Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-54-87y~~~~ TOWN OF NEWCASTLE REPORT File # ,'~~ _~` Res . #, ~~ / , ~'`~ By-Law # ~`r}~ hE~7It~: General Purpose and Administration Committee DATE: Monday, February 16, 1987 T #: PD-54-87 FIIF #: CT: REPORT OF THE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PD-54-87 be received; and 2. THAT the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of Municipal Affairs be advised that the Tovan of Newcastle has no objection to the recommendations of the Report of the Shoreline Management Review Committee, with the exception that it is recommended that funding available through the Ontario Home Renewal Program and the Federal Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program not be extended to those elements already covered by the Shoreline Property Assistance Act; and 3. 1~HAT a copy of Council's decision and Staff Report PD-54-87 be forwarded to the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Minister of Municipal Affairs. ~%~ -~-..c"* ~~-e--~ f' ~~. _. BACKGROUND: On December 16, 1986, Council considered a letter from the Minister of Natural Resources forwarding a copy of the Report of the Shoreline Management Review Committee. Council resolved (Resolution #C-16-87) that the Report be referred to the Directors of Public Works and Planning for review and a subsequent report to Committee. ...2 v ~~~ r REPURT NU.: PD-54-87 Page 2 The Shoreline Management Review Committee was established on April 1986 by the Provincial Government to make recommendations on a long-term strategy for managing the Great Lakes shoreline. The need for a strategy became evident when water levels in the Great Lakes rose in 1985 and 1986 causing considerable damage to shoreline areas. The Report was submitted to the Ministers of Natural Resources and Municipal Affairs on December 16, 1986. The Report notes that the regulations of water levels and flows in the Great Lakes and the connecting channels is the responsibility of the Canadian and American Governments, and not within the realm of Provincial Authority. As well, engineering solutions to regulating lake levels have limited effectiveness. The Province has jurisdiction over the Great Lakes shoreline and the Committee has recommended the development of a comprehensive Shoreline rvlanagement Program as the most effective role for the Province and the most effective method, in the short and long term, of dealing with shoreline damage. The Shoreline Management Program being recommended by the Committee has three (3) major components - Prevention, Protection, and Emergency Measures. au~vFNrrnu The Report noted that the municipality's role in damage prevention relates to their responsibility to guide development away from hazard-prone areas when preparing Official Plans and Zoning By-laws. Zoning By-laws can also be used to require flood proofing measures on development. As well, the municipality may also use site plan and subdivision control. The Committee has recommended that the Ministeries of Natural Resources and Municipal Affairs jointly prepare a Policy Statement under Section 3 of the Planning Act to formally recognize Great Lakes shoreline management in municipal landuse planning. ...3 ~~~ ,~ REPORT NO.: PD-54-87 Page 3 The Committee has recommended that the Ministry of Natural Resources be designated as the co-ordinating agency for shoreline management and that the Ministry prepare a Shoreline Management Plan to assist in consistent application of management policies. The Committee also recommended that the Conservation Authorities Act be amended to extend the jurisdiction al and geographical boundaries of shoreline, Conservation Authorities to include both shoreline and near shore areas of the Great Lakes, and that Conservation Authorities be identified as the agency to implement the Shoreline Management Plan, and to administer the shoreline policies of the Ministry of Natural Resources. The Committee has also recommended that the Ministry of Natural Resources discuss with the Federal Government the need to expand the Canada-Ontario Flood Damage Reduction Program to accelerate hazard land mapping. Unce flood and erosion hazard areas are identified, municipalities can include them in their planning documents, and Conservation Authorities can enact fill and construction regulations. PRf1TG('Ti/lt~i The Committee has envisaged two (2) tiers of shoreline protection works - relatively large scale projects initiated by the Conservation Authority with the support of member municipalities and projects initiated by individual land owners. With respect to the former, the Committee has recommended that these projects be evaluated and ranked on a priority basis, and that they be funded in away identical to ongoing capital works programs for damage reduction in the riverine environment - that is, 55% provincial funding and 45% local funding by the benefitting municipalities and for shorefro nt owners. The Committee has also recommended that a streamlined approvals process for shore protection works initiated by individual landowners be developed, with the Conservation Authorities being the focal point for the distribution of approvals applications. The Committee has proposed that provincial grants be available to all approved works initiated by individual or municipalities. These grants would be distributed by the Conservation Authority on a priority basis as determined by the Shoreline Management Plan. ...4 ~~~~ r REPORT NO.: PD-54-87 Page 4 The Shoreline Property Assistance Act enables municipalities to borrow from the Province to provide loans to those who wish to rehabilitate, repair or install new shore protection, or who wish to raise o r relocate buildings as the result of damage or potential damage due to flooding or erosion. The Committee has recommended a number of changes to the Act to strengthen the inspection and approvals process in the Act, to ensure that all shoreline works receive technical review and approval before public funding, to increase funding provisions under the Act, and to provide loan guarantees. The Committee also noted that, because of the cost involved, some property owners may not join with their neighbours in following a consistent approach i to managing their shore fronts, thereby creating a "weaklink" in continuous shore protection. The Committee recommended that the Province consider amendments to the Ontario Home Renewal Program (OHRP) to permit the extension of funding to those elements covered by the Shoreline Property Assistance Program (eg. protection, raising of structures), and to approach the Federal Government to discuss inclusion of this package under the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP). Staff note that funding under these programs is based on an applicant's income. EMERGENCY MEASURES The Committee has recommended that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs require all shoreline municipalities to develop shoreline emergency plans under the Emergency Plans Act which would cover the procedures for responding to a shoreline emergency and for providing necessary services resulting from flood and erosion. The Committee has also recommended that the Province, through the Ministry of Nlunicipal Affairs, continue to provide unconditional grants to those municipalities incurring unanticipated costs following shoreline emergency situations. CUNIMENT: As indicated earlier, the Report of the Shoreline Manangement Committee notes the importance of the municipality's role in controlling development in ...5 ~~~ REPORT NO.: PD-54-87 Page 5 hazard prone areas and has recommended the preparation of a Policy Statement to formally recognize Great Lakes Shoreline management in municipal land use planning. Staff note that the Region of Durham Official Plan and the Town of Newcastle Comprehensive Zoning By-law already incorporate policies designed to control development in Hazard areas along the Great Lakes shoreline. The Official Plan (Schedule A5) designates lands along the shoreline as "Hazard Lands" and states (Section 1.2.4) that the extent and exact location of such Hazard Lands shall be determined in zoning by-laws in accordance with detailed floodline, soil and contour mapping. The Official Plan (Section 1.2.5) further states that Hazard Lands shall be primarily for the preservation and conservation of the environment, and that the respective zoning by-laws shall impose building setbacks from the Hazard Land related to the extent and severity of the existing and potential hazard. By-law 84-63, as amended, implements the policies of the Official Plan by zoning the entire length of the Lake Ontario shoreline, with the exception of Darlington Provincial Park, as "Environmental Protection". As well, existing residential development along the lake south of Bowmanville has been placed in the "Residential Shoreline" zone, the provisions of which specify to what extent new residential development may be expanded or renovated. Based on the above, Planning Staff have no objection to the recommendations of the Committee's Report in respect of the municipal role in shoreline management. In particular, Staff note improved mapping of shoreline areas will facilitate the delineation of Hazard Lands in the Zoning By-law. Planning Staff also requested comments from the Clerk's Department and the Building Department in respect of funding, and the Public Works and Fire Departments in respect of Emergency Measures. The following comments were received: Clerk's Department "The Clerk's Department and indeed the Town of Newcastle generally, has not had a great deal of experience with the Shoreline Property Assistance Act, 1973. ...6 REPURT NO.: PD-54-87 Page 6 Clerk's Department - (Cont'd) In 1974, Council passed a by-law authorizing the raising of $50,000 for shoreline property assistance. Subseq uently, in 1980, Council aut horized an advance in the amount of $18,000 for shoreline property protection. As a result of public concern related to the flooding occurring along Lake Ontario the Council of the Town of Newcastle did, in 1986 authorize the passing of a debenturing by-law in the amount of $150,000 to aid property owners in effecting shoreline works under the Shoreline Property Assistance Act, 1973. Staff and Council recognized that funds might not be available from the Province but none-the-less felt it appropriate to have the borrowing authority approved in the event the program could be utilized. The Town of Newcastle's approved borrowing authority now standards at $182,000, and as of this date we have not received any applications for assistance. Under present legislation, the Clerk's Department is responsible for the following: 1. Provision of Information relating to the Program; 2. Provision of Application for Loan Forms; 3. Provision of Inspection and Completion Certificate Forms; 4. Council approval of the application and loan; 5. Sale of the debenture through the Region of Durham; 6. Preparation of Rating By-laws and their registration; 7. Payment over of funds when received; 8. Co~ilection of the funds advanced in alike manner as taxes. (7 and 8 are handled by the Treasury Department) The single serious problem throughout the period during which the program has been in existence has been the uncertainty of funding. The other minor problems such as administering the program, providing or requiring expert technical assistance, are not significant and ones easily resolved. Assigning a major role to the Conservation Authorities with respect to the provision of information to interested parties and the processing of the initial application woul d provide the Authori ty with the opportuni ty to monitor and establish what works are appropriate in a given situation. As well, they would be able to initiate large scale works if such works are required. The original intent of the Ontario Home Renewal Program and the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program has been clearly delineated and it would not be appropriate to use these programs as funding sources for Shoreline Protection works. The Shoreline Property Protection Act should be maintained as a self-sustaining program and have within it a full funding opportunity. The need for cross program funding would only serve to confuse both the applicants and the administrators." ~c~) ...7 ~(!F~ REPORT NO.: PD-54-87 page 7 Building Department "Any amendments to the OHAP and RRAP legislation as recommended in the subject Report would result in a diversion of funds from other areas requiring assistance." Fire Department "The Town of Newcastle Emergency Plan, which will hopefully be approved by by-law in the spring of 1987, details specific responsibilities to each member of the committee who form the body of the plan (Municipal Control Group). One member of the committee is the Director of Public Works, who is identified as being responsible for co-ordinating various functions, one being to maintain liaison with flood control, conservation and environment agencies and be prepared to conduct relief or preventative operations. Once the Energency Plan is approved and this committee meets to receive and discuss the plan, then individual roles and responsibilities would be discussed. The Director of Public Works would be required to assist in formulating or co-ordinating flood control measures throughout the Municipality for inland streams and rivers and would meet with Ministries and Agencies to offer assistance for Shoreline Flood Control. I am in agreement with the concluding remarks in the Summary and feel that the format of our Emergency Plan will provide for co-ordinated Shoreline Emergency Planning. Preventative and protective measures on the shoreline should remain a shared cost of the Federal and Provincial governments and not the Municipalities." Public Works Department "I concur with the recommendations in the report that suggest that Provincial Agencies take the lead with respect to all these facets of the Shoreline Management Program. I believe the suggested role of the municipality is compatible with the intent of the Town of Newcastle Emergency Plan which I believe is intended to be approved by by-law and implemented in 1987." A review of comments submitted indicates that, with the exception of the issue of funding, Town Staff have no objection to the recommendations of the Shoreline Management Review Committee. Both the Chief Building Official and the Town Clerk have expressed a concern that funding available through OHRP and RRAP should not be extended to those projects covered by the Shoreline Property Assistance Act. ...8 REPURT NU.: PD-54-87 Page 8 It is therefore respectfully recommended that the Minister of Natural Resources and the Niinister of Municipal Affairs be advised that the Town of Newcastle has no objection to the recommendations of the Report of the Shoreline Management Review Committee, with the exception that the Town recommends that funding available through the Ontario Home Renewal Program and the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Prograrn not be extended to those elements already covered by the Shoreline Property Assistance Act. Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation to the C ommi tte e ~~wrence Kot set t Chi of A i istrati ve Uf ficer ~~~