[0:54] Thank you very much, Madam Clerk. Members of council and members of the public, thank you for joining us here. This is our special council meeting. It's a planning public meeting, and today's date, of course, is August 26, 2026, where has the summer gone? It is now 530 p.m., and so council is going to commence with our special council meeting. And we do have two very important items on here tonight, and we will get to those shortly.

[1:24] We have some members in the audience as well tonight, so we welcome that as always.

[1:29] So members of Council, I do want to acknowledge that Councilor Belen does send his regrets

[1:34] tonight.

[1:34] He's unable to attend, but I'm sure he will watch this meeting at another time to catch

[1:38] himself up on the content.

[1:41] Council, at this time, we're going to look at our approval of the agenda, be it resolved

[1:44] the Council of the Attentions, be cleared to be here by approve the agenda dated August

[1:48] August 26th, 2026.

[1:49] As presented, mover, Mr. MacArthur, Mr. Barodarek, thank you very much.

[1:54] Any questions on the agenda?

[1:57] Seeing none, I'll call the motion all in favor.

[1:59] That carries unanimous, thank you.

[2:01] At this time, I'll ask for council, is there any declarations of pecuniary interest in regards to the items on today's agenda?

[2:07] Seeing none, if anything comes up during the meeting, please bring it forward at that time.

[2:11] So, council, we're going to move to our public meeting, which is item number three.

[2:14] We do have the first item that will be presented and proceeded by our deputy mayor, Paul Van Staffern, who will, of course, carry the meeting for the public meeting portion.

[2:25] So at this time, I'll turn the meeting over to Paul Van Staffern.

[2:29] Thank you.

[2:29] Thank you, Your Worship.

[2:31] And we will now initiate the public meeting portion of tonight's agenda.

[2:35] We invite you to comment on the applications being presented tonight and to engage the process with us.

[2:41] If you wish to be notified of the decision of the corporation of the Township Clearview on an application being discussed this evening, please complete a public delegation form and submit the form to the deputy clerk and our forms are sitting.

[2:54] I mean, you've got the move, there'll be over there, sitting ready, right, Emma?

[2:57] There we go, so I'm really wants to talk, really.

[3:00] The views expressed in the public comments are solely those of the individuals providing them and do not reflect the opinions of the township, its agents or its employees.

[3:09] It is not possible for the township to verify the accuracy of all information provided by members of the public.

[3:15] The township should therefore assume no responsibility for any inaccurate information that may be contained within the public comments.

[3:22] If you have information that might correct, clarify, or refute any statements contained within the public comments,

[3:28] please forward it to the township planning department.

[3:30] Please be advised that your comment or request be notified will form part of the public record.

[3:35] Your communication and any personal information therein will be made available to the public unless you expressly request its removal.

[3:43] If a person or public body would otherwise have an ability to appeal the decision of the township of Clearview to the Ontario Land Tribunal but the person or public body does not make an oral submission at a public meeting or make a written submission before the proposed official plan or zoning by-law amendment is adopted or passed.

[4:00] The person or public body is not entitled to appeal to the decision.

[4:10] If a person or public body does not make oral submission at a public meeting or

[4:14] make written submission to the Township Clearview before the proposed official

[4:18] plan or zoning by-law amendment is adopted or passed, the person or public body may

[4:24] not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal for the For the Ontario Land Tribunal.

[4:29] Unless it's in the opinion of the Tribunal, there are reasonable grounds to add the

[4:33] a person or public body as a party.

[4:36] The following public meeting will involve a brief presentation by our planning staff,

[4:40] an opportunity for the applicant or their agent to present their application, a period

[4:44] for public comment or questions and an opportunity for questions by the planning committee.

[4:50] So we will now begin the public meeting with respect to item 3.1, zoning by-law amendment

[4:55] for file 2026-0303.

[4:59] The applicant is the vendor and the very sendo and is regarding property located at 793-273 County Road 124 in Clearview.

[5:09] And our planning staff will now start with a brief presentation concerning the application.

[5:13] I believe it's Nick, you're the man tonight.

[5:15] All yours, go ahead.

[5:17] Thank you, Chair.

[5:18] As indicated, my name is Nick Amley.

[5:20] I'm a community planner here at the Township Clearview.

[5:22] and I'm here to facilitate or assist in facilitating

[5:24] tonight's public meeting for zoning by-law amendment

[5:27] application, 2026 and ZB09.

[5:31] This is a bit of a housekeeping.

[5:32] I'm going to provide a bit more of a high level overview

[5:34] of my presentation.

[5:36] We'll provide the application with the applicant

[5:39] that they're going to solve and providing

[5:40] at brief presentation following.

[5:42] Following both presentations,

[5:43] I'll be available to answer any questions

[5:45] from Councilor and members of the public.

[5:49] Next slide.

[5:49] Oh, perfect.

[5:51] Subject lands themselves.

[5:52] as well as located in the southwestern portion of the township.

[5:55] They located just north of Kay Road 9 and south of 6-7 side road.

[5:59] They maintained frontage on the Kay Road 124 and just to note that they are directly west

[6:05] of the subject lands is the boundary with Miss Validia Gray Highlands, with county road

[6:10] 124 being that boundary.

[6:13] Next slide.

[6:15] The purpose of the zoning by-law amendment application that's currently before Council tonight seeks

[6:20] It seeks to amend the zoning on a portion of the subject lands presently zone as air cultural to an air culture related industrial exception zone to an AGI exception zone.

[6:30] The request to exceptions of that exception zone seek to alter the following provisions of the zoning by law.

[6:35] So they seek to limit or restrict the uses on that portion lands to be re-zoned strictly to a flower mill facility use as well as add the following additional alter provision which be the combined total minimum parking space requirement for the air cultural related use.

[6:50] i.e. the flower mill is 19 spaces, which includes one barrier-free parking space.

[6:56] The effect of the application is to emit a flower mill facility as an air-culture-related

[7:00] use on the subject lands with site-specific provisions.

[7:04] Next slide.

[7:06] As a part of the complete application package that was submitted, I believe in late June,

[7:11] the applicant did submit a number of additional materials.

[7:14] This included cover letter, a conceptual site plan of the reposal, a plan investigation

[7:19] report, a draft zoning by-law, a traffic opinion letter, hydrogeological confirmation letter,

[7:26] permit drawings of the building itself, as well as a conceptual landscape plan.

[7:31] This material can be viewed online.

[7:33] Next slide.

[7:36] This is an aerial imagery of the subject lands.

[7:40] In terms of surrounding land uses, it's primarily air cultural, so

[7:43] air cultural residential uses and mainly air cultural.

[7:45] as indicated directly to the west is the Miss Valley Gray Highlands and again mainly agriculture uses on those portions of the lands.

[7:53] The subject lands are primarily used for agriculture use themselves, primarily cash crop. There is one existing single-touch dwelling as well as an agricultural building.

[8:02] And within the southwest and corner of the property there is also a kind of a forested treat area.

[8:08] Next slide. In terms of official planned policy as well as zoning

[8:12] by-law policy. The subject lands are designated hold these air

[8:16] cultural within the township of Clearview's official plan document. They are

[8:19] zoned air cultural as well as environmental protection. The EP zone is limited

[8:24] more to the forested area in the southwestern corner of the site and there is a

[8:28] small portion of the frontage of the property that is regulated by the

[8:32] conservation authority as well. Next slide. In terms of notice and circulation this

[8:38] was given in accordance with the Planning Act. This is completed in August

[8:41] It was done via mailing notification to all properties within 120 meters of the subject lands, as well as posting a notification signage on the frontage of the property.

[8:52] Details of applications for your trails have been made available to the public, so they are available online to view under current our current project's website, and have also been circulated relevant commenting agencies and internal departments.

[9:05] In terms of public comments, so all comments that have received prior to the current agenda

[9:10] deadline for tonight's meeting were appended to the agenda, sort of public media agenda,

[9:16] believe under appendix E. In any comments that are received this evening or following that,

[9:21] we'll form part of my pending recommendation report on the application.

[9:25] Next slide.

[9:27] In terms of overall review process, the application was received on June 28th, 2026, I should

[9:33] I wouldn't say that's some typo.

[9:35] It was deemed complete on July 15th.

[9:37] Notice was given on August 5th, and tonight is the public meeting.

[9:41] Following tonight's public meeting, we will bring a recommendation report and

[9:44] bail back to a subsequent council meeting for approval.

[9:49] And then here's my contact information for anyone in the audience or

[9:52] viewing online, if they wanted any questions that should contact me, please feel free to.

[9:56] Thank you.

[9:57] Thank you very much, Nick.

[10:00] So I believe, Amy Pellie, you'll be presenting on behalf of the applicants tonight.

[10:05] Yes, or general, she's all yours.

[10:18] Bill, you'll be just telling them to advance your screen as you request.

[10:22] Awesome, thank you.

[10:24] Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of Council.

[10:27] My name is Carly Murphy, and I'm a planner with Powell Planning and Associates,

[10:31] retained by the landowner of 793-273 County Road 124 to evaluate the merits of a zoning bylaw amendment application.

[10:40] Next slide, please.

[10:40] So this evening, this presentation will introduce the zoning bylaw amendment application as well as the subject applications consistency and conformity with both provincial and municipal policies.

[10:56] Next slide, please.

[10:58] The purpose of this presentation is really to provide an overview of the subject application, which seeks planning approval to permit a flower mill facility as an agricultural related views on the subject lands.

[11:10] And then I'll provide an overview of the comprehensive, provincial, county, and municipal policy analysis that was undertaken.

[11:17] Next slide, please.

[11:20] So the subject, the answer, designated agricultural and

[11:23] zoned agricultural and environmental protection zone.

[11:27] There's an existing dwelling in a farm building on the property and the lands are used primarily for agricultural uses.

[11:34] The surrounding areas also predominantly used for agricultural uses with a wooded area located to the west.

[11:40] Next slide, please.

[11:44] The proposed flower mill facility is considered an agricultural related use and that's permitted

[11:50] in the agricultural designation, subject to the passing of zoning bylaw amendment.

[11:55] The subject application therefore proposes to rezone a portion of the property from agricultural

[12:01] to agricultural related industrial exception zone specifically to permit the flower mill facility

[12:07] as a site-specific permitted use.

[12:09] Next slide, please.

[12:13] So a comprehensive policy analysis was undertaken

[12:16] of applicable planning legislation and provincial,

[12:20] municipal and county policies, which is also further detailed in the planning

[12:24] justification report that was submitted with the application.

[12:28] Next slide, please.

[12:32] The subject application is regard for provincial interest center of the planning act,

[12:35] which include protecting prime agricultural resources.

[12:38] The proposed fire mill facility is supported by provincial policy as the proposed use helps

[12:45] to protect prime agricultural areas while also supporting economic opportunities to the

[12:50] agricultural sector as a compatible agricultural related use.

[12:55] Next slide, please.

[12:58] Agricultural related uses are also permitted within prime agricultural areas under the provincial

[13:04] planning statement.

[13:05] The proposed Flyer Mill facility supports the diversification of agricultural uses while protecting the agricultural land base and environmental features on the subject lands.

[13:16] Overall, the application supports a healthy and viable rural area in the township and the county and the continued preservation and enhancement of the agricultural system, which is consistent with the policies of the PPS.

[13:29] Next slide, please.

[13:34] The subject application also conforms with the Simco County Official Plan Policies.

[13:39] The lands remain protected for long-term agricultural use by keeping them within the agricultural designation.

[13:46] Well, the proposed agricultural related use supports the agricultural sector and helps diversify the county's agricultural economy.

[13:56] Next slide, please.

[13:57] The

[14:00] townships official plan policies permit agricultural related uses which are consistent with provincial and county policies as well.

[14:09] The proposed flower mill facility will directly provide farm related products in area as its primary activity while being compatible with the surrounding agricultural operations to the subject lands.

[14:21] The establishment of agricultural related uses is encouraged to support the continued viability and long-term sustainability of the agricultural sector.

[14:31] The proposed flower mill facility can be permitted through site-specific zoning bylaw amendment and conformity with the policies of the official plan.

[14:40] Next slide, please.

[14:41] The zoning bylaw amendment application is therefore being brought forward to ensure that there's zoning compliance in accordance with the existing direction of the official plan for agriculture related uses.

[14:54] The subject application proposes to rezone the portion of the list.

[15:00] Agricultural to agriculture, leave related industrial exception zone to permit the fire mill facility as a site specific use, as well as establish the parking requirements. All other applicable zoning provisions are complied with. Next slide, please.

[15:16] A careful analysis concludes that the application is supported by provincial, county, and

[15:24] municipal policy direction.

[15:26] It maintains the agricultural designation and protects the agricultural resources of the province, the county and

[15:32] the township, while also supporting the viability and long-term sustainability of the agricultural sector.

[15:39] The subject application is consistent with the PPS.

[15:42] It conforms to the county and the township's official plan policies.

[15:46] and it respects the standards of the zoning bylaw.

[15:49] The subject application ultimately represents good planning

[15:52] that's in the best interest of the public.

[15:56] And thank you, and I'm happy to address any questions

[15:59] that Mayor and members of Council may have.

[16:02] Thank you, Carly.

[16:03] First, I want to apologize.

[16:05] I might notice it said that Amy was going to be

[16:06] doing the presentation and had her name on it,

[16:09] so but anyway, so my apologies.

[16:11] That's okay.

[16:13] Anyways, if you don't mind just staying there

[16:15] because we can ask, we can ask questions and HF sort of thing.

[16:19] Is there anybody in the audience who would make, who would like to make a comment, ask a question or address committee with respect to this application?

[16:26] Questions may be directed to or responded to by the applicant, their agent, their staff, but should be addressed through the chair, that's me.

[16:33] Please remember to complete and submit your delegation form.

[16:36] Is there anybody who wishes to ask questions?

[16:38] Go on once, anybody want to ask questions, place, three times, no public questions.

[16:44] I'll go to our council next to the members of our committee.

[16:48] Councillor Walker, I'll start at your end this time.

[16:50] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[16:52] Mr. Cobble, first of all, I'm looking at the concept plan, and I see the driveway is highlighted

[16:59] inside the zone.

[17:01] Is there upgrades to that driveway to be made, and if so, who monitors that change with that environment

[17:09] of protection zone?

[17:11] Through you, Mr. Chair.

[17:13] We actually, there is a driveway extension proposed, but we actually did locate it outside

[17:19] of the environmental protection zone to ensure that it would comply with the zoning by-law.

[17:28] My next question is, I don't see anything on the concept plan again with regards to,

[17:41] or

[17:42] I will not take a lot of water, I just don't know, so I'm just asking about water in the subject.

[17:48] Through you, Mr. Chair, we did submit a hydrogeological report with the subject

[17:56] application that confirms that the existing well-capacity is sufficient support

[18:01] the proposed use, and that there would be no adverse impacts on local ground water

[18:06] resources or any neighboring wells.

[18:08] Thank you, Councillor Walker. Councillor Dunning. Thank you. I'll leave you to the end.

[18:17] You're going to get one of the last ones. Councillor Walker, that's great. Councillor MacArthur,

[18:23] I'm looking over there and thinking over here. Councillor MacArthur.

[18:26] Thank you, Chair. First, I don't see any silos or green bins in the concept plan. I'm just

[18:32] kind of wondering what the scale of the operation might be.

[18:38] Through you, Mr. Chair, the intent is to submit a site plan application following the zoning bylaw amendment if the zoning bylaw amendment is approved, which would basically detail the specific site designs in terms of scale.

[18:57] It's very, it's smaller scale.

[19:00] It's going to be an operation that's between the hours of 9 to 5, typically.

[19:06] On an 8-hour schedule, there will be a minimum of two employees on site at a time,

[19:12] max them the four employees.

[19:14] There will be limited traffic to the site, so it's a very small scale operation in terms

[19:19] of what could be on the lands.

[19:22] Okay, and yeah, you answered my second question then.

[19:25] You're saying two to four employees is what we're thinking right now.

[19:29] Yes.

[19:30] So 19 parking spots should be way more than enough.

[19:33] Yes, so the zoning by-law required quite a large amount of parking.

[19:40] When you look at it, I think it was something like 75 spaces.

[19:44] With speaking with the landowner, they just determined that they didn't need that many spaces.

[19:50] So we've accommodated two parking spaces for trucks.

[19:54] There should only be one truck used on a normal basis, but two spaces just in case they're required.

[20:02] As well as a barrier-free parking space, which would be required, and then the 19th

[20:06] spaces should be able to accommodate both employees and visitors in the instance that they're there.

[20:12] But it's not expected that this use would have very many visitors associated with it.

[20:19] Okay, thank you.

[20:21] Thank you.

[20:21] Councillor Broderick, any questions?

[20:23] Okay.

[20:24] You're worshiped.

[20:25] You get the second last question.

[20:26] Sure.

[20:27] I'm going to, if I may, I'd like to go to the staff.

[20:30] I'm going to steal a question from you.

[20:33] Only because I've been thinking about this too, that Paul brought up a good point just before the meeting from the king about.

[20:39] But our work to develop on-farm-proversified use, is this something that could be considered as part of an on-farm-proversified use if we were able to get the zoning bylaw enacted that included that?

[20:55] Is this what our text right now would show that, I'm asking either of the staff, go ahead through the change then, Mayor.

[21:03] So actually, it is not an honor for me to use, so it is identified an official plan as an air cultural related use.

[21:10] So there is a little bit of difference to it, and on from different side, doesn't necessarily need to be absolutely related.

[21:19] It's associated with, whereas an air culture related use, such as this, does have to relate specifically to the air culture use kind of on the property and to the surrounding area, so it would fall under that provision.

[21:30] And then that's why the AG Industrial Zone is being proposed for the property.

[21:36] And in terms of the official plan policies, it does permit a fellow male specifically through a minor by-law,

[21:42] which is currently being considered to see Nick.

[21:45] Right.

[21:46] The reason I'm thinking that it would only because given the property that's available,

[21:52] the amount of product that would be produced to run the mill, you're going to have to bring materials in to be processed.

[21:59] So this is going to be a processing or processed, driven agricultural use for sure.

[22:05] But it would be outside of what would normally be approved.

[22:09] So this proposal has good merits.

[22:13] I'm just concerned that if we move forward with our existing ideals to bring forward

[22:20] on-farm-diverse values, that this would already be approved.

[22:25] So, if you're suggesting as a planner that this is not an on-farm diversified

[22:31] use, this is an actual agricultural use and needs to be identified as such.

[22:36] Is that really the adjustment through the Chair?

[22:40] That's correct.

[22:41] So, in terms of the direction policy through the official plan document, it does identify

[22:45] it as being an air-cultured-related use, which is permitted through a site-specific

[22:49] amendment, which is the process we're kind of going for currently.

[22:53] In terms of the new zoning by-law process moving forward, it is possible that it had to review it if this type of use

[23:00] would be permitted as an as-of-right use under the air-cultural zone, specifically, not as an on-farm

[23:05] tourist vibe, but as its own air-cultural-related use in that.

[23:09] But at this point in time, without the implementation of the new zoning by-law document, the zoning

[23:14] by-law is required.

[23:16] Okay. If I may, one further ask, and that's just to come back, circle back to Councillor

[23:22] Walker's suggestion, the driveway obviously will have to be upgraded just to be clear to

[23:27] carry the amount of traffic, of inputs coming in and finish product going out. So certainly,

[23:36] the driver will have to be improved. It does appear in the EP and are mapping, so we would

[23:41] I want to make sure that that's associated with good conversation between our staff and your procedure to make sure that it is clearly outside of EP, okay?

[23:52] Is that comfortable?

[23:54] Everybody's good.

[23:54] Thank you.

[23:55] There you go.

[23:55] Thank you.

[23:56] You stole my thunder, but that's okay.

[23:57] No, you're doing a great job.

[23:59] I'll use.

[24:00] Carly, quick question, and I think we'll be doing with an official application, but do we have any concerns?

[24:07] And I know it's not a planning issue, but to talk about fire and explosion protection for a business like this.

[24:13] Are they concerned about that at all, or for the dust and stuff like that?

[24:20] There are more specific studies that are required, again, through the site plan application.

[24:26] At this time, we haven't submitted like a noise-odor dust type of study.

[24:33] I can pass it over to staff if that's okay, Nick.

[24:37] Was that identified as a requirement for a site plan application?

[24:40] I just can't remember off the top of my head.

[24:43] Yeah, so as indicated through the site plan approval process, we will review in greater detail the specifics of the proposal.

[24:50] And also I'd note through the building permit process in terms of the type of building use that's going in there.

[24:55] That will be assessed in terms of fire safety and a sort of sprinkler systems that are being acquired.

[24:59] So there's kind of two methods that we would be reviewing it under.

[25:02] Thank you.

[25:03] Having worked on a evening once upon a day, I know what dust can do, so I want to protect

[25:07] them.

[25:08] My next question is to the sand dunes.

[25:11] I'd like to ask them.

[25:12] I said, make sure, once you get this all done, that you get in touch with us, so we can have

[25:17] our economic development lady, Brian Kelly, and ourselves come and visit your place, because

[25:21] we love to come and visit, okay, so keep that in mind.

[25:24] We love coming to see what you're doing, so.

[25:38] I'm going to pour in you, there's going to a lot of people because 124 gets closed a lot of times in the winter, so you,

[25:47] okay, anyways, thank you very much for that, it's a great good job.

[25:51] Okay, this concludes this file, amended to file 2026-033 regarding property located, 793-273 County Road 124, we thank all who attended and provided comments for their interest in this matter.

[26:07] All input received with regards to this proposal will be fully considered by the staff and the recommendation and by council and their decision with respect to this application.

[26:16] Report regarding this proposal will be prepared for council who will make a decision concerning this matter at a future meeting.

[26:23] At this time, we do have another item to deal with, but I will be turning the chair back over to the mayor because he will be handling this portion of the meeting.

[26:31] All right, thank you very much, Deputy Mayor.

[26:34] Excellent work, as always.

[26:36] Thank you very much for returning the chair.

[26:38] Council, we do have the next item on our agenda item number four, which is a report called PV0342026.

[26:46] In regards to the ask from this council for the Stainer Settlement Area Boundary Expansion, phase one status update, we have our staff available to help us answer some questions.

[26:58] I believe we have a consultant on the line.

[27:00] There is. Hi there. Good to see you. I'm glad you're there. I knew you were there.

[27:04] Is that two people on the line? Oh, there is. There's two. Excellent. All right. Nice to have you,

[27:08] gentlemen. So, Derrick Abbott, our chief of this department, Derrick, I'm going to put it right

[27:15] over to you to bring forward your presentation.

[27:19] Thank you, Your Worship. So, this report is as a result of mayoral decision 26-08.

[27:27] So Council edits meeting on May 25th, 2026 earlier this year endorsed the Merrill decision, which asks Council to consider a two-phase approach to the Stainer's settlement area boundary expansion and a preferred boundary expansion area.

[27:43] And as a result of that, Council approved technical studies to commence immediately for the preferred boundary and that these technical studies be completed no later than 90 days from Council's approval.

[27:54] We have since reached our 90 days and are providing counsel with an update on the work

[28:01] completed two dates and outlining where we are in the process as we move forwards towards

[28:07] our statutory public meeting, which is scheduled to be held on September 14th.

[28:12] One thing I will emphasize that we are not asking counsel to make any decisions on the proposed

[28:18] amendment this evening, so the draft official plan amendment that was attached to my staff

[28:23] report remains in draft form and will continue to be informed by the technical work that's

[28:28] underway as well as any input we receive from the public agencies, indigenous communities,

[28:35] and Council through the consultation process. As you will note on the screen we do have

[28:40] members of our consulting team with us and one that's here in attendance that is available

[28:46] to walk Council through a brief presentation on the work that's been completed to date and

[28:51] and outline the next steps, so I would like to introduce, we have Steve Weaver and Patrick

[28:57] Casey, both from GSP group, and off-camera but in attendance is Jeff Langwa from Burnside

[29:04] Engineering, who provide council with that representation that's on your screen now, and

[29:10] give a progress status update and be available for any questions the council may have, so

[29:17] So further ado, Steve and Patrick, if floor is yours.

[29:21] Thank you very much, Derek.

[29:24] Steve, Patrick and Jeff, thank you for joining us.

[29:28] Who wants to lead this?

[29:29] Is this you, Steve?

[29:31] Yes, I'll take the lead here, if you can hear me okay.

[29:33] Yes, go right ahead, sir.

[29:34] We got you, go ahead.

[29:35] Perfect.

[29:36] Before you go, I apologize the error on the title slide is mine.

[29:39] For some reason I had council meeting Monday on my mind,

[29:42] should say Wednesday, of course.

[29:43] So I apologize for that.

[29:44] Good to correct the date there. Thanks Patrick. Yes, I'll kick things off and then I'll turn it over to Jeff to present some of the results of the servicing fees.

[30:00] Describe next steps. So thank you. The reason for the update tonight is outlined by your director is provide an update on the status of the studies that were directed by council resolution in May. And share with you the preliminary findings of those studies. And then, as I mentioned, talk about the next steps for the official plan amendment, OPA 4, as well as some related county official plan amendment.

[30:29] considerations.

[30:33] As mentioned, there were some studies discussed at the meeting on May 25th in terms of phase

[30:42] one of this process for the state or settlement area boundary expansion, with three key initiatives

[30:48] identified to support that.

[30:51] The first is a servicing feasibility study which Jeff and his team are focused on and will

[30:57] will be the subject of the next few slides.

[31:00] The other is the agricultural impact assessment, which is a requirement of the provincial planning

[31:07] statement for settlement area boundary expansions, to demonstrate that any potential impacts

[31:13] to agricultural land, farm operations, and any minimum distance separation requirements

[31:19] or MDS requirements for livestock operations have been assessed and addressed.

[31:25] And then the last is a strategy for engaging with First Nations and Indigenous communities.

[31:33] So I'll pause there and I will turn it over to Jeff, who's there with you in person to give you an update on the servicing feasibility study.

[31:41] Thank you very much. Jeff, welcome.

[31:47] You got a green light there?

[31:48] I do now. Okay, thank you.

[31:49] Hi, your worship members and council and staff.

[31:52] My pleasure to be here in supporting this port program participating.

[31:57] So I will touch on the work that we've done today related to the servicing feasibility associated

[32:02] with the expansion of the stain or settlement boundary that is primarily focused on water capacity

[32:07] and wastewater capacity.

[32:11] So currently there's approximately 5,300 people serviced in stain and looking forward to the projected

[32:17] needed needs based on the available land area and assumed land uses that were developed

[32:22] in partnership with staff. At full build-out, we would say an additional 21,000 people

[32:28] within the existing settlement boundary and room for another 14,000 in the areas proposed

[32:33] to be added through the settlement expansion for a total additional population of just

[32:38] over 35,000 people. Combined, that brings the total to 40,686 people.

[32:46] I need to interrupt you right there, just so everyone understands, that is not happening overnight.

[32:53] This could be upwards of 30 to 40 years before that actually happens.

[32:57] So, but the objective here is to look at this study and find the right number that matches

[33:02] the ability of our infrastructure.

[33:05] So, Jeff.

[33:07] Thank you for that clarification, and you are on track with that.

[33:10] In terms of our study focuses on what we call app build-up.

[33:14] So when all the land is developed to the new boundaries that are proposed, what infrastructure would be required because, you know, significant pieces of infrastructure need to be built, and you don't want them to be too small further down the road when you need them because the infrastructure does last 15, 75 years, right?

[33:32] So as the growth catches up, you don't want to have to pull out a sewer that's too small to put a bigger one in when you should look a little further down the head.

[33:39] So our numbers are focused on that end line, and then later, I expect we'll be discussion about the rate of growth and exactly where the various developments will happen in water order.

[33:50] But today, it's about the end story.

[33:52] So on the water supply and storage side, there's currently four wells in the standard.

[33:57] It can provide approximately 3,240 meters cube per day of water and storage facilities on airport road that provides 7,100 cubic meters of water storage.

[34:06] Currently under construction is a significant new capacity increase to the water supply.

[34:12] So there's 4 new wells going in and 4,000 cubic meters of storage at the Klondike Park

[34:17] project located on the east side of the township, approximately 8 kilometers from the stainer,

[34:23] but it will convey water to the stainer.

[34:26] And when we look at the needs in the future, we need an additional supply of 10,825 cubic meters.

[34:34] We don't quite know where that's coming from yet, but that's how much we think we would need and also additional water storage of approximately 8,000 cubic meters.

[34:44] So next slide.

[34:49] So with all that anticipated growth and development, it is anticipated that we would need additional and or up size water mains to service those new lands and new people associated with that.

[35:02] But for the purpose of our analysis, we have assumed that the additional water would come from the vicinity of the Klondike Park road facility, but today there hasn't been any work to investigate exactly how much more can come from Klondike or areas near Klondike, but that's our assumption for the analysis, and as far as additional water storage, we're anticipating it's likely to be near the existing water storage on airport road, and so our modeling of the future water maintenance based on those assumptions to see if that is sort of a plausible servicing

[35:31] solution. It's anticipated that would remain with these new lands it can also be a single

[35:38] water pressure zone.

[35:41] On the wastewater side, one of the challenges

[35:43] at the existing system in Stainer was not really designed to handle the lands that are being

[35:50] added to the settlement boundary. So that does create obviously difficult to convey the

[35:55] waste water that would be generated. We also expect the SPS-2, which is, I think it's the bottom

[36:03] in immolate, while it has currently has some capacity and plan for expansion, the forecasted

[36:08] needs would exceed its capacity. To service the new lands, which are generally clustered in the

[36:16] south and west of the existing settlement boundary, the south and the east of the settlement boundary,

[36:22] and north and east of the settlement boundary, we anticipate when they're all in all developed

[36:27] that we would need three pump stations to service those areas, essentially conveying

[36:31] west water to the north-east corner of the expanded settlement boundary.

[36:38] We anticipate that there would essentially be trunk sewers running across the side road

[36:43] and side road 21 to the east and then essentially north along center line road and kind of road

[36:49] seven, it will get through the development as that permits, but that's the general flow of it,

[36:54] and three pump stations along that corridor.

[36:58] It's illustrated a little bit, very high level graphics,

[37:00] where we're working on the fancy graphics for the reports, but this is the basic diagram of how it

[37:04] flow, I think, southwest and south, southwest goes to six, it goes to five, the lands from the

[37:13] southeast come in and run north on that centerline road, kind of road seven, to SPS-4, which then would

[37:20] be conveying the wastewater to treatment facility.

[37:23] The location of that facility has yet to be determined, but the existing facility is

[37:28] not adequate for all of that additional wastewater.

[37:32] On the wastewater treatment side, currently there's one wastewater treatment plan located

[37:36] in Stainer with capacity of 2,500 meters cube per day, and the township has made agreements

[37:43] with the SEGA beach to direct an additional 50,000, sorry, 5,000 meters cubed of waste

[37:48] water to the SEGA beach, essentially, in two steps.

[37:52] The works are already constructed, essentially they convey up to 2,500, up to 5,000,

[37:58] and there would need to be an upgrade to the pumping station to go to the next level of 5,000,

[38:02] but the porous mains and pump stations are already there to do that.

[38:06] The flows to the current standard plan are approximately 70 percent of its actual

[38:10] capacity in terms of actual flow over rating.

[38:16] And I noted that the works are in place for SPS2 with the additional lands that are

[38:22] being added and the existing lands, the additional treatment needs are 11,545 cubic meters

[38:29] per day.

[38:30] So that's above the capacity of stain or in the existing waste cycle agreement.

[38:34] Obviously, it's a civic amount of wastewater and we would identify the, we would need to do

[38:39] a Schedule CEA to figure out, to create an expansion like that or a new waste water facility.

[38:46] All right, so

[38:52] it's essentially the summary, so we do anticipate that it had build out whenever

[38:58] a piece of land is developed to the expanded boundary and within on the current boundaries,

[39:02] it's approximately 41,000 people.

[39:05] To service that, we would need to identify an additional supply of 1,800 meters cubed

[39:10] of water supply. As I noted, the source is not yet known for that. And EAs would likely

[39:16] be required at least under the current regulation to construct, to get permission to design those

[39:22] facilities. The water storage is a little more straightforward. Could I even be pre-approved

[39:27] but might be a schedule B under the current EAs requirements. The wastewater collection

[39:32] components, the forest main sewers and pumping stations, can likely be pre-approved from a

[39:38] Classy A perspective if they're located on development lines or in existing municipal corridors.

[39:42] It's a little faster to implement and then the wastewater treatment as I noted,

[39:47] we will have to identify the ultimate destination in the matter of treatment,

[39:50] which would require a Classy A.

[39:53] So that is the highlights of the work done today.

[39:55] And then we're working on the fancy figures and supported report to go with the calculations that have been completed.

[40:03] So I think I turned that back over to Steve now and he'll finish up the presentation.

[40:07] and I'll be able to take questions at the end.

[40:09] All right, we'll take questions at the end then.

[40:11] Thank you.

[40:12] I think that's fine.

[40:13] Okay, well, we do that in that way then, we can do this.

[40:15] Keep it rolling, right?

[40:16] Let's keep it rolling.

[40:16] All right, thank you.

[40:18] All right, if that's good with council, keep your notes handy.

[40:21] Steve, we'll take it back to you, go ahead.

[40:24] Thank you, Mayor Measures and thanks, Jeff,

[40:26] for covering the servicing summary.

[40:29] I mentioned earlier in the presentation

[40:31] that one of the three key initiatives

[40:34] supporting this boundary change

[40:36] is the agricultural impact assessment as required in accordance with provincial policies and, in fact, the province has an agricultural impact assessment guideline that has been followed in preparing the study.

[40:49] And the study I'm shaking here on behalf of study authors is just a stable associates.

[40:54] There are planners and agronomists, so specialized in the areas of agricultural impact and soils review and MDS calculations.

[41:05] So I've worked closely with Rob through his process of Rob still will of producing his report.

[41:13] And that draft report is now on the project webpage as well for more information.

[41:18] But just to share the highlights of that, the agricultural impact assessment looked at two primary areas.

[41:24] Well, primary area and a secondary area.

[41:26] The primary area is the expansion lands themselves.

[41:30] So those lands are shown in the mapping accompanying the report and on the project website,

[41:38] the land to the north east of existing stainer and the land to the southeast.

[41:43] And then under the provincial guidelines, we're also required to look

[41:47] at potential agricultural impacts within any farm lands within 1.5 kilometer radius of

[41:54] those primary study area lands. So that has been looked at as well to assess what types

[42:00] of farm operations are in the surrounding area and whether they have any livestock and

[42:05] whether there are any setbacks associated with those livestock operations. And in fact,

[42:11] Like five agricultural operations have been identified within the proposed expansion area.

[42:17] So one of the impacts of the expansion was that those operations would come into the boundary.

[42:24] It doesn't necessarily mean that they can't continue with those operations.

[42:29] They can continue with the existing farm operations that they have until, if and when they decide

[42:35] that their land is going to be made available for development with the long-term purpose of the expansion being to position that land for urban land uses, such as residential housing and other supporting uses.

[42:51] In addition to that, there's a number of livestock operations in the surrounding 1.5 kilometer area.

[42:58] But the information we had at the time of developing the draft report and developing this

[43:06] presentation indicated that only two of those in fact have MDS setback arcs that potentially

[43:11] affect the proposed expansion lands.

[43:14] We're still detailing with the agricultural consultant exactly how much of an impact that

[43:21] has on the proposed settlement area expansion.

[43:24] initial information looks like it doesn't have a major impact, but it does have some impact.

[43:30] And then secondly, how we can address those impacts, there are a few different options

[43:35] of how to deal with that.

[43:38] That said, there is one of the methods required under the provincial guidelines to obtain information

[43:45] about these farms is to consult directly with the farmers and that outreach occurred early

[43:51] on in the process as we've been working on this since late May, and we've just been

[43:58] receiving as recently as today some additional information about existing livestock operations.

[44:04] So there will be some updates to the agricultural impact assessment draft report that's available,

[44:10] and ultimately that report will be finalized once we have all the information from the applicable

[44:15] study area and the farms that could be affected and next slide.

[44:22] In terms of First Nations and Indigenous Consultation, this is outlined in the staff report.

[44:28] A notice has been sent out to the contacts and we confirm those contacts with the County

[44:34] of Simco as well regarding the proposed official plan amendment.

[44:39] So far we haven't received any responses but there is some time here for Indigenous groups

[44:45] to review the information and respond and identify whether they have any interest in these matters.

[44:51] And then once we do get some response from any of the Indigenous communities.

[45:00] And the engagement process with those indigenous communities based on their responses and their areas of interest. And just to note here, this is one part of a multi-part process in terms of land going from agricultural to urban to developed land. And that as the mayor outlined is a long term process. So along the way, there are many other opportunities for not only First Nations and Indigenous communities.

[45:29] communities, but the public at large to participate in that process, including through further

[45:35] steps in the secondary planning process, as well as as individual development applications

[45:40] are proposed and come forward for those lands over the fullness of time.

[45:46] And next slide.

[45:48] So just shifting gears here on our next steps, the draft official plan amendment, as mentioned,

[45:54] has been posted online and circulated to the county and other agencies for review and comment,

[46:03] and a statutory public meeting under the Planning Act has been scheduled for Monday, September 14.

[46:09] The notice of that meeting has gone out with all the particulars, and just to be more specific

[46:14] about that, the public meeting on September 14 is specifically for Township Official Plan number 4,

[46:22] And next slide just summarizes that in addition to the township official plan amendment, because settlement area boundaries including those

[46:32] for stain are set out in the county official plan as well. There is an amendment required to the county official plan. Also to note that the county is the approval authority for the township's official plan amendment.

[46:45] So adoption of the Official Plan Amendment by the township would be followed by forwarding

[46:51] that to the county for their review.

[46:55] And I got a bit ahead of myself there, but the next with the County Official Plan Amendment

[47:00] they are required under the Planning Act to have their own public meeting for the Official

[47:05] Plan Amendment.

[47:06] And if you go to the next slide, there's some process considerations with that.

[47:13] The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing at the Provincial Level is the approval authority for an amendment to the county official plan.

[47:22] And under the Planning Act, the county must give the ministry at least 90 days of review time with the official plan amendment before giving notice of its public meeting.

[47:35] So that 90 day period has started, it was the county submitted their draft official

[47:42] plan to limit to the province on July 17th, which means they cannot give notice of

[47:46] their public meeting until October 15th.

[47:49] So the public meeting that the county will hold will be sometime after October 15th.

[47:56] Next slide.

[48:00] The planning act does require that the county public meeting be held no earlier than Wednesday,

[48:08] November 4th based on that timing and the provincial review requirements.

[48:13] After the county hold its public meeting, they can then adopt a related county official

[48:18] plan amendment at any time thereafter and forward that to the province for their consideration

[48:25] of approval. And next slide. The approval of the county official plan is then in turn subject to

[48:33] the ministry approval process and the ministry may approve refuse or approve with modifications

[48:42] the county official plan amendment and they post their review period and decision on the environmental

[48:50] bill of rights on the Ontario Registry, and will ultimately issue a written decision.

[48:56] Following that, there is an appeal period for the county OPA, which runs for 20 days,

[49:02] but the appeals are very limited because it's a provincial decision.

[49:09] The 20-day appeal period specifically applies to the township.

[49:13] The county's decision with respect to the township OPA, and if there are no appeals, the township

[49:19] OPA comes into effect on the last after the last day of profiling of the appeals.

[49:27] If there are appeals, then those are referred to the Ontario Land Tribunal to be dealt

[49:32] with there.

[49:34] So that covers the summary of the work completed to date, as well as the next steps.

[49:42] And Patrick, Jeff and I are available for questions at this time.

[49:46] Thank you.

[49:47] All right.

[49:48] Thank you very much.

[49:48] And I would suggest the staff perhaps are also available for questions, too, so thank you.

[49:53] All right, members of council, do you have any questions to the staff on the work so far?

[49:58] Paul, you'd like to start?

[49:59] Okay, go right ahead.

[50:00] Sure, thank you.

[50:01] Quick question, gentlemen, about, it says two operations in the secondary, we're affecting the proposed expansion and

[50:09] both of those were livestock operations.

[50:11] Is that the only type of operation we're concerned with?

[50:15] Or do we concern with intensive cash crop operations?

[50:22] I'm visualizing all the livestock operations in the area,

[50:25] but cash crop is definitely a bigger bite right now.

[50:32] Steve or Patrick, either one?

[50:36] Through the mayor, yeah, happy to respond to that question.

[50:40] It's a good question.

[50:42] The livestock operations have definitely more of a direct impact because there's specific

[50:49] provincial formulae for calculating required setback distances.

[50:54] If you're re-designating land from agriculture to other uses, and that setback distance

[51:00] is based on the type of land use, so it's a larger setback for urban land uses.

[51:06] So in this case, the proposed change of some land from agricultural to urban triggers

[51:14] the need to do these minimum distance separation calculations.

[51:18] And there are a couple of operations that have set back distances that overlap with the

[51:23] area that's proposed to be designated as urban.

[51:26] So when we say impact, we mean that either the urban boundary would have to be drawn to

[51:34] avoid those areas or there will need to be some special justification or policy treatment

[51:39] in the official plan amendment to specifically ensure that setbacks are maintained from

[51:46] those livestock operations or other measures they're taken so that we don't have incompatible

[51:51] land uses with the orders and other aspects of livestock housing specifically.

[51:58] But you're right on point that there are other types of diagramic cultural impacts as well

[52:02] associated with urban expansion, the obvious one is that land will eventually be taken out of

[52:08] farm production. Again, that is more up to the land owner once the official plan amendment is

[52:14] in place and there are other steps that need to be completed including the infrastructure being

[52:19] developed planning applications that need to be filed and the details of the development need to come

[52:24] forward, much of which is under the control of the land owner at that stage in terms of timing

[52:30] for development. So in the interim and the short term, they're able to continue operating

[52:35] as they do today. There's no direct immediate impact to an existing farm operation.

[52:41] And then the other types of impacts that are looked at in the agricultural impact assessment

[52:45] report are things like, well if some of the land starts to develop, what would be the impacts

[52:50] to say farm equipment that moves around the area on the existing roads or noise and dust

[52:56] than other normal farm operations that you see out on the landscape and that's where there

[53:04] are more detailed studies that need to be done as the land develops. So just like when you see

[53:11] applications like the one you heard earlier tonight, there are certain technical studies that

[53:14] come forward in support of those applications and are required as part of a complete application.

[53:19] There's traffic studies, there's noise and dust and land use compatibility studies and then

[53:24] And the experts in those types of fields recommend measures that need to be taken to ensure

[53:29] that we don't set up a situation where development is happening in an area where it's going

[53:35] to generate a lot of complaints about normal farm operations in the vicinity.

[53:40] There are certain mechanisms that are then used like phasing of the development or warning

[53:47] clauses and purchase and sale agreements to advise purchasers of the farm operations

[53:51] in the area and the impacts from that that they should expect.

[53:55] But the details of those measures aren't being established at this stage,

[53:58] so that those happen later when the land is actually being proposed for development.

[54:03] So lots to consider there, but

[54:05] hopefully that gets into some of the specifics as to the types of impacts

[54:09] that the agricultural impact assessment report is looking at.

[54:14] Thank you.

[54:16] You're all good?

[54:16] Thank you.

[54:17] Other members of council?

[54:18] Do you have any questions?

[54:19] Mr. MacArthur, I see you.

[54:20] Go ahead.

[54:21] Yeah, this is probably for Mr. Jeff Langwell.

[54:24] Just wondering, the airport road water main was just redone there a few years ago.

[54:31] Is, do you have any idea whether it's sized to help or sized accordingly for this expansion?

[54:41] Or if there'd be another redo 30, 40 years down the road?

[54:51] So we did look at that specifically.

[54:52] We run the model with these additional, assuming the people were all present and

[54:57] So it doesn't look like that man needs to be upgraded in terms of the diameter or capacity based on our initial analysis and similarly the water main

[55:07] KPR to town also looks like it would be adequate for the projected growth

[55:11] Based on the assumptions that we know right now, so in both cases

[55:15] They're not going to be obsolete pretty

[55:21] So probably probably down the road either upgrade those are we'll be looking for a third water source probably in the

[55:29] area. Yeah, so there are two sort of glass line steel tanks out on the airport

[55:35] road facility and I think there are approximately 7,000 cubic meters and we

[55:40] need 8,000 so it's essentially in my mind who would simply twin that facility

[55:45] right so there would be four tanks there using the same water made. It's really

[55:48] about the volume of water stored per firefighting that's the main that's the

[55:52] biggest thing to address with that storage and the main is big enough to convey

[55:56] the flow is through, the extra size because the flow rate doesn't go up that much from what we assume.

[56:01] It's just the duration is longer, so anyways, it looks good in terms of, you know, they'll be there for their normal life and not replaced.

[56:11] We do envision there would be water main looped essentially across 20 or so or 21, kind of creating that loop along the side of any side to help distribute water to the system.

[56:21] Thank

[56:24] you very much, Councillor McArthur. Those are good questions. If I can just do a little

[56:27] follow-up on that point before I go to Councillor Dunin, when we do calculations, perhaps, even

[56:34] Dan might be able to assist, we do calculations about fire, you know, fire service. We also taken

[56:42] the capacity of the actual pipes. Like, the project that Councillor McArthur brought up was a significant

[56:50] We can investment by this community to improve the pipe between, you know, the Urban Center of Stainer and our reservoirs down on local airport road, county 42.

[57:02] But the actual size of the pipe increased our capacity for storage because the pipe itself is now much larger.

[57:09] So I think that we need to understand that while pumping capacity is actually the primary thing when you're dealing with a major fire pumping capacity.

[57:19] but the actual volume of water in the system is sitting in reserve is because it's in the pipes.

[57:26] There's a lot of pipes that are actually acting as reservoirs.

[57:29] Is that right? Is that a good philosophy?

[57:33] Partially asked, I like to be partially accurate, thank you.

[58:00] Yes,

[58:25] yes.

[58:43] Absolutely, the storage tanks are everything for sure.

[58:46] And so we're very blessed in the standard community with the two that we have.

[58:50] have been, as you said, recently improved, and then the new pipe is also a big improvement

[58:56] to connect us.

[58:58] And then the project at KPR is a very significant reservoir that's being built, along with

[59:06] the actual pipe itself there that connects perhaps 8 kilometers of pipe.

[59:10] So I think that there's a good argument to be said that we will have supply given all the

[59:17] factors that are available, and to continue the calculations, as we slowly build out to this population number that we're looking at.

[59:27] I mean, there's no sense in acknowledging that we're going to do that tomorrow.

[59:31] It's a matter of, you make plans to build those pipes as we go.

[59:36] And so I think that's part of it, and working with the development community to help pay for these things is an important part of it.

[59:42] So thank you, Dan, did you have anything you want to add on that since I brought it up?

[59:45] Okay. Thank you very much. We're going to go to the question by Councillor Janine now. Thank you.

[59:50] Probably don't even have to ask now.

[59:53] Oh, well.

[59:53] So, through your worship to Jeff.

[1:00:00] Two-day supply storage that the pipe we're supposed to have for the amount of people that are using it. Sorry, for every water source, we're required to keep two days worth of storage. So, that issue has come up in the past with the topic principally in relation to supply this procure from the town of Hollywood pipeline. It's kind of where that two-day

[1:00:29] storage. Okay. You know, guideline comes from, generally that wouldn't be the rule we would

[1:00:36] apply for a system that has its own storage. Like, that was more through the nature of the agreement

[1:00:42] through calling one new tech, than our typical approach to water storage. It's much more

[1:00:47] equation derived from the anticipated population for how big that is. Population says it's this

[1:00:54] take a fire flow, you'd be able to fire it for this long.

[1:00:58] You know, and that goes into storage.

[1:01:00] That's the majority of what's in there.

[1:01:01] There is emergency storage and equalization storage,

[1:01:04] but we won't get into that.

[1:01:06] We need more.

[1:01:07] And the good news is that that pipeline

[1:01:09] is likely going to be able to convey it.

[1:01:11] It's particularly, we put a new boundary man around

[1:01:14] to help move it around the area.

[1:01:16] And it doesn't matter where the storage is located.

[1:01:19] To some extent, it does.

[1:01:20] Because as I noted, when it's a fire, the loss of pressure through the pipe is a function

[1:01:27] of length and diameter, but we've run it through the model that we have at the Township

[1:01:31] Water System with the assumptions we said of more water coming from KPR and more stored

[1:01:37] at airport road, and the forecasted fire flows and available fire flow and pressure looks

[1:01:43] acceptable.

[1:01:44] So it's just the amount of storage is just determined by the users.

[1:01:48] And of course all the new developments have new pipes which help can be the water through

[1:01:52] and they'll be sized in more detail.

[1:01:54] They all come forward.

[1:01:55] Okay.

[1:01:55] Thank you.

[1:01:57] Thank you.

[1:01:58] Yeah.

[1:01:58] Thank you, Worship.

[1:01:59] And just to add, I think the councilor Denise point to the connection of the two systems,

[1:02:11] one system, but the connection of KPR and Airport Road, the connection of that and trying

[1:02:17] to loop them together, give you better flow with the storage.

[1:02:24] That's more critical than having the two-day storage that was assumed as part of the,

[1:02:30] if there was a connection to the, to the calling of the pipeline.

[1:02:36] Excellent question so far.

[1:02:38] I'm going to go back to Paul unless you had something.

[1:02:42] No?

[1:02:42] Paul, you're up next.

[1:02:43] Go ahead.

[1:02:44] Just clarification to our clerk.

[1:02:45] I do understand we've got a meeting posted for September 14th, that's part of our regular meeting.

[1:02:54] I thought we would be doing this under a planning meeting, but we're doing this under a regular council meeting here.

[1:03:00] Through your worship to the Deputy Mayor, this is an important matter, it's a strong mayor decision.

[1:03:05] So we are putting it forefront at our regular meeting in September.

[1:03:09] We are getting low on council meetings before the next term, so we need to move forward.

[1:03:13] So, staff know that that's coming on as a public meeting during the regular meeting.

[1:03:17] It's always on the agenda.

[1:03:18] You see it, we just normally don't have any items, but this is a priority for the municipality.

[1:03:23] So, then a question you just brought up.

[1:03:25] I know the mayor loses his strong mayor powers.

[1:03:28] Is it a continuation of his strong mayor powers to continue this application?

[1:03:34] Through your worship to the deputy mayor, we still have to follow the guidelines under the Planning Act,

[1:03:38] And we still have to hold a public meeting, and we still had to follow the statutory notice period for that.

[1:03:45] Thank you.

[1:03:46] Thank you, very good.

[1:03:48] Other questions, Mr. Broderick, Mr. McArthur, Mr. Walker?

[1:03:53] All right, I would have a couple, if I can, and since you're here, Jeff, I appreciate we're going to go right back to water again.

[1:04:01] In your notes, in your presentation, it talked about an MCEA would be required for an alternate water source.

[1:04:10] Looking at the investment that the townships already made in the KPR site,

[1:04:16] there were four wells that were investigated on that site and identified as sources, all four of them are identified as individual sources.

[1:04:27] As I understand the project right now, we are going to be accessing two of those wells of the four.

[1:04:34] So is that a correct statement?

[1:04:36] We're using two of the four in the project that we're building right this minute.

[1:04:42] My recollection is they're all being built.

[1:04:44] They're certainly all permitted to be constructed.

[1:04:46] And they're in the approval from the Minister of Environment.

[1:04:50] They may not be needed on day one in terms of you don't need to turn them all on.

[1:04:54] Right, because it's just more capacity than you need in the very near future.

[1:05:00] That's where I think that stands, I could confirm that.

[1:05:03] Yeah, as again, as I understand it, we're going to be building all the pump or all of the wells.

[1:05:09] But we're not going to be turning to the pumps or KPR three and

[1:05:16] four until the time that we have that expansion requirement.

[1:05:20] So, like, we'll have the ability to do it, but it's a matter of a little future investment that'll be needed to make that happen.

[1:05:29] Yeah, I would need my hunches.

[1:05:31] Again, they would probably use them.

[1:05:33] I expect they will rotate through all of them, right?

[1:05:35] In terms of trying to make sure they're all ready to go if they're needed as opposed to just using two and leaving two to sit.

[1:05:42] You probably kind of want to exercise them essentially, right?

[1:05:44] And rotate through.

[1:05:46] Yeah.

[1:05:46] I could check with the construction team.

[1:05:47] Let's check what I am.

[1:05:49] He's been watching that project, he might be there even closer than I am.

[1:05:53] Yeah, I think your worship, that's Jeff nailed it.

[1:05:58] All four are going to be put in production, I call it, the volume that it's going to produce

[1:06:05] isn't going to be needed right away until more build out is done.

[1:06:11] But Jeff's cracked, there's going to be a rotation between the four on an as needed basis.

[1:06:17] basis, with lots of built in redundancy, if one of the well's 5, 10 years from now needs

[1:06:24] to be worked on. We have three other ones there to take its place. So, they'll all be

[1:06:31] producing water on a rotational basis. On an as needed basis, the volume or the frequency,

[1:06:40] I guess we'll increase as needed, as building hopefully ramps up here in the next year or something.

[1:06:51] Yeah, certainly.

[1:06:52] Again, this goes back to the design of this whole project, is that it will gradually move forward.

[1:06:59] I mean, we're going to have to get the infrastructure in place.

[1:07:02] And then the planning and building department will be very busy receiving applications to build more homes.

[1:07:10] And as those more homes come online, and as more people move to our community there will be more demand on the water system.

[1:07:18] So I think it's very wise of how we're spending this money to build this system, to have the four wells available.

[1:07:25] I recall talking to one of the engineers about this, Jeff, it wasn't you, it was another one about how the capacity volume that we would need even to reach the

[1:07:38] 4,000 units in that neighborhood could be achieved with two wells.

[1:07:43] And that was the conversation we had that we could achieve it.

[1:07:46] But you're right, that would put huge demand on those two wells all the time.

[1:07:51] So by cycling through, Dan, as you're suggesting, that's a little news to me, but

[1:07:55] I'm happy to hear it because it does demonstrate that we have the capacity to have redundant

[1:08:01] systems as well as to keep those other wells functioning well, correctly perhaps.

[1:08:06] So anyway, thank you very much for that.

[1:08:09] So that MCEA, is that a step that we would have to engage to as part of this process?

[1:08:17] Are we going to have to do that and go through that process as well, even though we have approved water source?

[1:08:23] So the KPR facility, I guess in an early step, that's all been completed in the past.

[1:08:28] I can't remember how many years ago now, but seven years ago or something like that.

[1:08:32] That facility was approved under the IA, it was an addendum to the Stainer IA.

[1:08:37] And so now it's through the future facilities, such as a reservoir or a new well at a new site or

[1:08:45] a new wastewater, all would have requirements to satisfy the requirements of the Missile Class IA.

[1:08:51] There are proposed changes to that that are actually anticipated in the new year, but

[1:08:57] under the current framework, they would require it.

[1:08:59] It's anticipated that if it rolls out, like we think it's going to roll out, some of them may be pre-approved as we move forward, it should get easier out of here.

[1:09:09] Okay. All I can ask there is to make sure you keep counsel informed of that. This is who's along. So that's great. Can I ask another question? I'm looking for other members.

[1:09:18] I have another question then. I'm going to switch over to the wastewater treatment plant agreement. We have a terrific agreement with our partners in the town of Osaga Beach.

[1:09:28] you referred to the pumping station, is that SCS-2, is that what that is, the one that's probably public work building?

[1:09:37] That's okay, so SCS-2, it does have the capacity to meet the requirements that we have currently building the current settlement area.

[1:09:47] Upgrades to that facility because of inputs that could come there, is that been sort of thought out as far as

[1:09:56] how extensive that could be?

[1:09:59] Are we thinking of another 30-foot dig into that soil,

[1:10:05] or is that an above-ground, mid-ground sort of project?

[1:10:10] So I do believe there'll be either significant upgrades

[1:10:13] to the SPS-2, or an alternate,

[1:10:16] like a new replacement that's larger,

[1:10:18] required in the future.

[1:10:20] The one that is constructed is ready to deal

[1:10:23] with the first half of the number

[1:10:25] that's supposed to go to Wisega, and the pipes are ready for the full agreement.

[1:10:31] They would need to be an upgrade to the pumpings within the existing building, essentially

[1:10:35] replacing pumps to go to the second stage, so it's a relatively modest upgrade to get

[1:10:40] to the agreement that was anticipated.

[1:10:42] Go on beyond that, we haven't really looked into that yet, whether there is room to cram

[1:10:46] more or with where the other development is, which is actually downhill from where that

[1:10:51] is.

[1:10:52] Yeah, it's hard to get that.

[1:10:53] So there's a lot of gravity there that helps it might be a blend of the two, but we'll sort that out in the future.

[1:10:59] But it would be more pumping capacity for us.

[1:11:01] Yeah, I'm kind of thinking of whether we need to sort of take another look at the site there.

[1:11:08] Do we need, like, will we need more real estate around that current building to build out?

[1:11:14] Or are we comfortable in the size of the building we have right now there to do the works internally?

[1:11:19] Is that I'm just seeking a construction project here to add on to that wastewater treatment volume that we're going to need when we make this settlement boundary expansion.

[1:11:30] Are we going to need more space there, and this is another large project that we'll be facing.

[1:11:37] Dan, maybe that's for you.

[1:11:38] You know, Jeff may be able to correct me if I'm wrong, but as he pointed out that the

[1:11:45] force main is going to a second beager size, yeah appropriately, I think there is space

[1:11:51] in the pump hose that's over the pump hose, it's the wet well, it's the wet well that

[1:12:00] the sewage goes into, I think that's the general theme of that is, and if we need a little

[1:12:07] a bit more room, we don't know all that area.

[1:12:09] But I think the building itself,

[1:12:11] I think you just add either larger pump or more pumps to it

[1:12:15] with an additional storage area.

[1:12:17] I think this, what I understood it to be constructively.

[1:12:21] I think for the original service area,

[1:12:24] I think there was hope that it would be expanded at that site,

[1:12:27] but because the new area is essentially downhill,

[1:12:30] it's like can you get it back into the existing one

[1:12:32] without it being deeper?

[1:12:34] We haven't quite got the detail done on that yet.

[1:12:36] Okay, so it's presented conservatively and that we need to good you know it will work if you build a new one

[1:12:42] Can we optimize it and leverage or?

[1:12:46] Or all what's there like

[1:12:48] Yes, right and it's it's rated a pump 25

[1:12:53] Easily upgraded to 5000 by those ultimate numbers are well beyond that right so

[1:12:58] I need an expectable probability station eventually when all that group materializes exciting stuff

[1:13:04] I know. Again, I try to think long-term, as far as into the future, what kind of expenses the committee could be facing, what we're looking at.

[1:13:16] So I look at it, we have a really good investment in this particular SCS-2, or SPS-2, and the fact that we have real estate around it, if we had to do an extra wet well, we already have space to do that.

[1:13:29] we can incorporate that into that site without too much issue and it can be engineered and it can be built

[1:13:39] given the resources that we have available to us. So all right, so that's good for that,

[1:13:44] and I think that that agreement Mr. Ferguson and I had a talk about that agreement some months ago

[1:13:50] about the fact that it's you know it'll be many years until we reach that point where we have

[1:13:55] I have to renegotiate that agreement.

[1:13:57] The good news is that the pipe that connects us from Stainer to the Visage Beach wastewater treatment plant will handle the capacity.

[1:14:03] So we don't have to open up those pipes again, which is great.

[1:14:07] So we're really in a good spot there.

[1:14:10] So I look to my council if there's other questions, no further?

[1:14:14] All right, can I just ask a question and a staff regarding the First Nations and

[1:14:21] addition to consultations? Can we just confirm? Did we receive any responses, Steve, or Patrick?

[1:14:28] Did we receive any responses on that? Or are we still going to engage consultations with

[1:14:34] them to seek their inputs on this?

[1:14:38] As of our last discussions with your staff, there haven't been any responses yet, but there

[1:14:46] There is some time here between now and the September 14th meeting, so we'll continue monitoring and following up.

[1:14:55] Okay, I think we've got an answer on.

[1:15:00] We haven't received anything, but they have been emailed as well as mail the notice, but we haven't received anything yet. Okay, so we're still engaging and making sure that we have those consultations. That's good. All right, that's great. And I guess the last thing is back to the county issue, which Derek, this might be for you if I can. Moving this whole project as a recommendation from this council as we go to a full council meeting and get the public input.

[1:15:28] and we get that report and we take OPA for, and we move it over to the county, and then the province of Ontario is removing the county authority to make these type of decisions anyway.

[1:15:39] So, are we facing a roadblock, do you think, or are we going to be looking at changes to the county system, given their timeline of when they give up the authority to make those decisions on planning matters?

[1:15:59] Derek, what do you think?

[1:16:01] Through your worship, it's a great question and one I've been in connection with Nathan

[1:16:07] Westendorp there.

[1:16:09] He and as well as other staff have informed me that the county will still have their decision

[1:16:16] making authority come November 4th.

[1:16:19] I think it's just those three municipalities in this bill Bradford and Newtech that will

[1:16:24] will operate kind of as a single tier municipality and not require counties approval authority.

[1:16:28] So following the election and on that date that the province did set out county, the county of Simco is still our approval authority for planning act decisions.

[1:16:38] What remains in question is what county council will look like come November 4th as I know the numbers are dwindling, and

[1:16:45] when they will actually have their next county council meeting, but we're in constant communication with the county and

[1:16:52] Nathan and his team to sort this out and just want to point out that in no way does our decision affect their decision like they will still formulate their own planning rationale.

[1:17:05] It doesn't necessarily mean that the county is going to automatically approve it, but they will still have to go through their approval process to amend their county official plan.

[1:17:14] All right, thank you for sharing that with everyone here, appreciate that.

[1:17:20] One more time, is there any further questions, so we'll take the mic a lot here, okay, you're all good?

[1:17:26] Well, listen, thank you very much, staff, thank you very much to our consultants, thank you to Bernside, Jeff, to have you guys here.

[1:17:33] This is certainly a positive step forward to get us to this point.

[1:17:38] Madam Clerk, the advertisements are out to advise the public about a public meeting where we hope to have a public meeting.

[1:17:44] have anybody who's interested in this particular issue come forward for the 14th.

[1:17:50] We will certainly endeavor to make that meeting agenda not as heavy, Madam Clerk, hint, hint.

[1:18:01] Well, it's just, it's a tough one because we have so many other departments we have to deal

[1:18:04] with at the same time.

[1:18:06] It's just, it's, it's, it's going to be a big decision and an opportunity, thank you very

[1:18:10] much for that.

[1:18:10] Okay, so if there's nothing further, we do have a small recommendation

[1:18:14] here, which is just to receive this.

[1:18:16] So, again, I want to thank our staff and our consultants and

[1:18:19] Burnside Engineering, et cetera.

[1:18:21] And thank you, Council, for all these terrific questions.

[1:18:23] Recommendation says, be it resolved that Council of the Township of Clearview hereby receive, report PV0342026.

[1:18:30] This is the Stainer Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Phase 1 Status Update,

[1:18:34] stated August 26, 2026 for information, moved by the Deputy Mayor, seconded by Mr. Walker.

[1:18:41] Thank you very much, sir.

[1:18:42] Any questions on that motion? Seeing none, I'll call it. All in favour?

[1:18:47] Carried unanimous. Thank you very much.

[1:18:49] Council, this is a special meeting but we do have the confirmatory by-law for this meeting as we do.

[1:18:56] It says it was all the by-law 2559 being a by-law to confirm the proceedings of the August 26, 2026 council meeting.

[1:19:04] be presented and read a first, second, and third time finally passed, the 26th of August,

[1:19:08] 2026, Councillor Denny. Thank you very much. Councillor MacArthur, thank you.

[1:19:13] And the by-laws have been read. Any questions? Seeing none, all in favour? By-law carries, thank

[1:19:19] you. Councillor, we're out there in motion to adjourn for our special meeting. 6.40, we're

[1:19:24] going to call it 49, by the time we get there. 6.49, maybe we should all buy a ticket.

[1:19:30] Councillor Brodwick, Deputy Mayor, would you like to move that? Motion to adjourn. All those

[1:19:35] in favour? Thank you very much. Very good folks. Thank you very much for joining us.

Special Council Meeting - Planning Public Meeting

Transcript