycamps or daycares, other children's With Guide Yes 13% $5.00 $0.65 $5.65 Yes groups Off-site and Digital Proposed new education program to provide (socially distanced) programs offsite, either in- education programming Yes 13% Variable Variable Variable Yes person or online. Children's Groups Per child - Outside daycamps or daycares, other children's groups. Children's educational groups Without Guide Yes 13% $3.50 $0.46 $3.96 Yes require chaperones (free of charge) as per required program ratios KidsCamp: Member Daily Rate No 0% $28.50 $0.00 $28.50 Yes Per child Non Member Daily Rate No 0% $31.00 $0.00 $31.00 Yes Per child Member Full Week No 0% $125.00 $0.00 $125.00 Yes Per child Non Member Full Week No 0% $145.00 $0.00 $145.00 Yes Per child Member Four-Day Week No 0% $100.00 $0.00 $100.00 Yes Per child Non Member Four-Day Week No 0% $116.00 $0.00 $116.00 Yes Per child Member 7 PA Day Bundle No 0% $165.00 $0.00 $165.00 Yes Per child Non Member 7 PA Day Bundle No 0% $186.00 $0.00 $186.00 Yes Per child Early Drop Off Fee Per Half Hour No 0% $3.00 $0.00 $3.00 Yes Per child: Early drop off 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Birthday Parties: Non members Yes 13% $117.50 $15.28 $132.78 Yes Up to 10 children - $12.00/Additional Child plus HST, 1 Adult required no charge Members Yes 13% $105.50 $13.72 $119.22 Yes Up to 10 children - $10.80/Additional Child plus HST, 1 Adult required no charge Up to 10 children - $12.00/Additional Child plus HST, 2 Adult required no charge, additional Birthday Parties: Non members Yes 13% $150.00 $19.50 $169.50 Yes adults/seniors at regular rates. (Cost recovery) Up to 10 children - $10.80/Additional Child plus HST, 2 Adult required no charge, additional Members Yes 13% $135.00 $17.55 $152.55 Yes adults/seniors at regular rates. (Cost recovery) Memberships: Adult Yes 13% $40.00 $5.20 $45.20 Yes Senior / Student Yes 13% $30.00 $3.90 $33.90 Yes Senior is defined as 65 years of age and older. Student is defined as Age 13+ or with ID Family Yes 13% $60.00 $7.80 $67.80 Yes 2 Adults and dependent children
Group Yes 13% $110.00 $14.30 $124.30 Yes Group membership is defined as an organized association or a business Corporate Yes 13% $250.00 $32.50 $282.50 Yes Corporate membership is defined as a business or for-profit organization
41 Schedule G Page 122 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11
Subject to Late Applicable HST on 2020 2020 Fee Payment Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate 2020 Base Fee Base Fee Including HST Interest Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "G" - GREY ROOTS & TOURISM Room Rentals:
Local municipalities are exempt from Day rental fees Boardroom Day: Non Profit Half Day Yes 13% $60.00 $7.80 $67.80 Yes Full Day Yes 13% $117.50 $15.28 $132.78 Yes Half Day Yes 13% $117.50 $15.28 $132.78 Yes Boardroom Day: Commercial Full Day Yes 13% $177.50 $23.08 $200.58 Yes An overage rate of $12.00 per 1/2 hour plus HST will be charged
Delton Becker Rm & Half Day Yes 13% $117.50 $15.28 $132.78 Yes Theatre Day: Non Profit Full Day Yes 13% $237.00 $30.81 $267.81 Yes Delton Becker Rm & Half Day Yes 13% $177.50 $23.08 $200.58 Yes Theatre Day: Commercial Full Day Yes 13% $324.00 $42.12 $366.12 Yes Delton Becker Rm or Theatre + Per Evening Yes Yes Cost Recovery. An evening rental is defined as 5pm - 9pm OR 6pm - 10pm. An overage rate of Foyer Evening: Commercial $60.00 per 1/2 hour plus HST will be charged if Grey Roots staff are on-site for more than 4 13% $360.00 $46.80 $406.80 hours. Rate also applies to weekends outside of regular hours. Delton Becker Rm or Theatre + Per Evening Yes Yes Cost Recovery. An evening rental is defined as 5pm - 9pm OR 6pm - 10pm. An overage rate of Foyer Evening: Non Profit $60.00 per 1/2 hour plus HST will be charged if Grey Roots staff are on-site for more than 4 13% $300.00 $39.00 $339.00 hours. Rate also applies to weekends outside of regular hours. Cost Recovery. An evening rental is defined as 5pm - 9pm OR 6pm - 10pm. An overage rate of Delton Becker Rm or Theatre $60.00 per 1/2 hour plus HST will be charged if Grey Roots staff are on-site for more than 4 Evening: Non Profit Per Evening Yes 13% $250.00 $32.50 $282.50 Yes hours. Rate also applies to weekends outside of regular hours. Cost Recovery. An evening rental is defined as 5pm - 9pm OR 6pm - 10pm. An overage rate of Delton Becker Rm or Theatre $60.00 per 1/2 hour plus HST will be charged if Grey Roots staff are on-site for more than 4 Evening: Commercial Per Evening Yes 13% $300.00 $39.00 $339.00 Yes hours. Rate also applies to weekends outside of regular hours. Proposed new category to allow for large receptions at Grey Roots, Includes use of foyer, main exhibit gallery and theatre.An evening rental is defined as 5pm - 9pm OR 6pm - 10pm. An overage rate of $60.00 per 1/2 hour plus HST will be charged if Grey Roots staff are on-site for Full Museum Rental Per Evening Yes 13% $800.00 $104.00 $904.00 Yes more than 4 hours. Rate also applies to weekends outside of regular hours. Proposed new category to allow local businesses and non-profits access to the lobby café for Kitchen Rental - non profit Per Day Yes 13% $50.00 $6.50 $56.50 Yes occaisonal use. During regular hours only. Proposed new category to allow local businesses and non-profits access to the lobby café for Kitchen Rental - corporate Per Day Yes 13% $75.00 $9.75 $84.75 Yes occaisonal use. During regular hours only.
Theatre Evening: Non Profit Per Evening Yes 13% $237.00 $30.81 $267.81 Yes An evening rental is defined as 5pm - 9pm OR 6pm - 10pm
Theatre Evening: Commercial Per Evening Yes 13% $355.00 $46.15 $401.15 Yes An overage rate of $60.00 per 1/2 hour plus HST will be charged if Grey Roots staff are on-site Delton Becker Rm Evening: Non Profit Per Evening Yes 13% $117.50 $15.28 $132.78 Yes no longer offered due to fire regulations Delton Becker Rm Evening: Commercial Per Evening Yes 13% $177.50 $23.08 $200.58 Yes no longer offered due to fire regulations
Travelling Exhibit Cancellations: 6 - 9 Month's Notice Yes 13% $555.00 $72.15 $627.15 Yes No charge 9 months to one year before scheduled opening
3 - 6 Month's Notice Yes 13% $1,110.00 $144.30 $1,254.30 Yes
1 - 3 Month's Notice Yes 13% $1,675.00 $217.75 $1,892.75 Yes
Less than 1 Month Notice Yes 13% $2,175.00 $282.75 $2,457.75 Yes Exhibition Fees: Labour, Material & Fees, Damaged Per Hour (Current Market Materials Value) Yes 13% $40.00 $5.20 $45.20 Yes Cost recovery. Storage Fees:
15-30 Days Storage Per Day Yes 13% $55.00 $7.15 $62.15 Yes No charge for first 15 days, after 30 days becomes property of Grey Roots. Tourism:
Tourism - Television Opportunities (i.e., Norther Experience) Per Minute Yes 13% Cost Recovery Variable Variable Yes Cost recovery based on cost per minute
Tourism - Travel Shows (i.e., Cottage Life, Canada Blooms, Fee structure for Local Municipalities of the County of Grey: $237.00 to send brochure to 3 Outdoor Adventure Show, Brochures Yes 13% $237.00 $30.81 $267.81 Yes shows (plus HST) & $471.00 to send book to 1 show (plus HST) Snowmobile Show, and Travel & Leisure Show) Book Yes 13% $471.00 $61.23 $532.23 Yes
42 Schedule G Page 132 COUNTY OF GREY - FEES AND SERVICE SCHEDULES - TO BY-LAW 4735-11
2020
Base Fee Subject
Increase to Late
HST on 2020 Fee over Payment
Applicable 2020 Base 2020 Base Including 2019 Interest Item Description Unit HST Applicable Tax Rate Fee Fee HST Base Fee Charge Special Notes SCHEDULE "I" - Economic Development-Sydenham Parking Daily Daily Yes 13% $ 6.19 $ 0.81 $ 7.00 Yes New fees in 2020 Locker Rental New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially Monthly Yes 13% $ 10.00 $ 1.30 $ 11.30 Yes low to start Hot Desk Daily Yes 13% $ 10.00 $ 1.30 $ 11.30 Yes New fees in 2020 Monthly Yes 13% $ 150.00 $ 19.50 $ 169.50 Yes New fees in 2020 Gym Rental New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially Per Use Yes 13% $ 150.00 $ 19.50 $ 169.50 Yes low to start New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially 4 per month Yes 13% $ 250.00 $ 32.50 $ 282.50 Yes low to start New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially 12 per quarter Yes 13% $ 600.00 $ 78.00 $ 678.00 Yes low to start Classroom Training New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially Rental Per Use Yes 13% $ 50.00 $ 6.50 $ 56.50 Yes low to start New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially 4 per Month Yes 13% $ 125.00 $ 16.25 $ 141.25 Yes low to start Classroom Rental New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially Per Use Yes 13% $ 75.00 $ 9.75 $ 84.75 Yes low to start New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially 4 per month Yes 13% $ 200.00 $ 26.00 $ 226.00 Yes low to start Long Term Classroom Lease Sq. Ft. Yes 13% $ 12.00 $ 1.56 $ 13.56 Yes As per lease agreeement. Market rate. Fabrication Lab New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially Membership Monthly Yes 13% $ 25.00 $ 3.25 $ 28.25 Yes low to start Green Space Field New fees in 2020, to be reviewed annually. Intentially Rental Per Use Yes 13% $ 25.00 $ 3.25 $ 28.25 Yes low to start
43
Committee Report
To: Warden McQueen and Members of Grey County Council Committee Date: July 23, 2020 Subject / Report No: Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 Title: Davenport Subdivision 42T-2017-05 Final Report Prepared by: Randy Scherzer Reviewed by: Kim Wingrove Lower Tier(s) Affected: Township of Georgian Bluffs Status: Recommendation 1. That Report Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 be received; and
2. That all written and oral submissions received on plan of subdivision 42T-2017-05 known as Davenport were considered; the effect of which helped to make an informed recommendation and decision; and
3. That in consideration of the draft plan of subdivision application 42T- 2017-05, for lands described as Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 Plan 16R- 11378, geographic Township of Sarawak, Township of Georgian Bluffs, the Grey County Committee of the Whole approves this plan of subdivision to create a total of twenty eight residential lots (Lots 1 to 28) and a future development block (Block 31), subject to the conditions set out in the Notice of Decision. Executive Summary The County has received a plan of subdivision application (County file number 42T- 2017-05) known as Davenport, to facilitate the construction of 28 single detached residential units (Lots 1 to 28) in the settlement area of East Linton, Township of Georgian Bluffs. Several revisions have been submitted by the Applicant for this proposed subdivision. The first application submission was for 8 lots to be serviced by municipal water and private septic systems. The Township of Georgian Bluffs later negotiated with Cobble Beach to assume the sewage treatment system from Cobble Beach earlier than originally anticipated. This will allow the Township to connect this
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 1 Date: July 23, 2020 44 development as well as other future developments in the area on full municipal services. Based on full municipal services being available, the Applicant submitted a revised development proposal with the latest proposal showing a total of 28 single detached lots. Access to the proposed lots would be off of streets that would be constructed as part of the subdivision development with two entrances into the subdivision coming off of Church Sideroad East. An associated local official plan amendment (LOPA 7) has been approved by the County which is currently in the appeal period and a zoning by- law amendment has been passed by the Township of Georgian Bluffs. Based on agency review and comments received regarding the proposed plan of subdivision, it is recommended that the proposed plan of subdivision be given draft approval subject to the conditions set out in the attached Notice of Decision. Background and Discussion The County received a plan of subdivision application back in 2018 that proposed to create a total of 8 single detached lots and a future development block within the settlement area of East Linton. The proposal at that time was to service the development using municipal water and private septic systems. The Township of Georgian Bluffs and Cobble Beach have reached an understanding that the Township would assume the private sewage treatment plant in the near future. This will allow the Township to service other developments outside of Cobble Beach including this proposed development. Based on the servicing potential, the Applicant submitted several revisions to the proposed development with the most recent proposed plan showing a total of 28 single detached lots (Lots 1 to 28) and one future development block (Block 31). One of the lots (Lot 9) contains an existing single detached house. Two additional blocks (Block 29 and 30) would also be created to allow a temporary cul- de-sac to be created at the end of proposed Street ‘B’ which would be removed should development proceed within the future development block.
The subject lands are located at Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, geographic Township of Sarawak, in the Township of Georgian Bluffs. The subject lands are located south of Church Sideroad East and east of Grey Road 1 in the settlement area of East Linton (see Map 1 – airphoto of subject lands). The proposed 28 lots would gain access off of roads to be constructed as part of the proposed development with two road connections to Church Sideroad East (see Map 2 – proposed subdivision plan).
The Cobble Beach development which includes a golf course and residential dwellings is located north of the subject lands. There are existing residential dwellings to the west and east of the subject lands. Directly south of the subject lands is the proposed Georgian Shores development which is currently draft approved for 16 lots and a future development block.
The proposed development also required an amendment to the Township of Georgian
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 2 Date: July 23, 2020 45 Bluffs Official Plan as well as an amendment to the Township of Georgian Bluffs Zoning By-law. Local Official Plan Amendment 7 (LOPA 7) to the Georgian Bluffs Official Plan has been approved and is currently in the appeal period. The associated zoning by-law amendment (By-law 2020-058) has been passed by the Township of Georgian Bluffs and is subject to LOPA 7 coming into force and effect.
The Applicant has submitted updated reports with the subdivision application to address the lands that have been added to the application as well as to address the previous comments raised by agencies and members of the public as part of the previous application submissions. Copies of all background reports and plans can be found at this link.
Map 1: Airphoto of Subject Lands
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 3 Date: July 23, 2020 46 Map 2: Proposed Plan of Subdivision
Public and Agency Comments Received The Township of Georgian Bluffs held an initial public meeting on September 15, 2018 for an earlier version of the proposed development and also held a second public meeting on June 5, 2019 in the Township of Georgian Bluffs Council Chambers based on additional lands being added to the proposed plan of subdivision. Three members of the public addressed Township Council at the public meeting on June 5, 2019 and raised the following summarized comments regarding the proposed development:
1. Murray Harris – storm sewers and retention ponds should be required, concerns regarding flooding during melt periods, existing drainage issues along Church Sideroad From Grey Road 1 to Balmy Beach Road, and the noted absence of a sub-watershed study for this area. 2. Robert Gibson – concerns with stormwater management and the existing ditch and culvert overflow, highlighted Church Sideroad drainage issues. 3. Brian MacIntosh – concerns with stormwater management and existing drainage issues.
Written public comments associated with the proposed development were also received from the following:
Rose and Peter Peacock Murray Harris
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 4 Date: July 23, 2020 47 Barry Hargrave David Rai Brian MacIntosh Beth Anne Currie Ron Campbell Robert Gibson Marion Gibson Sue Honer
The comments received in writing or at the public meeting have been summarized into the table below along with a response on how the comments have been considered and addressed.
How Comments have been Public Comments Raised considered/addressed? Concerns regarding stormwater The Grey Sauble Conservation Authority management including concerns (GSCA) and the peer reviewer retained regarding surface and groundwater by the Township and the County (GM flowing downhill from the subject BluePlan) have reviewed the proposed lands to the bay impacting fish habitat. stormwater management reports and are satisfied with the proposed plan subject to Concerns regarding capacity of the recommended conditions of draft culverts to handle the existing flows approval. as well as any proposed increases to the flows from this proposed Part of the stormwater management plan development. includes utilizing the municipal roadside ditch upgrades downstream of the Concerns regarding existing proposed Davenport subdivision. The stormwater management and drainage Township is in the process of finalizing an issues. engineered plan for the municipal roadside ditch upgrades along Church Recommendation that a Side Road East that will not only address comprehensive plan that includes existing drainage issues in the area but storm sewers and stormwater will also be designed to accommodate the management retaining ponds for the additional storm water from the proposed entire block is needed. development. The developer will be responsible to pay for a portion of the Concerns regarding maintenance of costs to improve the roadside ditch and the proposed drainage swales. replace the Balmy Beach Road crossing culvert, prior to final approval of the subdivision (i.e. prior to any development proceeding).
Stormwater Quality is proposed to be addressed through the use of enhanced grass swales and both GSCA and the
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 5 Date: July 23, 2020 48 peer reviewer are satisfied that the enhanced level of water quality treatment can be provided by the proposed design.
The final stormwater management design will be subject to the approval of the Township and GSCA and will also require environmental compliance approval from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) prior to any site alteration or construction occurring on the subject lands. Maintenance of the roadside ditch will be the responsibility of the Township. The recommended conditions of draft approval from the Township, the peer reviewer, and GSCA have been included in the proposed conditions of draft approval. Concerns regarding maintenance of The Township has worked out an the wastewater treatment plant. understanding with Cobble Beach to assume ownership of the sewage The proposed sewer lines should be treatment plant in the near future. The sized to allow for future phases of sewage treatment plant was constructed Georgian Shores to be put on full as part of the Cobble Beach development municipal services and should be left and the intent has always been that the in a place that would be easily Township would assume ownership once accessible to allow connections. the Cobble Beach development reached a certain point in the overall development. Concerns regarding sewage treatment Development within Cobble Beach has plant capacity and the need for a been slower than anticipated which was comprehensive master service plan primarily result of the recession. Development activity post-recession has increased quite steadily but has still not reached the trigger point as originally contemplated. The Township has a desire to take ownership of the sewage treatment plant which would allow this development and future developments in the area to connect to full municipal services. By assuming ownership, the Township will be responsible for maintaining the sewage treatment plant and the costs for maintenance will be funded by the users of the system.
The final design of the sewer mains to be constructed from the sewage treatment plant will be reviewed by the Township
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 6 Date: July 23, 2020 49 consulting engineer and will need to be designed to the satisfaction of the Township. The design should consider capacity for not only the remaining parts of the Cobble Beach development but should also consider future developments/connections within the East Linton area.
With respect to concerns regarding capacity and the need for a comprehensive master servicing plan, The Township has indicated no concerns with respect to servicing capacity to service the proposed development. The Township has noted that detailed plans for water and sewer services will be required at the subdivision agreement stage and will be reviewed by the Township consulting engineer and be completed to the satisfaction of the Township. This has been addressed in the recommended conditions of draft approval.
With full services being potentially available to service the remaining parts of East Linton, this has the potential to increase density in this area. There is also the possibility of connecting existing uses to full municipal services. Moving forward, it is recommended that a master servicing plan be considered by the Township for this area. It is staff’s understanding that Township Planning and Operations staff will be presenting a report on this issue to Township Council before the end of the year. Concerns regarding environmental An Environmental Impact Assessment impacts. (EIA) was completed. The EIA does note the presence of wetland features and Concerns regarding impacts to suitable habitat for eastern meadowlark species at risk and bobolink. No other constraints were identified on the property. The EIA does Concerned about threats to water note that approximately 3.3 hectares of intake meadowlark/bobolink habitat will be removed because of the proposed development and therefore a permit from
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 7 Date: July 23, 2020 50 MECP may be required in accordance with the Endangered Species Act, 2007. This has been addressed as part of the recommended conditions of draft approval.
The EIA provides recommendations in order to protect the wetland features, the woodlands, and the peak breeding bird season. These recommendations have been addressed as part of the recommended conditions of draft approval.
Portions of the property are also within Grey Sauble Conservation Authority’s Regulated Area and therefore any development or site alternation within the regulated area will require a permit from GSCA. Based on the most recent comments from GSCA, GSCA notes that they generally have no objection to this proposal. GSCA recommended conditions of draft approval which have been incorporated into the proposed conditions of draft approval.
With respect to the concerns raised about the threat to the municipal water intake, the Risk Management Office has indicated that the property is located outside of the Intake Protection Zone for the East Linton drinking water system and therefore no source protection policies apply. Comments regarding concerns about stormwater management and drainage and potential impacts to the bay and fish habitat were discussed above. Concerns regarding increased density It has been demonstrated through the of the proposed subdivision and the technical studies and the review of those impacts to the neighbourhood studies by agencies and the peer reviewer that this proposed development That approval of this proposal is can be considered subject to conditions unacceptable of draft approval. The subject lands are designated ‘Secondary Settlement Area’ Concerned that this proposed in the County Official Plan. Growth and development is not responsible development are meant to be directed to planning and that it is being done in a settlement areas, and as such this is an
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 8 Date: July 23, 2020 51 piece meal approach. Suggested that appropriate location. The development the entire property have engineering will be serviced by municipal water and studies completed and that a sewer services which is the preferred submission for the entire property be form of servicing. The location of the submitted. subject property is surrounded by a mix of low-density residential development and Concerned that the proposed future development lands. The Cobble development exceeds the 20 year Beach development is north of the planning horizon subject lands. Therefore, the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses.
Any development proposed within the future development block will require a local official plan amendment, zoning amendment and a subdivision application. Supporting studies will need to be submitted for any applications that propose development within the future development block. Concerns regarding unsafe egress at The Township Operations Department proposed Street ‘E’ and County Transportation Services have reviewed the proposed development Concerns regarding increase in traffic, applications and have identified no air pollution from increased traffic and concerns with respect to traffic impacts or road wearing the egress of the proposed roads. These matters will be reviewed in further detail as part of the detailed engineering design requirements prior to final approval of the proposed subdivision. Concerns regarding light pollution and A condition of draft approval has been ensuring that the subdivision is ‘dark included requiring that the lighting for the sky’ compliant proposed subdivision be ‘dark sky’ compliant. Concerned about lack of parkland A condition of draft approval has been dedication included as recommended by the Township regarding parkland dedication or cash-in-lieu of parkland. Concerns about impact on property All costs associated with this tax base development will be borne by the developer and will be detailed as part of the subdivision agreement between the Township and the developer. All costs for maintaining the sewage treatment plant and water treatment will be paid through user fees. Property taxes will be collected from the future homeowners to pay for services to be provided to the
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 9 Date: July 23, 2020 52 development (i.e. garbage collection, maintaining roads, etc.). Based on the above, there should be no impact to the property tax base as a result of this development.
Agency comments were as follows:
Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) - In correspondence dated May 4, 2020, the MECP provided further information and clarification regarding the rules and regulations regarding Bobolink and Meadowlark Habitat Management Plans. These requirements have been addressed as part of the recommended conditions of draft plan approval. Risk Management Office – Source Water Protection (RMO) - In correspondence dated March 27, 2019, the RMO indicates that the property is located outside of the Intake Protection Zone for the East Linton drinking water system and therefore no source protection policies apply. Canada Post - In correspondence dated March 27, 2019, Canada Post has indicated that mail delivery to the proposed development will be serviced by centralized mail delivery and identified some recommendations which have been incorporated into the recommended conditions of draft approval. Enbridge - In correspondence dated March 27, 2019, Enbridge requests that as a condition of final approval that the owner/developer provide to Union Gas/Enbridge the necessary easements and/or agreements required for the provision of gas services. Conditions of draft approval address these comments. Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism, Culture Industries (MHSTC) - In correspondence dated May 4, 2020 and in response to the archaeological assessments submitted with the proposed applications, the MHSTC notes: that no further archaeological assessment of the study area is warranted; the Provincial interest in archaeological resources has been addressed; and, the proposed undertaking is clear of any archaeological concern. Historic Saugeen Metis – in previous correspondence, Historic Saugeen Metis noted interest in reviewing the Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment. The Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment was provided to HSM and they noted in correspondence dated July 8, 2020 that they have no objection or opposition to the proposed development. City of Owen Sound - The City of Owen Sound previously provided comments on an earlier version of the proposed development applications which at that time proposed that the development would be serviced by municipal water and private septic systems. At that time the City expressed concerns. Now that the proposed development is proposed on full municipal services, it is County staff’s
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 10 Date: July 23, 2020 53 understanding that the previous concerns identified by the City have been addressed. Grey Sauble Conservation Authority (GSCA) – GSCA provided comments dated May 24, 2019 which noted that previously proposed Lot 10 contains some hazard area and the cul-de-sac appears to propose to fill in a portion of a wetland feature. The GSCA also noted concerns with the revised Stormwater Management Plan. The Developer addressed the concerns of the GSCA by removing proposed Lot 10 from the proposed plan of subdivision. In follow up comments dated June 4, 2019, and March 27, 2020 the GSCA indicated that they generally have no objection to this proposed development. GSCA requests that the habitat management/compensation plan be provided to their office once it has been accepted by the County and MECP.
GSCA also recommends the following conditions of draft approval:
1. That the final stormwater management plan be prepared and implemented through the subdivision agreement to the satisfaction of the County, the Township and GSCA. 2. Wording be included in the subdivision agreement to the satisfaction of GSCA and the Township that no site work is to be completed until the downstream municipal drainage infrastructure is adequately sized to accommodate increased flows from the site.
GSCA also recommends that as a condition to draft approval that the subdivision agreement include the following note:
3. A portion of the property falls within a regulated area under Ontario Regulation 151/06 administered by the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority (GSCA). Prior to development in a regulated area, permits are required from the GSCA. This would include the infilling of the portions of a wetland related to the construction of ‘Street A’.
Grey County Transportation Services - In correspondence dated April 10, 2019, Transportation Services notes that they have no concerns with the proposed development and that the number of proposed lots does not trigger the need for a Traffic Impact Study. If and when this development increases to 50 lots or more than a Traffic Impact Study will be required.
Township of Georgian Bluffs - Georgian Bluffs Council adopted LOPA 7 through by-law 2020-057 on June 17, 2020 and passed the associated zoning by-law amendment. This adoption followed a recommendation by their planner in Township Staff Report PL.2020.24 dated June 3, 2020. The Township staff report identified recommended conditions of draft approval which were supported
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 11 Date: July 23, 2020 54 by Township Council. The recommendations have been incorporated into the recommended conditions of draft approval.
Analysis of Planning Issues When rendering a land use planning decision, planning authorities must have regard to matters of Provincial Interest under the Planning Act, be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) 2020, and conform to any Provincial Plans or Municipal Official Plans that govern the subject lands. In this case, the County of Grey Official Plan and the Township of Georgian Bluffs Official Plan all have jurisdiction over the subject property.
Provincial Policy and Legislation Both the Planning Act and the PPS speak to the efficient use of land within settlement areas, where services are readily available. The proposed plan of subdivision is within a settlement area and will be serviced by municipal water and sewer services. The PPS indicates that the preferred form of servicing for settlement areas is full municipal services. Municipal water and wastewater treatment capacity is currently available for the proposed units once extended to the site.
The supply of an adequate range of residential housing types is preferred in both Provincial documents. In this case, the proposed plan of subdivision is providing single detached units. Although a mixture of housing types is always preferred, the proposed single detached units would be compatible with the existing residential uses in the area. Should further development be proposed in the future development block, there may be an opportunity to consider a mixture of housing types. Given the housing prices in the area, it is unlikely that these units would be considered ‘affordable housing’.
The protection of significant environmental features is also required through the legislation and policy. An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was completed. The EIA does note the presence of wetland features and suitable habitat for eastern meadowlark and bobolink. No other constraints were identified on the property. The EIA does note that approximately 3.3 hectares of meadowlark/bobolink habitat will be removed because of the proposed development and therefore a permit from MECP may be required in accordance with the Endangered Species Act, 2007. The EIA also provides recommendations in order to protect the wetland features, the woodlands, and the peak breeding bird season. These matters have been addressed as part of the recommended conditions of draft approval.
Section 51(24) of the Planning Act also provides criteria which must be considered when assessing any new plan of subdivision. These criteria (in italics), along with staff analysis are as follows:
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 12 Date: July 23, 2020 55 (a) the effect of development of the proposed subdivision on matters of provincial interest as referred to in section 2;
The matters of provincial interest have been analyzed earlier on in this section.
(b) whether the proposed subdivision is premature or in the public interest;
Services can be provided to this subdivision. The lands have also been designated for growth in both the County and Township Official Plan. Furthermore, there is a demand for additional residential units in the Township. As such, the proposed plan of subdivision is in the public interest and would not be premature.
(c) whether the plan conforms to the official plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if any;
Local Official Plan Amendment 7 to the Georgian Bluffs Official Plan has been approved which designates the subject lands as ‘Residential’ which would permit the proposed subdivision. Some of the subject lands were already designated ‘Residential’. All of the subject lands are located within a designated settlement area in both the County Official Plan and Georgian Bluffs Official Plan. There is an existing draft plan of subdivision south of the subject lands. Should development proceed on the Future Development block, servicing connections and road connections should be considered in order to connect both subdivisions. It is recommended that Georgian Bluffs consider acquiring an easement across the Future Development Block to allow services to be connected to the future development block in the Georgian Shores subdivision should Georgian Shores proceed with development prior to the future development block of Davenport proceeding.
(d) the suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is to be subdivided; (d.1) if any affordable housing units are being proposed, the suitability of the proposed units for affordable housing;
Based on the background reports and technical studies, the subject lands appear suitable for residential development. It is not known if any of the proposed units will be ‘affordable’, but it is unlikely given their location and lot size.
(e) the number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of highways, and the adequacy of them, and the highways linking the highways in the proposed subdivision with the established highway system in the vicinity and the adequacy of them;
This item has been reviewed by the proponent, Township staff and County staff with no concerns identified. Draft plan conditions are included to address the final detailed design of the proposed roads to the satisfaction of the Township.
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 13 Date: July 23, 2020 56 (f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots;
The proposed dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots are standard and form a grid like pattern which is preferred.
(g) the restrictions or proposed restrictions, if any, on the land proposed to be subdivided or the buildings and structures proposed to be erected on it and the restrictions, if any, on adjoining land;
County staff are not aware of any restrictions or proposed restrictions on the subject lands which would prevent the proposed development. The proposed development will be subject to a subdivision agreement, as is standard for such developments.
(h) conservation of natural resources and flood control;
GSCA staff have provided recommended conditions of draft plan approval to address the natural resources on the subject lands which have been incorporated in the recommended conditions of draft approval.
(i) the adequacy of utilities and municipal services;
The proposed lands will be adequately serviced by municipal water and sewer services.
(j) the adequacy of school sites;
The two school boards were circulated on this application and did not raise any concerns.
(k) the area of land, if any, within the proposed subdivision that, exclusive of highways, is to be conveyed or dedicated for public purposes;
Streets A to C shown on the proposed plan would be dedicated to the Township following the construction of the roads by the developer in accordance with the Township’s road standards. Block 29 and 30 would also be dedicated to the Township for a temporary cul-de-sac to be constructed until such time as development occurs on the future development block. No other lands are proposed to be conveyed for public purposes.
(l) the extent to which the plan’s design optimizes the available supply, means of supplying, efficient use and conservation of energy; and
The lands will connect to the existing road network and services in an efficient manner.
(m)the interrelationship between the design of the proposed plan of subdivision and site plan control matters relating to any development on the land, if the land is
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 14 Date: July 23, 2020 57 also located within a site plan control area designated under subsection 41 (2) of this Act or subsection 114 (2) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006.
The proposed single detached lots do not require the utilization of site plan control.
The proposed plan of subdivision application, with the attached conditions of draft approval, would have regard for matters of Provincial Interest and the criteria of section 51(24) of the Planning Act and is consistent with the PPS 2020.
County Official Plan The proposed plan of subdivision was submitted prior to the approval of Recolour Grey, the County’s new Official Plan. County staff have reviewed the application against Recolour Grey, as it stands as Council’s most recent statement of goals and objectives for the County.
The subject property is primarily designated as ‘Secondary Settlement Area’ with a small portion of ‘Hazard Lands’ being designated on the eastern edge of the ‘Future Development’ lands. The Secondary Settlement Area designation permits limited residential growth as well as new community facilities and employment uses. Within this designation the County Plan generally defers to the development standards of the Township of Georgian Bluffs (including in their official plan and zoning by-law).
The subject property contains pockets of ‘Significant Woodlands’ on the ‘Future Development’ lands as mapped on Appendix B to the County Plan. Although not mapped in the County Plan, there have been species at risk concerns identified with respect to Meadowlark and Bobolink habitat. As noted previously, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was submitted with the proposed development applications which provides recommendations in order to protect the wetland features, the woodlands, and the peak breeding bird season. GSCA has reviewed the EIA and has no objections to the proposed development subject to conditions of draft approval. These matters have been addressed as part of the recommended conditions of draft approval.
Section 8.9.1 of the County Plan provides a similar servicing hierarchy to that found in the PPS, which has been noted above. Elsewhere in Section 8.9 of the Plan, are policies which govern roads, transportation, and stormwater management all of which have been addressed as noted above.
The proposed plan of subdivision conforms to the County of Grey Official Plan, with the attached conditions of draft approval.
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 15 Date: July 23, 2020 58 Township of Georgian Bluffs Official Plan
Local Official Plan Amendment 7 has been approved which is currently in the appeal period. LOPA 7 redesignated a portion of the subject lands from the ‘Future Development’ designation to the ‘Residential’ designation. A portion of the subject lands that contains proposed Lots 12 to 21 were previously designated as ‘Residential’. The future development block remains designated as ‘Future Development’ and therefore will require a future official plan amendment application prior to development being permitted on these lands. Township Planner, Jennifer Burnett, issued a planning report (PL.2020.24) on June 3, 2020 regarding the proposed official plan amendment. A copy of the Township staff report can be found on page 101 of this link. Overall, the Township planning report finds that the proposed official plan amendment is consistent with the PPS, and conforms to the intent of the County and Township Official Plans. County staff generally concur with the position of Township staff, and will not offer a duplicative policy review here.
LOPA 7 has been approved but is currently within the appeal period and therefore is not in force and effect. Should LOPA 7 be appealed, the matter would be referred to the LPAT for a final decision. The recommended conditions of draft plan approval indicate that LOPA 7 needs to be in force and effect prior to issuing final approval.
With the attached recommended draft plan conditions, County staff are of the opinion that the proposed development:
1. has regard for matters of Provincial interest under the Planning Act, 2. is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020, 3. conforms to the County of Grey Official Plan, and 4. conforms to the Township of Georgian Bluffs Official Plan pending Local Official Plan Amendment 7 coming into force and effect. Legal and Legislated Requirements The application was processed in accordance with the Planning Act. Financial and Resource Implications There are no anticipated financial, staffing or legal considerations associated with the proposed subdivision, beyond those normally encountered in processing a subdivision application. The County has collected the requisite fee and peer review deposit for this application.
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 16 Date: July 23, 2020 59 Relevant Consultation
☒ Internal: Planning, Transportation Services, Legal
☒ External: The Public, Township of Georgian Bluffs, GM BluePlan (peer reviewer for some of the technical studies), Grey Sauble Conservation Authority, and other required agencies under the Planning Act.
Appendices and Attachments PDR-CW-06-18 Davenport Subdivision Information Report
Addendum to PDR-CW-06-18 Revised Davenport Subdivision Information Report
Draft Notice of Decision (conditions of draft approval) – attached
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 17 Date: July 23, 2020 60 Applicant: MJD Investments Inc., Patricia and Murray Davenport File No.: 42T-2017-05 Municipality: Township of Georgian Bluffs Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak Date of Decision: Date of Notice: Last Date of Appeal:
NOTICE OF DECISION On Application for Approval of Draft Plan of Subdivision under Subsection 51(37) of the Planning Act Draft Plan Approval, is hereby given by the County of Grey for the application regarding the above noted lands. A copy of the Decision is attached.
PUBLIC AND AGENCY COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE FILE All written and oral submissions received on the application were considered; the effect of which helped to make an informed recommendation and decision.
WHEN AND HOW TO FILE A NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice to appeal the decision to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal must be filed with the County of Grey no later than 20 days from the date of this notice, as shown above. The notice of appeal should be sent to the attention of the Director of Planning and Development of the County, at the address shown below and it must, (1) set out the reasons for the appeal, (2) be accompanied by the fee required by the Tribunal as prescribed under the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, and (3) Include the completed appeal forms from the Tribunal’s website.
WHO CAN FILE A NOTICE OF APPEAL Only individuals, corporations or public bodies may appeal decisions in respect of a proposed plan of subdivision to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. A notice of appeal may not be filed by an unincorporated association or group. However, a notice of appeal may be filed in the name of an individual who is a member of the association or group on its behalf. No person* or public body shall be added as a party to the hearing of the appeal of the decision of the approval authority, including the lapsing provisions of the conditions, unless the person or public body, before the decision of the approval authority, made oral submissions at a public meeting or written submissions to the council, or made a written request to be notified of changes to the conditions or, in the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal’s opinion, there are reasonable grounds to add the person or public body as a party. *Notwithstanding the above, only a ‘person’ listed in subsection 51(48.3) of the Planning Act may appeal the decision of the County of Grey to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) as it relates to the proposed plan of subdivision. Below is the prescribed list of ‘persons’ eligible to appeal a decision of the County of Grey related to the proposed plan of subdivision as per subsection 51(48.3) of the Planning Act. These are recent changes that have been made to the Planning Act by the province. A link to the revised Planning Act can be found here - https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90p13.
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 18 Date: July 23, 2020 61 Applicant: MJD Investments Inc., Patricia and Murray Davenport File No.: 42T-2017-05 Municipality: Township of Georgian Bluffs Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak Date of Decision: Date of Notice: Last Date of Appeal:
For more information about these recent changes, please visit the LPAT website or contact LPAT - https://elto.gov.on.ca/tribunals/lpat/about-lpat/. The prescribed list of ‘persons’ eligible to appeal a decision of the County on the proposed plan of subdivision as per subsection 51(48.3) of the Planning Act is as follows:
1. A corporation operating an electric utility in the local municipality or planning area to which the plan of subdivision would apply. 2. Ontario Power Generation Inc. 3. Hydro One Inc. 4. A company operating a natural gas utility in the local municipality or planning area to which the plan of subdivision would apply. 5. A company operating an oil or natural gas pipeline in the local municipality or planning area to which the plan of subdivision would apply. 6. A person required to prepare a risk and safety management plan in respect of an operation under Ontario Regulation 211/01 (Propane Storage and Handling) made under the Technical Standards and Safety Act, 2000, if any part of the distance established as the hazard distance applicable to the operation and referenced in the risk and safety management plan is within the area to which the plan of subdivision would apply. 7. A company operating a railway line any part of which is located within 300 metres of any part of the area to which the plan of subdivision would apply. 8. A company operating as a telecommunication infrastructure provider in the area to which the plan of subdivision would apply.
RIGHT OF APPLICANT OR PUBLIC BODY TO APPEAL CONDITIONS The following may, at any time before the approval of the final plan of subdivision, appeal any of the conditions imposed by the approval authority to the Tribunal by filing a notice of appeal with the approval authority: the applicant; any public body that, before the approval authority made its decision, made oral submissions at a public meeting or written submissions to the approval authority; the Minister; or the municipality in which the subject land is located. HOW TO RECEIVE NOTICE OF CHANGED CONDITIONS The conditions of an approval of draft plan of subdivision may be changed at any time before the final approval is given.
You will be entitled to receive notice of any changes to the conditions of the approval of draft plan of subdivision if you have made a written request to be notified of changes to the conditions.
RELATED APPLICATIONS Township of Georgian Bluffs Official Plan Amendment 7 Township of Georgian Bluffs Zoning By-law Amendment – Z-03-18 (By-law 2020-058)
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 19 Date: July 23, 2020 62 Applicant: MJD Investments Inc., Patricia and Murray Davenport File No.: 42T-2017-05 Municipality: Township of Georgian Bluffs Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak Date of Decision: Date of Notice: Last Date of Appeal:
GETTING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Additional information about the application is available for public inspection during regular office hours in the Planning & Development Office at the address noted below. Please contact the Planning Office at 519-376-2205 or 1-800-567-GREY to schedule an appointment to review the information.
ADDRESS FOR NOTICE OF APPEAL County of Grey 595-9th Avenue East OWEN SOUND, Ontario N4K 3E3 Attention: Mr. Randy Scherzer, MCIP RPP Director of Planning & Development
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 20 Date: July 23, 2020 63 Applicant: MJD Investments Inc., Patricia and Murray Davenport File No.: 42T-2017-05 Municipality: Township of Georgian Bluffs Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak Date of Decision: Date of Notice: Last Date of Appeal:
Plan of Subdivision File No. 42T-2017-05 has been granted draft approval. The County’s conditions of final approval for registration of this draft plan of subdivision are as follows:
General Requirements
1. That the final plan shall conform to the Draft Plan of Subdivision File No. 42T- 2017-05 prepared by M.J. Davenport and Associates Ltd. and surveyed by Hewitt and Milne Ltd., dated February 10, 2020 showing:
a. Twenty-eight (28) lots to gain access off of roads to be constructed as part of the overall development shown as Streets ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’,
b. Two blocks to create a temporary cul-de-sac at the south end of Street ‘B’, and
c. A Future Development Block (Block 31).
The legal description of the subject lands is Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 or Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 or Plan 16R- 11378, geographic Township of Sarawak, Township of Georgian Bluffs, County of Grey.
2. That prior to final approval the owner enter into a subdivision agreement with the Township, to be registered on title to the property and then upon each lot once the plan has been registered.
3. That the owner agrees in writing, to satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Township of Georgian Bluffs, concerning roads, installation of services, drainage, parkland, security, and other matters as determined by the Township including the payment of all applicable development charges in accordance with the applicable Development Charges By-law. Other requirements could include easements as necessary to allow the future extension of services to adjacent lands. Any street lights and lighting required for this development shall also be ‘dark sky’ compliant.
4. Prior to final approval and registration of the subdivision, an amending Zoning By-law implementing the subject plan shall be approved and be in force and effect under Section 34 and 36 of the Planning Act.
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 21 Date: July 23, 2020 64 Applicant: MJD Investments Inc., Patricia and Murray Davenport File No.: 42T-2017-05 Municipality: Township of Georgian Bluffs Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak Date of Decision: Date of Notice: Last Date of Appeal:
5. Prior to final approval and registration of the subdivision, Local Official Plan Amendment 7 to the Township of Georgian Bluffs shall be in force and effect under Section 17 of the Planning Act.
Parkland and Open Space Requirements
6. That the owner convey 5% cash-in-lieu of parkland, parkland dedication or a combination thereof, to the Township and that the subdivision agreement contain a provision to effect this.
Servicing, Grading and Road Requirements
7. That the roads shall be dedicated as a public highway, and named to the satisfaction of the Township. All roads and entrances shall be designed and constructed to a standard acceptable to the Township, and such design shall be included in the subdivision agreement. The owner agrees to provide detailed plans and specifications indicating that the roads and drainage will be constructed to the standards of the Township. The final plan shall also include any one-foot reserves deemed necessary by the Township of Georgian Bluffs.
8. That entrances to lots from the internal road of the subdivision be to the satisfaction of the Township of Georgian Bluffs.
9. That wording be included in the subdivision agreement requiring the developer to pay a portion of the off-site drainage works in lieu of providing stormwater quantity control and that the Developer is responsible to pay for a portion of the costs to improve the roadside ditch and replace the Balmy Beach Road crossing culvert, prior to final approval of the subdivision and to the satisfaction of the Township.
10. That the subdivision agreement contain the provision, “No site work is to be completed until the downstream municipal drainage infrastructure is adequately sized to accommodate increased flows from the site.”
11. That prior to final approval of the plan of subdivision, a final storm and surface water management report and grading and drainage plan be prepared and submitted for review, at the expense of the owner, by the Township and the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority. The report shall include such matters as building envelopes, lot grading, sediment control measures. The report should also ensure that run-off, including the storm water and spring snow melt, does not adversely affect neighboring properties, and detail all necessary upgrades to existing road and or drainage structures. This report should detail all easements or rights of way required to be dedicated to the Township.
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 22 Date: July 23, 2020 65 Applicant: MJD Investments Inc., Patricia and Murray Davenport File No.: 42T-2017-05 Municipality: Township of Georgian Bluffs Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak Date of Decision: Date of Notice: Last Date of Appeal:
12. That prior to final approval, that a detailed servicing plan be provided to the satisfaction of the Township. The servicing plan should consider capacity for future connections including the future development block and any future potential connections to adjacent lands.
Natural Environment
13. The subdivision agreement shall include provisions for protecting the ecological and natural heritage features of the lands, and to implement the recommendations in Section 9, items 1 to 9, of the Environmental Impact Assessment dated November 27, 2017 completed by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc. to the satisfaction of the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority.
14. That wording be included in the subdivision agreement that a permit be required from GSCA for development and/or site alterations within the areas subject to Ontario Regulation 151/06. This would include the infilling of the portion of a wetland related to the construction of ‘Street A’.
15. That prior to final approval, a habitat management/compensation plan regarding the loss of potential habitat for meadowlark and bobolink habitat be provided to the satisfaction of the County, the Township, and the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority and that addresses the requirements of the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and the corresponding regulations. Please note that a permit may be required from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks.
Utilities and Canada Post
16. That all easements and or agreements for drainage, gas line or utility purposes shall be dedicated to the appropriate authority or public authority. Should the relocation of any utilities be required as a result of this development, that all associated costs be at the Developer’s expense.
17. The Owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with Canada Post and the Township, for the installation of Canada Post Community Mailboxes and shall indicate these locations on the appropriate servicing plans. The applicant shall further provide the following for the Community Mailboxes:
a) An appropriately sized sidewalk section (concrete pad), per Canada Post standards, to place the mailbox on, plus any required vehicle lay-bys, walkway access and/or curb depressions for wheelchair access.
b) A suitable temporary Community Mailbox location which may be utilized by Canada Post until the curbs, sidewalks and final grading have been
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 23 Date: July 23, 2020 66 Applicant: MJD Investments Inc., Patricia and Murray Davenport File No.: 42T-2017-05 Municipality: Township of Georgian Bluffs Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak Date of Decision: Date of Notice: Last Date of Appeal:
completed at the permanent Community Mailbox Site locations to enable Canada Post to provide mail service to new residences as soon as homes are occupied.
Administration
18. Prior to the signing of the final plan by the County of Grey, the applicant is to provide to the County written correspondence from the Township of Georgian Bluffs indicating that all the Draft Plan Conditions have been carried out to the Township’s satisfaction.
19. Prior to the signing of the final plan by the County of Grey, the applicant is to provide to the County written correspondence from the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority how Draft Plan Conditions 10, 11, 13, 14 and 15 have been addressed to GSCA’s satisfaction.
20. Prior to the signing of the final plan by the County of Grey, the County is to be advised by the applicant in writing from Canada Post how Draft Plan Condition 17 has been addressed to the Canada Post’s satisfaction.
21. If final approval is not given to this plan within three (3) years of the draft approval date, and no extensions have been granted, draft approval shall lapse under Subsection 51(32) of the Planning Act, RSO 1990, as amended. If the owner wishes to request an extension to draft approval, a written explanation along with the applicable application fee and a resolution from the local municipality must be received.
22. That the Owner shall provide the Township of Georgian Bluffs and County of Grey with digital copies of the Final Plan in a format acceptable to the Township and the County.
NOTES TO DRAFT APPROVAL
1. It is the applicant's responsibility to fulfil the conditions of draft approval and to ensure that the required clearance letters are forwarded by the appropriate agencies to the County of Grey, quoting the County file number.
2. An electrical distribution line operating at below 50,000 volts might be located within the area affected by this development or abutting this development. Section 186 - Proximity - of the Regulations for Construction Projects in the
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 24 Date: July 23, 2020 67 Applicant: MJD Investments Inc., Patricia and Murray Davenport File No.: 42T-2017-05 Municipality: Township of Georgian Bluffs Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak Date of Decision: Date of Notice: Last Date of Appeal:
Occupational Health and Safety Act, requires that no object be brought closer than 3 metres (10 feet) to the energized conductor. It is proponent’s responsibility to be aware, and to make all personnel on site aware, that all equipment and personnel must come no closer than the distance specified in the Act. They should also be aware that the electrical conductors can raise and lower without warning, depending on the electrical demand placed on the line. Warning signs should be posted on the wood poles supporting the conductors stating “DANGER - Overhead Electrical Wires” in all locations where personnel and construction vehicles might come in close proximity to the conductors.
3. Clearances or consultations are required from the following agencies, as well as the appropriate agency or authority providing utilities or services:
Township of Georgian Bluffs 177964 Grey Road 18, RR#3 Owen Sound, ON N4K 5N5
Grey Sauble Conservation Authority 237897 Inglis Falls Road, RR4 Owen Sound, ON N4K 5N6
Canada Post Corporation 300 Wellington Street London, ON N6B 3P2
4. We suggest you make yourself aware of the following subsections of the Land Titles Act:
a) subsection 144(1) requires all new plans to be registered in a Land Titles system if the land is situated in a land titles division; and
b) subsection 144(2) allows certain exceptions.
The subdivision plan for Registration must be in conformity with the applicable Ontario Regulation under The Registry Act.
5. Inauguration or extension of a piped water supply, a sewage system or a storm drainage system, is subject to the approval of the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks under the Ontario Water Resources
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 25 Date: July 23, 2020 68 Applicant: MJD Investments Inc., Patricia and Murray Davenport File No.: 42T-2017-05 Municipality: Township of Georgian Bluffs Location: Part Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11376, and South Part of Lot 27, Concession 3, Part 1 of Plan 16R-11378, geographic Township of Sarawak Date of Decision: Date of Notice: Last Date of Appeal:
Act, RSO 1990, as amended.
6. All measurements in subdivision final plans must be presented in metric units.
7. The final plan approved by the County must be registered within thirty (30) days or the County may withdraw its approval under subsection 51(32) of the Planning Act RSO 1990, as amended.
Addendum 2 to PDR-CW-06-18 26 Date: July 23, 2020 69 Committee Report
To: Warden McQueen and Members of Grey County Council Committee Date: July 23, 2020 Subject / Report No: FR-CW-19-20 Title: Development Charges Deferral, Payment Plan and Rate Freeze Interest Rates Prepared by: Kevin Weppler and Randy Scherzer Reviewed by: Kim Wingrove Lower Tier(s) Affected: All municipalities Status: Recommendation
1. That Report FR-CW-19-20 be received which provides information regarding interest rates for Development Charge deferral payment plans (section 26.1) and rate freezes (section 26.2) as required by the Development Charges Act; and
2. That Council approve the charging of interest pursuant to sections 26.1 and 26.2 of the Development Charges Act, 1997:
a. Effective as at January 1, 2020
b. At a rate of 3.5% compounded annually
c. Notwithstanding Recommendation 2b, a rate of 0% be used for payments under section 26.1, beginning at time of building permit, to help encourage these rental housing and non-profit housing developments; and
3. That authorization be given to the Director of Corporate Services and the Director of Planning to execute agreements related to the administration of the Development Charges By-laws for Payment Plans and Rate Freezes as required by the Development Charges Act; and
FR-CW-19-20 701 Date: July 23, 2020 4. That the Development Charges Interest Policy included as an attachment in this report be approved. Executive Summary On January 1, 2020, the Province introduced changes to the Development Charges Act that requires municipalities to offer 5-year deferral payment plans for development charges associated with rental housing and institutional developments, and 20-year payment plans for non-profit housing developments as per section 26.1. The current County Development Charges By-law only applies development charges to residential developments and therefore a County development charge is not applied to Institutional developments.
The changes to the Development Charges Act also freeze the development charge rates at the time of when a site plan application is submitted or at the time a zoning by- law application is submitted as per section 26.2.
The Development Charges Act changes in Bill 108 and Bill 138 allow municipalities to charge interest on phased payment plans and rate freezes, as well as interest on deferral agreements the County enters with developers.
As it pertains to the freezing of development charges, it is being recommended that an interest rate of 3.5% would apply to developers who lock in development charge rates under section 26.2 of the Act, that is, developers who submit a site plan application or zoning bylaw amendment application on or after January 1, 2020. For developers proceeding without a zoning bylaw amendment or site plan application, development charges would continue to be calculated and payable at building permit unless the development is eligible for a payment plan as per section 26.1 of the Development Charges Act.
Staff recommend for these types of development eligible for the deferral payment plans, such as purpose-built rental and not-profit housing development, that a 0% interest rate be used during the deferred payment plan period in order to help encourage these types of developments. These developments would still be subject to interest on the frozen portion of development charges, until the County considers updates to the County’s Development Charges By-laws.
The recommendation also includes providing authorization to the Director of Corporate Services and the Director of Planning to execute agreements related to the required deferred payment plans and rate freezes as required by the Development Charges Act.
FR-CW-19-20 712 Date: July 23, 2020 Background and Discussion On January 1, 2020, the Provincial Government introduced changes to the Development Charges Act (the DC Act) that requires municipalities to offer a 5-year payment plan for rental housing and institutional developments and a 20-year payment plan for non-profit housing developments (section 26.1 of the DC Act). The first payment for these payment plans would be due upon the date of an occupancy permit being issued by the municipality or the date the building is first occupied, whichever comes first.
The DC Act also proposes to freeze the development charge rates at the time of when a site plan application has been submitted for a development or when a zoning by-law amendment application is submitted, whichever application is later (section 26.2 of the DC Act). The rate freeze only applies to applications submitted after January 1, 2020 and are frozen for a maximum period of two years from the date the application is submitted.
The changes made to the DC Act were introduced by both Bill 108 - More Homes, More Choices Act and Bill 138, the Plan to Build Ontario Together Act. Some of the changes made by Bill 108 and Bill 138 to the DC Act have been proclaimed whereas other changes to the DC Act have not been proclaimed to date.
The Province recently introduced Bill 197 entitled the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act. Bill 197 is an omnibus bill that proposes to make changes to a number of Acts including the DC Act. Staff are still reviewing the proposed changes being introduced by Bill 197, however it appears that these changes will help to provide the information that the County has been waiting for in order to align and finalize the proposed changes to the County’s Development Charges By-laws. Staff plan on bringing forward a draft of the proposed changes to the County’s Development Charges By-law in the near future so that the public review process can commence.
In the interim, the County is currently receiving requests to enter into Development Charge Deferral Payment Plans as required by subsection 26.1 of the Development Charges Act. As noted above, subsection 26.1 of the DC Act requires municipalities to offer deferral payment plans for rental housing and institutional developments (5 year payment plans), and non-profit housing developments (20 year payment plans). The County’s current Development Charges By-laws only applies to residential developments and therefore a County Development Charge does not apply to institutional developments. For development charge rate freezes (section 26.2), this will only apply when the County DC rate changes as per the annual indexing scheduled for January 1, 2021 and therefore staff anticipate that rate freeze payments will begin to apply starting next year.
FR-CW-19-20 723 Date: July 23, 2020 Subsection 26.1(7) and subsection 26.2(3) of the DC Act allows municipalities to charge interest on payment plan instalments and rate freezes. For subsection 26.1 - payment plans, the interest rate can be applied from the date the development would have been normally payable (i.e. at time of building permit) to the date the instalment is paid, at a rate to not exceed the prescribed maximum rate. For subsection 26.2 - rate freezes, the interest rate can be applied from the date the site plan or zoning amendment application is received to the date the development charge is payable (i.e. at time of building permit). The Province has indicated that they are not planning to prescribe a maximum rate and to leave the determination of the interest rate to municipalities.
County staff consulted with the County’s current development charges consultant (Hemson) regarding how other municipalities are treating these interest rates. Hemson indicated that the interest rate applied should relate to the time value of money, which can occur in two ways:
1. In terms of lost monies related to interest earnings (i.e. if the development charge was collected at time of building permit issuance, which is the normal time of when DC’s are due, the development charges reserve would be in a higher position and therefore earn interest); and, 2. The cost of borrowing money from the date the development charge is determined (i.e. at time of site plan or zoning amendment application) to the collection of the charge (i.e. building permit)).
The legislation does not prescribe how the interest rates are to be calculated and therefore municipalities can determine what rates should be applied. If however the rates are seen as punitive, there is the possibility that the Province may then consider prescribing a maximum interest rate. In speaking with Hemson, municipalities are generally considering the following options:
Bank of Canada Prime Rate plus a percentage mark-up Non-residential Construction Price Index plus a percentage mark-up Borrowing rate on a 20-year loan plus a percentage mark-up Multiple bases with the idea of establishing a rate - somewhere in the range of 4.5% to 5.5%. Interest rate based on an investment instrument such as the interest rates being received on the One Investment Savings Account plus a percentage mark-up The same interest rate as per outstanding property taxes and utility bills or 1.25% per month or 15% per year. No interest
FR-CW-19-20 734 Date: July 23, 2020 In order to try to simplify the interest rate, where applicable, to be applied to development charge deferrals, payment plans, and rate freezes, County staff are recommending a fixed rate over a variable rate to provide transparency and cost certainty to developers and to help reduce the administrative burden to local municipal staff. Therefore, staff are recommending that the following interest rates be applied:
A rate of 3.5% compounded annually. This interest rate is in line with the Canada’s Prime Rate (also known as the prime lending rate that major banks charge), as well as the County’s average indexing of development charge rates increases over the past 3 years (2018-2020). Notwithstanding the rate of 3.5% compounded annually, a rate of 0% shall be used for payments under section 26.1, beginning at building permit, to help encourage rental housing and non-profit housing developments.
As staff had reported previously in Report PDR-CW-19-19, there is an on-going need for more affordable housing throughout Grey County and more importantly purpose built rental housing and secondary units. One item that staff had suggested to help encourage more affordable housing was to review development charges.
The premise with development charges is that growth should pay for growth related costs so that these costs are not required to be paid by taxpayers. The Development Charges Act allows municipalities to exempt certain types of development from development charges. Certain types of development are already exempted under the County’s current Development Charges By-law(s). For example, secondary units constructed either within or attached to an existing residential unit are exempted from a development charge.
Staff had stated that to encourage more purpose-built rental housing and to encourage more secondary units, that Council consider making some changes to the Development Charges By-law(s) to exempt purpose built rental housing and more secondary units.
Therefore, based on this premise to recommend exempting purpose built rental builds from the County’s Development Charges By-law(s), staff are recommending that a 0% interest rate be used during the deferred payment plan period for those types of development referred to in section 26.1 of the DC Act.
Staff have also prepared a Development Charges Interest Policy attached to this report. The Interest Policy provides further detail on how the interest rate would be administered.
If required, staff could bring forward in the future, recommendations for interest rate changes based on the effects of the DC Act changes and to respond to any economic or market conditions that may arise.
FR-CW-19-20 745 Date: July 23, 2020 In order to help expedite the execution of agreements related to the payment plans/rate freezes as required by the DC Act, it is recommended that authorization be given to the Director of Corporate Services and the Director of Planning to execute these agreements. Legal and Legislated Requirements Development Charges Act Financial and Resource Implications Any interest collected through these deferral agreements, payment plans, and rate freezes would be added to the Development Charge Reserve Fund to offset any potential loss in revenue as a result of these deferred payments/rate freezes.
If approved, the use of a 0% interest rate for the types of development eligible for the deferral payment plans, such as purpose-built rental and not-profit housing development, would be foregoing any future interest income. Relevant Consultation ☒ Internal – Finance, Planning
☒ External – Hemson (current development charges consultant) Appendices and Attachments Attachment to FR-CW-19-20 Development Charge Interest Policy
FR-CW-19-20 756 Date: July 23, 2020 Corporate Policy
Development Charge Interest Policy Approved by: Policy: X-XXX-XXX By-law: Date Approved: Replaces: Last Revision Date: Section: Scheduled for Review by:
Policy Statement A policy governing the charging of interest, as permitted under sections 26.1 and 26.2 of the Development Charges Act, 1997. Purpose The purpose of this policy is to establish the rules and practices for charging interest, as permitted under section 26.1 and 26.2 of the Development Charges Act, 1997. Scope This policy applies to all development as eligible for development charge payments under section 26.1 and 26.2 of the Development Charges Act, 1997. Definitions Act means the Development Charges Act, 1997, as amended. Development: The construction, erection or placing of one or more buildings or structures on land. This includes the making of an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of: Increasing the size, or Change the use from non-residential to residential or from residential to non-residential and includes redevelopment Development Charges: means only the County of Grey development charges imposed pursuant to the Development Charge by-law(s). Total Accrued Amount: Equal to the total of the development charges and the interest that has accrued
FR-CW-19-20 767 Date: July 23, 2020 Legislated Requirements Installment Payments under section 26.1 of the Act Under subsections 26.1 (1), (2) and (3) of the Act, development charges shall be paid in equal annual installments, beginning at the earlier of first occupancy or occupancy permit under the Building Code, Act, 1992 for: Rental housing development that is not non-profit housing development Institutional development Non-profit housing development Interest on Installment Payments under 26.1 of the Act Subsection 26.1(7) of the Act allows a municipality to charge interest on the installments from the date the development charges would have been payable, under section 26 of the Act, to the date the installment is paid, at a rate not exceeding the prescribed maximum interest rate. Development Charge Freeze under section 26.2 of the Act Under subsection 26.2(1) of the Act, the total amount of a development charge is determined under the County’s Development Charges By-law(s) on: The day an application for an approval of development in a site plan control area under subsection 41(4) of the Planning Act was made in respect of the development that is the subject of the development charge, or If clause i) does not apply, the day an application for an amendment to a bylaw passed under section 34 of the Planning Act was made in respect of the development that is the subject of the development charge. Interest under section 26.2 of the Act Under subsection 26.2 (3) of the Act, a municipality may charge interest on the development charge, at a rate not exceeding the prescribed maximum interest rate, from the date of the application referred to in clause 2 c) i) and 2 c) ii) to the date the development charge is payable. Maximum Interest Rate under sections 26.1 and 26.2 The Act allows a municipality to charge interest on the development charge at a rate not exceeding the prescribed maximum interest rate. There is no prescribed maximum interest rate under subsections 26.1 and 26.2 of the Act.
FR-CW-19-20 778 Date: July 23, 2020 Interest Rate Used An interest rate of 3.5% shall be used Notwithstanding clause 3(a), a rate of 0% shall be used for payments under section 26.1, beginning at building permit, to help encourage rental housing and non-profit housing developments. Amendment or Revision to Interest Rates In the event the interest rate is amended or revised, the new interest rate shall apply to the total accrued amount, prorated from the date of the interest rate amendment or revision to: The date the total accrued amount if fully paid, or A subsequent amendment or revision of the interest rate Interest Rate Publication and Notification Upon Council approval, this policy and the interest rates being used shall be made available on the County’s website. The interest rates shall also be published as part of the County’s development charges pamphlet publication. Compounding and Prorating All interest shall be compounded annually and shall accrue from the date of the applicable application until the date the total accrued amount is fully paid. A 365- day calendar year shall be used for the purposes of prorating. Subsequent Application(s) If a subsequent application(s) is made for a development: The date the subsequent application is made will become the new date under which the total amount of the development charge is determined All interest that had accrued prior to the subsequent application shall be deemed to be zero (0) Interest will be compounded annually and begin to accrue from the date the subsequent application is made Interest under section 26.1 If a development was one of the eligible types of development for the installment payments under section 26.1 of the Act, the total accrued amount
FR-CW-19-20 789 Date: July 23, 2020 shall continue to accrue interest on the outstanding balance. This shall continue until the date the total accrued amount has been fully paid. Effective Date Upon approval by County Council this policy shall take effect as at January 1, 2020 at 12 a.m. This policy may be repealed and/or modified by County Council at any time. Early Payment Agreement Under section 26.1 of the Act, the development charges shall be paid in equal annual installments for eligible development. Under section 27 (1) of the Act, an early payment agreement will be required if the person required to pay development charges chooses to pay the full development charges plus accrued interest owing prior to building permit issuance or occupancy. The Director of Corporate Services and the Director of Planning has the authority to issue and execute all early payment agreements. Termination of the Installment Schedule The remaining balance of all development charges shall be payable within 15 days immediately following the notification / determination of any of these trigger events: Change of use to a development type that is not eligible for a development charge installment under the Act, as of the day the change is made. Sale or transfer of ownership of the property unless an agreement is entered into. Interest will be compounded annually and begin to accrue from the date the subsequent application is made Authorization to Execute Agreements That authorization to execute agreements related to the administration of the Development Charges By-law(s) for Payment Plans and Rate Freezes as required by the Development Charges Act be given to the Director of Corporate Services and the Director of Planning.
FR-CW-19-20 7910 Date: July 23, 2020 Unpaid Development Charges If any development charges (including interest) are unpaid, those development charges (including interest) may (at the direction of the Director of Corporate Services) be added to the tax roll and collected in the same manner as taxes, in accordance with section 32 of the Act. Interest on late payments added to the tax roll shall incur the applicable taxation interest rate.
FR-CW-19-20 8011 Date: July 23, 2020 Committee Report
To: Warden McQueen and Members of Grey County Council Committee Date: July 23, 2020 Subject / Report No: CAOR-CW-12-20 Title: Enacting a Public Non-Medical Masking Bylaw Prepared by: Kim Wingrove, CAO Reviewed by: Michael Letourneau Lower Tier(s) Affected: County-wide Status: Recommendation
1. That Report CAOR-CW-12-20 Enacting a Public Non-Medical Masking Bylaw be received; and
2. That Council direct staff to consult with the Medical Officer of Health and Bruce County and bring forward a bylaw for consideration at a future Council meeting, should conditions warrant. Executive Summary The Province of Ontario announced that Phase 3 of re-opening the economy would begin on Friday July 17th. As more businesses and services reopen and people come in contact with many others, safeguards to reduce the possibility of infection are necessary. In addition to physical distancing and frequent hand hygiene, wearing a mask or face covering in enclosed spaces has been shown to reduce the spread of the COVID-19 virus. In the future, it may be appropriate for Grey County Council to enact a bylaw that would support the direction of the Grey Bruce Medical Officer of Health and provide for enforcement of a requirement to wear a non-medical mask in enclosed public spaces, where an exemption has not been provided. Background and Discussion On July 14, 2020 the Medical Officer of Health for the Grey Bruce Health Unit issued an Order under Section 22 of the Health Protection and Promotion Act requiring owners and operators of commercial establishments take actions to prevent the spread of
CAOR-CW-12-20 811 Date:July 23, 2020 COVID-19. These actions include providing for physical distancing measures, making hand sanitizer available and using best efforts to ensure people entering or doing business inside the establishment wear a face covering. The Order provides for exemptions to wearing a face covering under certain circumstances and defines best efforts when restricting entry to persons not wearing face coverings.
Best efforts are providing a verbal reminder that every person entering the business should be wearing a face covering (there is not a need for a business to turn away a person to achieve the best efforts standard), reminding people in a premise seen removing their face covering that it is a requirement to wear it unless an exception applies. Owners and operators don’t require employees or members of the public to provide proof that they qualify for any of the exemptions to wearing a face covering.
The Order remains in place for four weeks at which time it may be rescinded, amended or extended by further Order of the Medical Officer of Health. Safeguards in Municipal Facilities
For municipal facilities (such as libraries, community centres, and municipal buildings), Dr. Arra strongly recommends implementation of similar policies to those in the Order. Grey County has included requirements for physical distancing, use of hand sanitizer and wearing masks in public areas of our offices in the reopening plan for buildings and re-start of in person services.
Affordability and Access to Face Coverings
Establishments in Grey and Bruce Counties may be able to obtain masks for no cost based on donations to make available to people who cannot purchase their own masks. For example, Bruce Power has donated 120,000 one-time masks to local organizations including Chambers of Commerce and Food Banks to help ensure people have access. Bruce Power is also distributing 30,000 re-usable masks to their employees, pensioners and a range of community organizations to support the need for masks in the community. Finally, Bruce Power has launched the ‘Strength in Numbers’ program offering organizations access to its bulk buying power to access more competitive pricing for personal protective equipment.
County Bylaw Considerations
Enacting a bylaw at the County level, rather than each member municipality acting individually, would provide a consistent message to the public, enable Grey County’s member municipalities to take enforcement action and streamline any prosecution, demonstrate the municipal commitment to COVID-19 infection prevention and public safety and could remain in place beyond the lifting on the provincial state of emergency.
CAOR-CW-12-20 822 Date:July 23, 2020 The Association of Municipalities of Ontario website provides a list of municipalities and regions who have taken action regarding the implementation of by-laws, health unit orders and public education campaigns regarding mask wearing.
Staff recommend that the decision to enact a bylaw be done in consultation with the Medical Officer of Health and in response to changes in regulation from the province or increased spread of infection in the community requiring enhanced infection prevention practices to protect public health.
Proposed Bylaw Contents
Staff propose that the bylaw language would be in keeping with the contents of the MOH Order but could provide for the laying of charges and associated penalties and fines.
Definitions
Application and Requirements
Exemptions
Administration, Enforcement and Inspection
Penalties
Effective and Repeal Dates Legal and Legislated Requirements Grey County has the authority to enact by-laws for the health, safety and wellbeing of persons pursuant to Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, and the authority pursuant to Section 425 to provide that a person is guilty of an offence if they contravene such a by-law. Financial and Resource Implications The enforcement of the proposed non-medical masking bylaw would be a new responsibility for local by-law enforcement personnel and the police. Prosecution of charges laid under the by-law would be undertaken by Grey County staff. Relevant Consultation ☒ Internal - Michael Letourneau, County Solicitor
☒ External – MOH Dr. Ian Arra, Sandra Deters Bere, CAO Bruce County
CAOR-CW-12-20 833 Date:July 23, 2020 Appendices and Attachments S. 22 Order from Medical Officer of Health
CAOR-CW-12-20 844 Date:July 23, 2020 CLASS ORDER
of the Medical Officer of Health for the Grey Bruce Health Unit made pursuant to s. 22 of the Health Protection and Promotion Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 7 as amended.
Date: July 14th, 2020.
TO: All persons who own or operate a Commercial Establishment within the Grey Bruce Health Unit
I, Dr. Ian Arra, the Medical Officer of Health for the Grey Bruce Health Unit, order you to take the following actions:
1. To the fullest extent possible, ensure effective measures are in place in the Commercial Establishment to maintain physical distancing of 2 metres amongst all employees and clients.
2. To the fullest extent possible, ensure the availability of alcohol-based hand rub at all entrances and exits for the use of all Persons entering or exiting the Establishment.
3. Use Best Efforts (as defined in this Order) to restrict Persons from entering the premises of the Commercial Establishment or remaining within the premises if the said Person is not wearing a Face Covering. The Face Covering must be worn inside the Establishment at all times, unless it is reasonably required to temporarily remove the Face Covering for services provided by the Establishment.
A Person shall be exempt from wearing a Face Covering on the premises if:
a. The Person is a child under the age of 2 years or a child under the age of 5 years either chronologically or developmentally and he or she refuses to wear a Face Covering and cannot be persuaded to do so by their parent, guardian or caregiver in attendance at the Establishment with them;
b. The Person is incapacitated and unable to remove their Face Covering without assistance;
c. Wearing a Face Covering would inhibit the Person’s ability to breathe in any way;
CAOR-CW-12-20 855 Date:July 23, 2020 d. For any other medical reason, the Person cannot safely wear a Face Covering such as, but not limited to, respiratory disease, cognitive difficulties or difficulties in hearing or processing information;
e. The obligation to provide reasonable accommodation under the Ontario Human Rights Code requires exemption from this requirement.
SCOPE OF THIS ORDER:
The areas of a Commercial Establishment that are subject to the Face Covering requirements of this Order are:
Any areas in which customers interact with one another or with staff members, AND, Any areas that are open or accessible to members of the public, Except where: . The area is outside, whether or not the area is covered (e.g. a restaurant patio); or, . The area is designated for aquatic activity (e.g. while being in a swimming pool).
THIS ORDER shall come into force on the 17th day of July, 2020 at 12:00 noon Eastern Daylight Time, the same date designated by the Province of Ontario for Stage 3 re- opening in the area of the Grey Bruce Health Unit, and shall remain in effect for 4 weeks (being 28 calendar days) from that time. This Order may be rescinded, amended or extended by further Order.
THE REASONS for this ORDER are that:
i. COVID-19, a disease caused by a novel coronavirus, is designated as a disease of public health significance and a communicable disease pursuant to Ontario Regulation 135/18 made under the Health Protection and Promotion Act. ii. COVID-19 can cause acute and severe respiratory illness and death in humans.
CAOR-CW-12-20 866 Date:July 23, 2020 iii. The spread of COVID-19 is of immediate and compelling public health importance in the jurisdiction of the Grey Bruce Health Unit, because: a. On March 11, 2020, the spread of COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization; b. On March 17, 2020 the spread of COVID-19 was declared an emergency in Ontario pursuant to the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.E.9, as amended, on the basis that COVID-19 constitutes a danger of major proportions; c. States of Emergency were subsequently declared by the Counties of Grey and Bruce in response to COVID-19; d. As of this Order’s effective date, there is evidence of continued community transmission of COVID-19 within the territory and jurisdiction of the Grey Bruce Health Unit, as evidenced by newly identified cases not connected to facility outbreaks or travel. iv. COVID-19 is transmitted from person to person predominantly through respiratory droplets that are released from the nose and mouth, through contact with contaminated surfaces, and through poor hand hygiene. v. COVID-19 may be transmitted from persons who have minimal or no signs or symptoms of illness. vi. Accumulating epidemiological evidence indicates that the widespread use of Face Coverings by all persons decreases spread of respiratory droplets, and expert medical opinions support the widespread use of Face Coverings to decrease transmission of COVID-19. vii. Use of Face Coverings is recommended by the Chief Medical Officer of Health of Ontario and the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada in situations where physical distancing (spatial separation of individuals by at least two metres) is difficult to maintain. viii. The Provincial Stage 3 re-opening plan will, by definition, include permitted activities with highest contact intensity and that would require significant modifications to maintain public health safety.
CAOR-CW-12-20 877 Date:July 23, 2020 ix. Re-opening of Commercial Establishments will increase the frequency of contact and limit opportunities for physical distancing between persons in the jurisdiction of the Grey Bruce Health Unit which, absent adequate preventative measures, will increase the risk of cases and outbreaks of COVID-19 in the jurisdiction and territory of the Grey Bruce Health Unit. x. An increase in the number of cases of COVID-19 will increase disease transmission, potential for outbreaks in congregate settings, and the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 within the population of the jurisdiction and territory of the Grey Bruce Health Unit.
As the Medical Officer of Health for the Grey Bruce Health Unit, I am of the opinion, on reasonable and probable grounds that:
I. The communicable disease caused by the novel coronavirus known as COVID-19 now exists and will persist in the health unit served by the Medical Officer of Health without this Order; II. COVID-19 presents a clear risk to the health of persons in the health unit served by me; and III. The requirements specified in this order are necessary in Order to decrease or eliminate the risk to health presented by the communicable disease, COVID-19.
I am also of the opinion that the delivery of notice of this Order to each and every member of the class to whom it is directed is likely to cause a delay that could significantly increase the risk to the health of any person residing in the jurisdiction of the Grey Bruce Health Unit, so notice shall be provided through the public media and the internet via posting on the Grey Bruce Health Unit website at: www.publichealthgreybruce.on.ca.
Definitions, Examples and Exemptions Applicable to this Order:
The following definitions apply to this Order:
CAOR-CW-12-20 888 Date:July 23, 2020 A Person means any customer, patron, employee or visitor, who enters the Establishment. A Face Covering means a medical mask or a non-medical mask or other item that can be used to cover the face such as a bandana, a scarf or cloth that covers the mouth, nose and chin presenting a barrier that limits the transmission of infectious respiratory droplets. Commercial Establishment and Establishment mean those portions of a fixed commercial premise or place that are openly accessible to members of the public and that are used for the purposes of offering goods or services for sale to members of the public and includes a mall or other structure containing a number of commercial premises, without limiting the generality of the foregoing examples. Best Efforts when restricting entry to Persons not wearing Face Coverings means the following: Where an establishment follows a policy restricting occupancy into its premises by this Order, a verbal reminder that every Person attending should be wearing a Face Covering as a result of these instructions shall be given to any Person entering the premises without one. For greater clarity, there is not a need for a business to turn away a Person to achieve the Best Efforts standard. For Persons in a premise seen removing their face covering, a verbal reminder to that Person of the requirement to wear face coverings under these instructions, unless an exception applies. In complying with the Best Efforts requirement, owners and operators shall not require employees or members of the public to provide proof that they qualify for any of the exemptions set out above.
Examples of Commercial Establishment and Establishment, without limiting the definition above, include the following:
Retail stores Convenience stores Malls/plazas Restaurants/bars/taverns Personal service settings Grocery stores and bakeries Gas stations Farmer’s markets Areas of Mechanics’ shops/garages/repair shops which are open to the public
CAOR-CW-12-20 899 Date:July 23, 2020 Car dealerships Indoor play zones/arcades/art studios Cinemas/Performing Arts/Theatres Indoor arenas/sporting venues as a spectator Public indoor tours of facilities Casinos/charitable gaming halls including horse racing Fitness facilities/gyms/indoor sports facilities/studios Common areas of hotels/motels Despite the foregoing, the following are exempt and not subject to this Order even if they would otherwise fall within the definition of a Commercial Establishment:
Churches or faith settings Day camps Day care centres Schools Libraries Community centres Offices that are not open to members of the public Professional offices where clients receive purchased services (e.g. lawyer’s/accountant’s office) that are not open to members of the public Private transportation (bus/taxi/limo) Public transportation (bus/train) Hospitals, Independent health facilities, Offices of regulated health professionals
The areas of a Commercial Establishment that are subject to the Face Covering requirements of this Order are: Any areas in which customers interact with one another or with staff members, OR Any areas that are open or accessible to members of the public; Except where: o The area is outside, whether or not the area is covered (e.g. a restaurant patio). For greater clarity, examples of areas that are or are not subject to the Face Covering requirements of this Order are as follows:
CAOR-CW-12-20 9010 Date:July 23, 2020 Example Parts of the Parts of the Establishment Establishment Establishment Covered Not Covered by the Order by the Order (Examples) (Examples) Retail Store Retail floor/aisles Staff lounge not Cashier area/queues accessible to the Service public desks/counters Stock/storage room Publicly accessible not accessible to the washrooms public Workshop/service room not accessible to the public Private office (e.g. manager’s office) Shipping/receiving area not accessible to the public Outdoor patios/display areas that form part of the retail store (e.g. outdoor garden centre) Gas Station (self-serve) Inside the gas Pump area station store/kiosk Restaurant/Bar/Tavern Indoor take-out Outdoor drive-through counters windows Indoor dining area Outdoor dining area when indoor dining Kitchen area that is becomes permissible physically separated Food preparation from dining area and areas that are open not accessible to the to the public public Staff lounge not accessible to the public Stock/storage room not accessible to the public Private office (e.g. manager’s office) Shipping/receiving area not accessible to the public
CAOR-CW-12-20 9111 Date:July 23, 2020 Mall/Plaza Indoor areas Outdoor areas accessible to accessible to the members of the public public Administrative offices, service areas, or other areas that are not accessible to the public Farmer’s Market Indoor areas Outdoor areas accessible to the Areas not accessible public to the public Fitness facility/gym/ Reception area While using indoor sport facility or Common areas not equipment studio including pools used for activities While in exercise Other indoor areas class accessible to the Pool/spa area public Showers/ change room Amusement Park/Indoor Indoor areas Outdoor areas Play Zone/ Arcade/Art accessible to the Areas not accessible Studio public to the public Theatre/Performing Arts Lobby Outdoor areas Show/Cinema or Movie Concession stand Areas not accessible Theatre Theatre seating to the public Publicly accessible washrooms Other indoor areas accessible to the public Car Dealership Indoor sales floor Outdoor sales lot Service Parking lot desks/counters Publicly accessible washrooms Indoor arena or sporting Lobby Outdoor areas venue Concession stand Areas not accessible Stands/seating areas to the public Publicly accessible washrooms Other indoor areas accessible to the public Indoor facility offering All indoor areas Outdoor areas public tours accessible as part of
CAOR-CW-12-20 9212 Date:July 23, 2020 a guided (including Areas not accessible self-guided) tour to the public Other indoor areas accessible to the public Casino/Charitable Lobby Outdoor areas Gaming Hall/Horse Casino floor/gaming Areas not accessible Racing hall floor to the public Stands/seating areas Hotel/Motel Common areas of Personal room or building suite Shared indoor Pool/spa area amenities (e.g. Outdoor areas lounges, restaurants, parking garage)
NOTICE:
TAKE NOTICE THAT each member of the class is entitled to a hearing by the Health Services Appeal and Review Board if the member has delivered to the Medical Officer of Health and to the Health Services Appeal and Review Board (151 Bloor Street West, 9th Floor, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1S4, E-mail: [email protected]) a notice in writing, requesting a hearing within 15 days after the effective date and time of this Order or otherwise in accordance with applicable law.
AND TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT although a hearing may be requested this Order takes effect when it is delivered to a member of the class or brought to the attention of a member of the class.
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS Order is an offence for which you may be liable, on conviction, to a fine of not more than $5,000.00 for every day or part of each day on which the offence occurs or continues.
CAOR-CW-12-20 9313 Date:July 23, 2020 SIGNED THIS 14th DAY OF JULY, 2020 AT OWEN SOUND, ONTARIO.
______
Dr. Ian Arra, MD MSc FRCPC ACPM ABPM (Diplomate) Medical Officer of Health Grey Bruce Health Unit 101 17th Street East Owen Sound ON N4K 0A5
This Order shall be posted on the Grey Bruce Health Unit website: www.publichealthgreybruce.on.ca.
ANY INQUIRY respecting this Order may be directed to the Medical Officer of Health at the address hereon.
CAOR-CW-12-20 9414 Date:July 23, 2020