Township of Laurentian Valley
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TOWNSHIP OF LAURENTIAN VALLEY COUNCIL IN COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 3, 2016 - 5:30 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 4. DELEGATIONS a) Duane MacDougall - Abandoned CPR Property Page 3 - 8 b) Richard Van Houtte – Civic Address Page 9 - 11 5. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES A. PUBLIC MEETING UNDER THE PLANNING ACT B. BUSINESS a) Report/Motion – Amendment to Animal Control By-law to clarify Page 12 - 18 language related to the keeping of farm animals on farms/agriculture zone b) Report/Motion – By-law to Authorize the Mayor & CAO to Enter Page 19 - 23 into a Professional Services Agreement for a Site Plan Agreement SP2015 02 with 2468651 Ontario Inc (Pembroke ESSO – formerly Mullens) C. INFORMATION D. SUB COMMITTEES a) Pembroke & Area Airport - Annual Assessment & Business Plan Page 24 Expenditure b) Upper Ottawa Valley Physician Recruitment - Final Report Page 25 - 37 c) Emergency Management Program Committee 6. CORPORATE SERVICES A. BUSINESS B. INFORMATION a) Fire Department Report – April 2016 Page 38 b) AMCTO Executive Diploma in Municipal Management Completion Page 39 - 40 - Kayla Janke C. SUB COMMITTEES a) Festival Hall b) Pembroke Public Library 7. PUBLIC WORKS, PROPERTY & PROTECTION A. BUSINESS a) Report - Public Works Facility Update Page 41 - 46 B. INFORMATION a) OPP News Release - Be Bear Wise As Warm Weather Arrives Page 47 - 48 b) OPP News Release – Fraudsters Claiming to be CRA Page 49 C. SUB COMMITTEES a) Laurentian Valley Policing b) Ottawa Valley Waste Recovery Centre c) Upper Ottawa Valley CPAC 8. PUBLIC SERVICES & PROGRAMS A. BUSINESS B. INFORMATION C. SUB COMMITTEES a) Friends of the Disabled b) Shady Nook Recreation Association c) Alice and Fraser Recreation Association d) Forest Lea Park Association e) Pleasant View Park Recreation Association f) Stafford Park Recreation Association 9. REEVE'S REPORT a) Reeve's Report for April Page 50 - 51 10. IN CAMERA 11. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION AND REPORT ON IN CAMERA SESSION 12. ADJOURNMENT From: Kathy and Duane MacDougall [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 1:25 PM To: Dean Sauriol Subject: Opportunity to speak to Council Hello Dean, I would like the opportunity to speak to the Laurentian Valley Council, on May 3th or 17th, to share the results of a questionnaire that I have circulated to 60 houses in the township on Heritage Place, Burns Drive, and Mountainview Drive. The question asked residents what future use they would like to see for the abandoned CPR property that borders their properties. Residents are aware of meetings(private, closed, secret) that have taken place and they have not been consulted. They would like to have equal level input to what Mayor Sweet has taken and been given and have Council advocate on their behalf to protect the quality of life along this corridor. I would like to present the question, the results, and answer any questions the Mayor or Councillors may have of the questionnaire experience. ( I was asked to do this by 3 of the Councillors when we spoke individually about this topic in followup to Mayor Sweet power point presentation to Council in March of 2015). The question results are ready as of noon on April 21, 2016. Duane MacDougall 613 735 0057 Canadian Pacific Railway Right of Way Questionnaire February – March 2016 The County of Renfrew through its Property and Development Committee (Chairman- Bob Sweet - Mayor of Petawawa) has been working to acquire the abandoned CPR Right of Way that goes along your property. They are proposing a “multi-purpose” trail. (including motorized vehicles). Much has been published in the local newspapers and meetings have been held with “interested parties”. To date, there appears to have been no ‘input opportunity’ for the property owners adjacent to this land. Presently, illegal use continues on this right of way, despite CPR barriers and signage. As an owner of land adjacent to the right of way, I believe I am an ‘interested party’ and I should be considered/consulted in the meetings concerning the future plans for uses of this property as it directly affects my quality of life. My belief is strong enough that I have agreed to circulate this questionnaire which will be presented to Laurentian Valley Township Council on its completion. Duane MacDougall 613 735 0057 Would you kindly present below, what you would like to see as the future use for this abandoned rail land along your property? Street name (number not necessary) – not used for identification purposes – will be used for the location on the CPR as three streets: Heritage Place, Burns Drive and Mountainview Drive are being surveyed. The CPR Right of Way should be : ( more space on the reverse if needed): Additional Comments: ( over) Canadian Pacific Railway Right Of Way Questionnaire Results April 2016 Number of Homes – 58 - on Heritage Place, Burns Drive, Mountainview Drive – 6 of which are seasonal use only. Number of Questionnaires Distributed – 82 Number of Questionnaires Returned – 68 Per Cent of Returned Questionnaires used in reporting : 82.9 Overall results: 1st Choice 2nd choice 3rd choice Motorized 2* 1 Non- motorized 26 17 3 Fitness ( walking, 28 18 5 cross country skiing, snow shoeing) Bicycle 23 6 Purchase to own 18 5 3 Community green 6 2 space Municipal 5 2 1 roadway No trail 1 Accessory Issues Raised: 1) * monitored. Monitored for abuse such as littering and speed. / A definition needs to be made between what is rural area and what is residential area. Then, assign/enforce motorized vehicle use on the rail bed to rural areas and a walking bicycle path in residential areas./ There are 58 property owners in 2.2 kms. In a rural area, this same distance could only have 1 owner. /- All three streets covered by this questionnaire have unique environmental features about them – not common on any other motorized trails- a hill to the south of all the residents with large buildings on top, and the river already has snowmobiles on it – we don’t need them on both sides of our yards at once!/ The stench of burnt fuel lingers for up to a half an hour after ATV or snowmobile passes. 2) Motorized sport vehicles meet the needs of the very few and destroy the peace for the many, where they are used. /Mechanized vehicles take over, no safety for other uses. /The rail bed is less than a 60 feet from our bedrooms. / Most Renfrew County residents don’t even know where these three streets are and the owners like it that way. / A trail this close to houses will create too many problems to list here. / The Municipality has no noise by-law and there have been numerous noise violations from the rail bed that disturb residents. Sleep at night is a priority here. 3) – grading of railway bed to a trail surface can disturb environmental contaminants, 4) – private land abuts private land now, public access to private lands with a trail – respect for boundaries, / presently constant disrespect for signage, presently late night noises, liability issues – who compensates for noises and smells? /– funds for maintenance and upkeep- garbage- needs to be borne by the users not the residents./ – who pays to maintain a trail, who is responsible for garbage collection?/ I do not want my tax dollars used to purchase or maintain a trail, /– how will disputes between users and locals be resolved – ‘private and quiet enjoyment of property’ - all legal cases?/ Illegal users presently are noisy, smelly, careless, reckless, disrespectful, and unco-operative/current illegal uses do not speak well if ‘controlled’ uses come later,/ – how will a trail be adequately policed for uses, speeds, noise, how do you deter motorized vehicles from entering walking trails (if a walking trail is the outcome) when there are so many access points along Burns Drive?/How will trail access points be determined and will parking of vehicles occur in lots for trail access – where will these be? 5) – safety on the trail itself between competing uses, / 5 respondents indicated they have already had ‘close misses’ with illegal motorized use on the rail bed/ safety at the private crossings ( driveways), safety of children playing outside needs strong consideration, 6) – ‘faulty’ economic benefit argument – trail cash will not be generated but merely re-distributed – coffee/meals do not get purchased at every shop along the way, they can only sleep in one bed at a time – either it’s Renfrew or it’s Pembroke- not both,/economic savings from a healthier life style of an exercise trail promoting active living, economics of attracting tourists to enjoy cycling and skiing ( 2 respondents named the Petit train du Nord in Ste.Adele, QC as destinations they have used because we do not have such in our part of the country). 7) – a mentality presently exists with motorized operators that because their vehicle has the ability to go anywhere that they can exercise this ability as a right, /-the practice exists that if there are tracks from a motorized vehicle on site, that any and all other vehicles can follow that track. 8) - It has been repeatedly observed that the Property and Development Chair from Renfrew County operates more as a ‘cheerleader’ for a trail system than a chaiman to facilitate facts/positions. This is not appropriate. 9) - A multi-use trail will lower property valves. 10) - A privacy/ noise barrier for noise, smells, pollution must be installed in residential areas before any trail is opened in my neighbourhood,/ A walking trail should not interfere with the enjoyment, peace, or safety of any of the adjacent landowners. Home owners have more rights than transients.