agenda community development committee

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 5:00 p.m. Lanark County Administration Building Council Chambers

Councillor Richard Kidd, Chair

AGENDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

COMMITTEE

Page

1. CALL TO ORDER (Reminder please silence all cellphones)

2. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES Suggested Motion: "THAT, the minutes of the Community Development Committee held on March 7, 2012 be approved as circulated."

4. ADDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA Suggested Motion: "THAT, the agenda be approved as presented."

5. DELEGATIONS & PRESENTATIONS

6. COMMUNICATIONSi) Resolution from the Township of Bonnechere Valley: Green Energy Act

ii) Ministry of Environment: Preparing for Implementation and Compliance Under Part IV The Clean Water Act

iii) Drinking Water Source Protection: Seeking Your Municipality's Input on Additional Draft Policies

iv) Letter from Lanark County Youth Centre Coalition: Thank You

v) Rideau Valley Conservation Foundation: Community Forest Working Group Nominated for Tri-Valley Conservation Award

vi) Drinking Water Source Water Protection: Four Important Updates Regarding the Source Water Protection Program

56-7

8-10

1112

13-14

of 100

Page

Suggested Motion: "THAT, the communications for the April Community Development Committee meeting be received as information."

7. CONSENT REPORTSi) Report #PD-10-2012 Alternative Energy Projects Information Report

ii) Report #PD-11-2012 Planning Department Information Report

iii) Report #T-07-2012 Lanark County Tourism Information Report

iv) Report #T-08-2012 Lanark County Tourism Association (LCTA) Information Report Suggested Motion: "THAT, the following Consent Reports for the April Community Development Committee meeting be received as information: Report #PD-10-2012 Alternative Energy Projects Information Report Report #PD-11-2012 Planning Department Information Report Report #T-07-2012 Lanark County Tourism Information Report Report #T-08-2012 Lanark County Tourism Association (LCTA) Information Report."

8. DISCUSSION REPORTSi) Report #PD-12-2012 Alternative Energy Project - Mississippi Mills

Planning Approvals Administrator, Mary Kirkham Suggested Motion: “THAT, the Clerk for the County of Lanark complete the “Municipal Consultation Form” for Mississippi Solar Park, outlining the following comments and/or concerns: 1. That Canadian Solar / Saturn Power consult with the County of Lanark Emergency Management Coordinator prior to development of the “Communications and Emergency Response Plan; 2. That a Civic Address be obtained from the Town of Mississippi Mills. Canadian Solar / Saturn Power shall consult directly with the Town in this regard. And that this address be provided to the County Emergency Management Coordinator; 3. That the applicant shall satisfy all the requirements of the County of Lanark, financial and otherwise, that may be required under established by-laws for processing the Municipal Consultation Form for Alternative Energy Projects; AND THAT a copy of this “Municipal Consultation Form – Technical Report” be forwarded to the Town of Mississippi Mills for information purposes.”

15-1920-2425-3031-34

35-48

of 100

Page

ii) Report #PW-24-2012 Proposed Online Public Input: Community Forest Five Year Operating Plan Director of Public Works, Steve Allan Suggested Motion: "THAT, the Community Development Committee recommends that County Council approves the proposed public consultation process for the Draft Lanark County Community Forest Five (5) Year Operating Plan, 2013 - 2017, as described in Report #PW-24-2012; AND THAT the Clerk sends Report #PW-24-2012 to all local municipal Clerks, for information."

9. DEFERRED REPORTS

10. VERBAL REPORTSi) Report of the Valley Heartland Community Futures Development Corporation

(verbal) Executive Director, Susan Fournier Suggested Motion: "THAT, the Report of the Valley Heartland Community Futures Development Corporation (verbal) be received as information."

ii) Report of the Lanark County Municipal Trails Corporation (LCMTC) (verbal) Councillor Pat Dolan a) March 19, 2012 Meeting Minutes Suggested Motion: "THAT, the Report of the Lanark County Municipal Trails Corporation (LCMTC) (verbal) be received as information."

iii) Report of the Eastern Ontario Trails Alliance (EOTA) (verbal) Councillor Richard Kidd No Report.

49-83

84-91

of 100

Page

iv) Report of the Mazinaw-Lanark Forest Management Committee (verbal) Councillor Peter McLaren a) March 12, 2012 Meeting Minutes Suggested Motion: "THAT, the Report of the Mazinaw-Lanark Forest Management Committee (verbal) be received as information."

v) Report of the Algonquin Land Claim Negotiating Committee (verbal) Chief Administrative Officer, Peter Wagland Suggested Motion: "THAT, the Report of the Algonquin Land Claim Negotiating Committee (verbal) be received as information."

vi) Report of the Rideau Corridor Landscape Strategy (verbal) Councillor Bill Dobson a) Parks Canada Information Bulletin: First Public Workshops for the Rideau Corridor Landscape Character Assessment a Success Suggested Motion: "THAT, the Report of the Rideau Corridor Landscape Strategy (verbal) be received as information."

vii) ICSOP Committee Update Warden, John Gemmell/Chair, Councillor Richard Kidd Suggested Motion: "THAT, the ICSOP Committee Update (verbal) be received as information."

11. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS

12. NEW/OTHER BUSINESS

13. ADJOURNMENT

92-98

99-100

of 100

The Corporation of the Township of Bonnechere Valley

49 Bonnechere Street East Phone (613) 628-3101 ext. 226 P.O. Box 100 Fax (613) 628-1336 Eganville, Ontario K0J 1T0 e-mail [email protected] ________________________________ _______________________________ March 5, 2012 The following resolution was passed as the regular meeting of council held on February 21, 2012

12. 028 MOVED BY Bob Peltzer SECONDED BY Cairine Cybulski

WHEREAS the Province of Ontario in its wisdom passed the Green Energy Act removing the municipalities and by extension the public from consultation on energy projects within their community.

AND WHEREAS, people are finding these projects being constructed near their homes without regard to how the placement of those projects affect property values and the rightful enjoyment of their neighbours lands.

AND WHEREAS, small green energy projects are exempt from even the most basic measures to ensure that what one neighbor does has some regard for others.

BE IT resolved that the Municipal Council of the Township of Bonnechere Valley on behalf of their citizens who have lost any semblance of voice in the placement of energy projects, call upon the Province of Ontario to reinstate at least a modest level of local planning control over energy projects within our community. Carried Original Signed, Mayor Jennifer Murphy Yours truly

Marilyn Casselman, CMM1 Deputy Clerk

Agenda Item # 6i)

Resolution from the Township of Bonnechere Valley: Green Energy Act of 100

rotection Programs

ON M4V 1M2

programmes de protection es

Toronto (Ontario) M4V 1M2

From: rotection Programs Branch

OR IMPLEMENTATION & COMPLIANCE UNDER PART IV THE CLEAN

______________________________________________________________________

s, units, and associations that are interested in the next phase of the source protection

rogram.

escription of Outreach Sessions:

Ministry of the Environment

Source PBranch

14 Floor 40 St. Clair Ave. West

th

Ministère de l’Environnement

Direction des des sourc

14 étage 40, avenue St. Clair Ouest

Toronto

Mary Anne Covelli, Director, Source POntario Ministry of the Environment

Re: PREPARING F WATER ACT Date: February 17, 2012 ___________ Good Day, I am pleased to announce that the Ministry of the Environment will be offering a number of outreach sessions to implementing bodies that will be administering Part IV of the Clean Water Act, including municipalities, source protection authorities, source protection committee members, planning boardpublic healthp D

ntation, administration and compliance responsibilities related to art IV of the Clean Water Act.

urpose & Scope of Outreach Sessions:

We will be hosting a 3 hour webcast which will focus on providing participants with the necessary information related to the implemeP P

mpliance;

agement Official, Risk

zations that have begun to prepare for implementation and compliance.

ession Details:

The sessions for implementing bodies will provide:

An emphasis on timelines associated with implementation and co

A description of Part IV responsibilities for implementing bodies;

An overview of the roles and responsibilities of the Risk ManManagement Inspector, and the Person with Qualifications;

A description of administrative options for implementing bodies; and,

An overview from organi

S

12

Monday, April 2, 2012

We will be offering 3 sessions:

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Thursday, March 29, 20

Agenda Item # 6ii)

Ministry of Environment: Preparing for Implementation and Compliance Under Part IV The Clean Water Act of 100

Time: 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Location: The sessions will take place through a webcast, utilizing Webex. Please note, if internet apabilities are not available in your local area, please contact us in advance and we will work with you

r: Pamela Lamba, Source Protection Programs Branch, Ministry of the Environment

ctoward an alternate solution. Course Facilitato Registration: Please register for one of the following sessions: March 27, 2012 Register Here March 29, 2012 Register Here April 2, 2012 Register Here Registration for all the sessions will close on Tuesday, March 20th, 2012. You will receive a confirmation email and the link to the online session (webex) once you complete your registration. Please note: space is limited for these sessions, so we encourage more than one staff member from

you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact Pamela Lamba, with the he Environment – 416-212-8838 or [email protected]

the same organization to register as one participant and watch the online session in a boardroom together. IfMinistry of t .

ne Covelli

ary Anne Covelli, Director Source Protection Programs Branch

Sincerely, Original Copy Signed by Mary An M

14-075 2

Agenda Item # 6ii)

Ministry of Environment: Preparing for Implementation and Compliance Under Part IV The Clean Water Act of 100

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Box 599, 3889 Rideau Valley Drive Telephone 613-692-3571 Fax 613-692-0831 Manotick, ON K4M 1A5 1-800-267-3504

Corporation of the County of Lanark March 16, 2012 Attention: Clerk PO Box 37 Sunset Boulevard Perth, ON K7H 3E2 Re: SEEKING YOUR MUNICIPALITY’S INPUT ON ADDITIONAL DRAFT POLICIES

Third Pre-Consultation Notice under Ontario Regulation 287/07 Dear Clerk, In October 2011 we sent your municipality a pre-consultation package requesting input on our first batch of draft source protection policies. In December 2011 we sent your municipality a follow-up notice with several additional policies (pertaining to unlikely existing significant threats, road and waterway signs and removing the municipality as the implementer of the advanced sewer design policy). The purpose of this letter is to provide notification and seek input about three recent policy changes that are described below.

1. Stop-Gap Policies In finalizing the draft Source Protection Plan, it came to the attention of the Source Protection Committee that in some cases, waste disposal sites and sewage works may not be governed by a prescribed instrument (a Certificate of Approval or Environmental Compliance Approval issued by the Ministry of the Environment). Where these prescribed instruments are available, the Ministry of the Environment is responsible for managing the risks or preventing the future establishment of these activities through these prescribed instruments. Where these instruments are not available as a policy tool, “stop gap” policies must be included. These “stop gap” policies require that the risk to drinking water be managed through the establishment of a Risk Management Plan or the activity must be prohibited from being established in the future via prohibition under Section 57 of the Clean Water Act. Both of these types of policies are the responsibility of the municipally appointed Risk Management Official. These new policies are unlikely to translate into additional workload for the Risk Management Official since they address unlikely scenarios. The wording of the stop-gap policies is provided below. Note that the time frame to establish Risk Management Plans for existing activities was discussed at the February 16th municipal working group meeting and 3 years was agreed upon. Existing Waste Disposal Site (or Sewage Works) – Risk Management Plan An existing waste disposal site (or sewage works) that is not governed by a Prescribed Instrument (Certificate of Approval or Environmental Compliance Approval) is designated for the purpose of Section 58 of the Clean Water Act, requiring a Risk Management Plan in areas where it is a significant drinking water threat as described in Appendix B. Risk Management Plans for existing activities shall be established within 3 years from the date the Source Protection Plan takes effect. Future Waste Disposal Site (or Sewage Works) – Section 57 Prohibition Future waste disposal sites (or sewage works) that are not governed by a Prescribed Instrument (Environmental Compliance Approval) are designated as prohibited under Section 57 of the Clean Water Act in areas where they would be a significant drinking water threat as described in Appendix B.

Agenda Item # 6iii)

Drinking Water Source Protection: Seeking Your Municipality's Input on Additional Draft Policies of 100

of 3

2. Land Use Planning Policies

The Source Protection Committee was advised to add complementary land use planning policies where waste disposal sites and sewage works are prohibited in future through prescribed instruments issued by the MOE. Since planning approval is often the first step in establishing a land use, complementary land use planning policies would help inform proponents at the beginning of the development process. Adding complementary land use planning policies means that zoning bylaws must be amended to prohibit certain types of waste disposal sites and sewage works in the areas where they would be a significant threat to drinking water. Instead of adding new policies, wording (shown in red below) has been added to the existing policies that prohibit future waste disposal sites and sewage works. A policy has also been included to stipulate the time frame for Official Plan and zoning by-law conformity. Future Waste Disposal Site – Prescribed Instrument/Planning Act Decisions Future waste disposal sites are prohibited where they would be a significant drinking water threat as described in Appendix B. Accordingly, decisions to issue, otherwise create or amend Prescribed Instruments (Environmental Compliance Approvals under the Environmental Protection Act or the Ontario Water Resources Act) must conform with this policy. In addition, decisions made by planning authorities under the Planning Act must conform with this policy. Future Stormwater Management Facility In Wellhead Protection Area “A” or Intake Protection Zone Scored 10 – Prescribed Instrument/Planning Act Decisions Future stormwater management facilities that would be a significant drinking water threat as described in Appendix B are prohibited in the: • Wellhead Protection Area “A”; and • Intake Protection Zone with a vulnerability score of 10.

Accordingly, decisions to issue, otherwise create or amend Prescribed Instruments (Environmental Compliance Approvals) must conform with this policy. In addition, decisions made by planning authorities under the Planning Act must conform with this policy. Future “Other” Sewage Works – Prescribed Instrument/Planning Act Decisions Future sewage works (sewage treatment plant effluent discharges and bypass discharges, industrial effluent discharges, storage of sewage excluding storage associated with the sewer network and combined sewer discharges) are prohibited where they would be a significant drinking water threat as described in Appendix B. Accordingly, decisions to issue, otherwise create or amend Prescribed Instruments (Environmental Compliance Approvals under the Ontario Water Resources Act) must conform with this policy. In addition, decisions made by planning authorities under the Planning Act must conform with this policy. Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Conformity Where this Source Protection Plan specifies that Section 40 and 42 of the Clean Water Act apply (see Appendix A, List A), the municipality shall amend their Official Plan and Zoning By-Laws to conform with significant threat policies in this Source Protection Plan. Official Plans must be updated no later than the date of their next 5-year review required under Section 26 of the Planning Act and zoning by-laws must be updated within three years of the Official Plan amendments to bring them into conformity with the Official Plan.

3. Road and Waterway Signs The road and waterway sign policies were discussed at the February 16 municipal working group meeting as part of ongoing policy development/refinement. It was agreed that municipalities were the logical implementer for both municipal road and waterway signs but that the Source Protection Authority should assist the municipalities as described in the revised policy wording (below). Please note that the sign policies are not legally binding on municipalities and the waterways policy would only apply to municipalities that have navigable waterways in the vicinity of intake protection zones. Signs Along Primary Municipal Roads The municipality is strongly encouraged to purchase, install and maintain signs designed by the Province to identify the locations of Wellhead Protection Areas and Intake Protection Zones. These signs should be placed, at a minimum, where municipal arterial roads are located within the Wellhead Protection Areas and Intake

Agenda Item # 6iii)


of 3

Protection Zones with a vulnerability score of 8 or higher (appropriate sign locations to be determined by the municipality and Source Protection Authority). This policy should be initiated within two years of the Source Protection Plan taking effect. Signs Along Recreational Waterways The municipality is strongly encouraged to purchase, install and maintain signs designed by the Province to identify the locations of Intake Protection Zones. These signs should be placed along recreational waterways where awareness of the Intake Protection Zones should be raised. Source Protection Authorities will collaborate with municipalities, the MNR and Parks Canada to determine appropriate sign locations and secure any necessary approvals for the installation. This policy should be initiated within two years of the Source Protection Plan taking effect. Additional Information Our original pre-consultation letter dated October 12, 2011 contains the following information:

• Our local policy development process and consultation schedule • Maps showing where draft policies would apply in our region • Circumstances when draft policies would apply

Next Steps and Key Dates Please contact us by March 23rd if you have any concerns with the policies or wish to provide initial written comments. On March 29th the Draft Source Protection Plan that contains all of the policies will be posted for a 35 day public comment period. Your municipality will receive official notification of this posting and opportunities that are available to view and provide any additional comments or suggested changes to the Draft Source Protection Plan. All comments received during this period will be considered by the Source Protection Committee. In June, a revised version of the Source Protection Plan will be posted for a final 30 day public comment period prior to being submitted to the Ministry of the Environment for approval. It is anticipated that approval will be received in 2013 after which policy implementation will begin. Questions If your municipality would like to discuss any of the draft policies with our staff or if there is anything we can do to help you in your policy review, please contact:

Sommer Casgrain-Robertson 613-692-3571 or 1-800-267-3504 ext. 1147 [email protected]

Sincerely,

Janet Stavinga Sommer Casgrain-Robertson Chair Co-Project Manager Mississippi-Rideau Source Protection Committee Mississippi-Rideau Source Protection Region Cc. ● [email protected] ● [email protected]

Agenda Item # 6iii)


Agenda Item # 6iv)

Letter from Lanark County Youth Centre Coalition: Thank You of 100

Agenda Item # 6v)

Rideau Valley Conservation Foundation: Community Forest Working Group Nominated for Tri-Valley Conservation Award of 100

Agenda Item # 6vi)

Drinking Water Source Water Protection: Four Important Updates Regarding the Source Water Protection Program

of 100

1 of 5

THE COUNTY OF LANARK

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE April 4, 2012

Report #PD-10-2012 of the

Planning Approvals Administrator and

Facilities & Fleet Manager

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PROJECTS INFORMATION REPORT 1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION

“THAT: Report #PD-10-2012 Alternative Energy Projects Information Report of the Planning Approvals Administrator and Facilities & Fleet Manager for the period January 1, 2012 to March 29, 2012 be received as information.”

Agenda Item # 7i)

Report #PD-10-2012 Alternative Energy Projects Information Report of 100

2 of 5

2. PURPOSE

This report is to provide Council with an update on the Alternative Energy Projects received by the County of Lanark.

3. BACKGROUND

Ontario Regulation 359/09 Renewable Energy Approvals under Part V.0.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, section 18 requires that the person who proposes to engage in a renewable energy project that requires approval under the Act, consults with the local municipality and upper-tier municipality in which the project location is situated. The purpose of the consultation is to identify any issues and provide recommendations regarding such items as: infrastructure and servicing, road and road access, traffic management plans, municipal service connections (other than roads), landscaping design, emergency management procedures, easements or restrictive covenants, rehabilitation, permits (including building permits) significant natural features, endangered species, waterbodies, archaeological resources or heritage resources, etc. The regulations also require that the proponent hold at least two public meetings to present the proposal. On February 9, 2010 the government filed a regulation to remove local barriers to designated renewable energy installations (i.e. small-scale). The regulation will ensure that municipal by-laws and other local barriers do not create barriers to ground or wall mounted solar photovoltaic, solar thermal air and solar thermal water systems, and ground source heat pumps. Examples of changes brought forward in this regulation include: - zoning and site planning requirements, height restrictions and setbacks no longer apply for any of the designated technologies; - nuisance by-laws that restrict the installation of renewable energy projects for non-health and non-safety reasons no longer permitted; - Provincial acts and certain local requirements (e.g. property standards by-laws) related to health, safety, heritage and environmental concerns remain in effect. The government did however; ensure that by-laws, instruments and other restrictions relating to natural heritage and heritage features would continue to be in place. “Ontario Regulation 15/10 – Designations RE: Section 5 of the Act. Exception, prescribed by-laws etc. 3. By-laws, instruments and other restrictions that relate to the following classes of matters are prescribed for the purposes of clause 5 (4) (b) of the Act: 1. The prevention of injury to or the destruction of trees. 2. The protection of groundwater.

Agenda Item # 7i)


3 of 5

3. The designation and protection, including interim protection, of properties of cultural heritage value or interest, heritage conservation study areas and heritage conservation districts and the designation of properties of archaeological or historic significance pursuant to Parts II, III.1, IV, V and VI of the Ontario Heritage Act. 4. Any activity or matter that is the subject of a regulation made by a conservation authority pursuant to clauses 28 (1) (a), (b) and (c) of the Conservation Authorities Act. O. Reg. 15/10, s. 3.”

4. DISCUSSION The following projects have been received to date: 4.1 SF#6-2010 – Northland Power – Step 5 North Burgess Project – Pt Lot 13 Conc. 9, Township of North Burgess Municipal Consultation Form submitted to MOE. 4.2 SF#7-2010 – Saturn Power Inc. – File Closed Mississippi Mills Solar Park – Pt Lot 4 & 5 Conc. 12 Township of Pakenham Applicant has re-submitted the application under Canadian Solar, location has changed to Lot ¾ Conc. 11 Township of Pakenham. 4.3 SF#8-2010 – Effisolar Energy Corporation – Step 1 Beckwith Site – Pt Lot 11 and 12 Conc. 5 Township of Beckwith. Pre-consultation meetings held with Township & County 4.4 SF#9-2011 - Beckwith Solar Inc. – Step 2

Almonte Solar Project – Pt Lot 3 Conc. 8, Township of Ramsay. 1st round of public meetings held August 31st, 2011. 4.5 SF#10-2011 – Canadian Solar Solutions Inc. – Step 2 Mississippi Mills Solar Park – Pt Lot 3 & 4 Conc. 11, Township of Pakenham. 1st round of public meetings held Dec 15th, 2011. 2nd public meeting held March 19, 2012. Municipal Consultation Form Technical Report See #PD-12-2012

5. OTHER 5.1 Projects Approved The following projects have received final approval from the Ministry of the Environment: 5.1.1 Smiths Falls 5 – Pt Lot 10/11 Conc. 9, geographic Township of North Elmsley. 5.1.2 Smiths Falls 2 – Pt Lot 4 Conc. 10, geographic Township of North Elmsley.

Agenda Item # 7i)


4 of 5

5.2 Regulation Update None at this time 6. ANALYSIS AND OPTIONS

SF#9-2011 - The Planning Approvals Administrator and Facilities & Fleet Manager will review documents as they become available.

7. FINANCIAL IMPACT Alternative Energy facilities are assessed under the Assessment Act and therefore subject to property taxation. The rate is yet to be determined. The County of Lanark adopted By-law No. 2011-37 Tariff Fees which established a ‘review fee’ of $1,500 for the Municipal Consultation Form. 8. LOCAL MUNICIPAL IMPACT The local municipality will be required to submit a separate “Renewable Energy Approval Consultation Form”. 9. CONCLUSIONS This report is for information purposes.

10. ATTACHMENTS Appendix “A” – Regulatory Process

Agenda Item # 7i)


5 of 5

APPENDIX “A”

Regulatory Process

(full details of the process are available in the Green Energy Act, 2009)

Step 1 Proponents Project Concept Step 2 Studies & Consultation Municipal Consultation Public Consultation 2 public meetings req’d Technology specific requirements Letters from MNR / MTC and related assessments Step 3 Complete Submission to MOE Step 4 EBR Proposal Notice Step 5 Provincial Review Sept 6 EBR Decision Notice Approvals from MOE, REA Permits from MNR Permits from MTO Permits from CA Step 7 Construction

Agenda Item # 7i)



COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

April 4, 2012, 2012

Report #PD-11-2012 Planning Approvals Administrator

INFORMATION REPORT

1. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that:

Report #PD-11-2012 of the Planning Approvals Administrator – Information Report for the period March 1, 2012 to March 29, 2012 be received as information.

Agenda Item # 7ii)

Report #PD-11-2012 Planning Department Information Report of 100

2. PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to update Members of the Committee on the activities of the Planning Approvals Department.

3. BACKGROUND

3.1 Land Division Committee Next meeting is scheduled for April 2, 2012.

3.2. Subdivisions

3.2.1 Glen Isle Shores (File No. 09-T-84002) Mississippi Mills – STEP 9 – Approval of Draft Plan. No activity since 2000. Meeting held to review file Nov 1, 2010 – reports requested with no response. Extension Granted. Lapses June 22, 2013. (16 Units)

3.2.2 Nu Globe Developments Ltd (File No. 09-T-88006) Carleton Place – STEP 15 – Lapsed March 22, 2012 FILE CLOSED

3.2.3 Gary & Mary Greer (File No. 09-T-91011) Montague - STEP 9 – Approval of Draft Plan. No activity since 2000. (2 Comm)

3.2.5 734230 Ontario Ltd (File No. 09-T-05002) (Phase 1) Beckwith - STEP

14 – Partial Final Approval. No activity. Extension Approved - Lapses April 28, 2012 (72 Units)

3.2.6 Sadler Estates (File No. 09-T-07002) Mississippi Mills - STEP 11 – Monitor Progress. Extension Approved - Lapses February 2, 2014 (119 Units)

3.2.7 Rideau Bluffs (File No. 09-T-08001) Tay Valley – STEP 11- Monitor

Progress. Lapses September 25, 2012 (8 Units)

3.2.9 Lubbers Subdivision (File No. 09-T-08004) Mississippi Mills – STEP 11 – Monitor Progress

Lapses June 17, 2014 (5 Units)

3.2.10 Pagesus Subdivision (09-T-09001) – Carleton Place – STEP 1 - OP Conformity, Traffic Study, Services (412 units)

3.2.11 Wilson Subdivision (09-T-09003) – Drummond / North Elmsley – STEP 14 and STEP 15 – final approval of Phase 1, plan registered. STEP 11 Monitor Progress – for Phase 2. Lapses July 16, 2013 (47 units)

Agenda Item # 7ii)


3.2.12 Maggie’s Place Subdivision (09-T-09004) – Beckwith – STEP 11 –

Monitor progress. Major Red-Line Revisions approved. Lapses February 28, 2014 (101 units)

3.2.13 Rattray’s Subdivision (09-T-09006) Beckwith – STEP 11 – Monitor progress. (62 units) Lapses April 29, 2013

3.2.15 Riverfront Estates (09-T-10001) Mississippi Mills – STEP 11 – Monitor Progress. Phase 2 Plan Registered. Lapses September 24, 2013 (344 units)

3.2.14 The Meadows of Perth Subdivision (09-T-10002) Town of Perth Step 11 – Monitor Progress. (69 units) Lapses February 28, 2014

3.2.15 Carlgate High (09-T-10003) Town of Carleton Place

STEP 11– Monitor Progress. (94 units) Lapses September 24, 2014 OMB Appeal withdrawn

3.2.16 Tayside Estates (09-T-10004) Tay Valley Township

STEP 5 – Review Objections, STEP 7 - Evaluation , STEP 10 – Reline Plan submitted (25 units)

3.2.17 Smith (09-T-11001) Township of Beckwith STEP 7 - Evaluation – Review agency comments, obtain additional information, preliminary drafting of conditions. (12 units)

3.2.18 Adelaide (09-T-11002) Town of Mississippi Mills Public Meeting held February 21, 2012 STEP 5 – Review Objections and STEP 7 – Evaluation. (30 units)

3.3 Part Lot Control

None

3.4 Other None

4. DISCUSSION

Not applicable.

Agenda Item # 7ii)


5. ANALYSIS AND OPTIONS

Not applicable.

6. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS None.

7. LOCAL MUNICIPAL IMPACT None.

8. CONCLUSIONS This report is for information purposes.

9. ATTACHMENTS

Appendix “A” - Subdivision Procedures Flowchart.

Agenda Item # 7ii)


APPENDIX “A”

Subdivision Procedures Flowchart

Responsibility Local County STEP 1 Pre-submission OP Conformity Services Servicing Capacity STEP 2 Pre-consultation Receive application Receive Fees Review conformity STEP 3 Submission Receive formal application and fees Advise review team Deem complete STEP 4 Consultation Circulation list Notice of Application Notification of circulation Public Meeting Receive comments Prepare Status Letter STEP 5 Objections Review with Review Team Advise Review Team if objections resolved or not STEP 6 Application Withdrawn Receives letter Advices various parties Move to Step 15 STEP 7 Evaluation SRT reviews Prepares draft conditions Prepare technical reports STEP 8 Failure to make Decision Applicant if no decision within 180 days may be

appealed to OMB STEP 9 Refusal / Approval Review technical reports Consider recommendations Notice of Decision STEP 10 Change Conditions Receive request to amend Prepare Report Changes may be appealed STEP 11 Monitor Progress 3 years to complete May request extension May withdraw STEP 12 Clearance Receives copy Receives Clearance letters of letters Clear local Clear County conditions conditions STEP 13 Land Titles/Registry Applicants solicitor to review requirements with Land Titles / Registry Office STEP 14 Final Approval Review file to ensure

complete Endorse and Sign Plan Notification of final approval Forward plans to Land Registrar

STEP 15 Close File Prepare statement of deposit Requisition o/s Balance

Agenda Item # 7ii)


1 of 6



Report #T-7-2012

of the Tourism Manager

COUNTY OF LANARK TOURISM INFORMATION REPORT

1. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended:

THAT, the County of Lanark Tourism Information Report # T-7 of the Tourism Manager be received as information only.

Agenda Item # 7iii)

Report #T-07-2012 Lanark County Tourism Information Report of 100

2 of 6

2. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to update the Community Development Committee on 2012 tourism projects and programs to date.

3. BACKGROUND

The Tourism department plans and implements promotional activities in order to raise the profile of Lanark County as a tourism destination.

4. DISCUSSION Lanark County Tourism Marketing Outlook 2012 The Annual Marketing Plan for Lanark County Tourism is now available online at http://www.lanarkcountytourism.ca/files/2012/03/Marketing-Outlook-2012.pdf Consumer Shows Lanark County’s Tourism Department participated in three consumer shows this spring. Staff and volunteers attended: The Ottawa Boat and Sportsmen’s Show

Held at the new Capital Exhibition Centre on Uplands Drive from February 23 – 26, this show attracted approximately 24,000 attendees. Lanark County was featured as a destination for outdoor enthusiasts within a short drive from Ottawa. Lanark County Tourism’s new Outdoor Map was extremely well received. Other popular promotional material included the County’s online lake maps, trails and fishing information (available on www.LanarkCountyTourism.ca), the Canoe & Kayak Journeys and the Bird Watching journeys.

Volunteers from Rideau Mac Resort were integral to Lanark County’s success at this show.

The Ottawa Travel & Vacation Show

This show was held at the Ottawa Convention Centre from March 10 – 11, 2012 and welcomed 17,800 attendees.

Lanark County Tourism had a corner booth situated beside that of the Town of Carleton Place. Volunteers from Rideau Mac Resort again helped to make this show a success. The response to Lanark County’s presence at this show was outstanding.

Areas of common interest for this show were long weekend and day trips from Ottawa. Attendees were very interested in spas, maple syrup and sugar bushes, festivals and events, shopping, restaurants, museums, cottaging, the Purdon Conservation Area, camping and accommodation (B & B’s and Hotels). Information about Lanark County was eagerly received. Many attendees enquired about the previous Lanark County Highways and Byways tours.

Agenda Item # 7iii)


3 of 6

The Toronto Sportsmen’s Show Canada’s biggest outdoor show, held at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre from March 14 – 18th, was attended by over 122,000 consumers. This venue provides excellent exposure to Ontario’s outdoor enthusiasts. Tourism staff were approached by many people interested in spending summer vacations in the Lanark County area. Areas of common interest for this show were fishing, boating, our lake maps, camping, cottaging, canoeing and kayaking, bird watching and hunting.

Advertising Group Travel Planner

Advertising in the Group Travel Planner directory provides International Motor coach and Group Tour operators with contact information about Lanark County and a link to www.lanarkcountytourism.ca.

Ottawa Sun and Capital City News

As part of a Maple Syrup Feature appearing in the Capital City News on March 29 and the Ottawa Sun on March 30, Lanark County Tourism purchased a small ad that will alert readers to visit www.lanarkcoutytourism.ca for more information about visiting the Maple Syrup Capital of Ontario.

Editorial Coverage The following articles have been posted online at http://lanarkcountytourism.com/resources/ From the homepage, look for the “Resources” menu item in the footer. The Toronto Star

Patrick Brennan, a travel writer who visited Lanark County during a familiarization tour of the Ottawa and Rideau Canal in 2011, returned to the County last summer to meet with Vernon Wheeler of Wheeler’s Pancake House and Sugarbush. This resulted in a two-page feature in the travel section.

Horizon Travel Magazine

A full page colour article entitled, “Ontario’s Sweet Spot” features Wheeler’s and Fulton’s Pancake Houses.

Lanark County Living

This online blog featured a posting entitled “Lanark County offers its residents so much recreational variety” March 2012.

Marilyn Dennis Show CTV Morning Live Show

On March 12, Shirley Deugo and Sarah Freemark of Fulton's Pancake House and Sugar Bush were guests on the CTV Morning Live show. Two video segments have been posted as links on the tourism website. Look for the

Agenda Item # 7iii)


4 of 6

“Resources” menu item in the footer of the home page. http://www.lanarkcountytourism.ca/resources/

CTV Regional Contact

On Friday February 10, Heritage Court in Almonte was featured on Regional Contact and on CTV.ca. This online article and video segment has been posted as a link on the tourism website. Look for the “Resources” menu item in the footer of the home page. http://www.lanarkcountytourism.ca/resources/

Kingston this Week

“Producers Tap into Sweet Season” features Wheeler’s Pancake House and Sugar Camp. March 2012.

Lanark County Tourism Website Activity

As of March 19, visits to the Lanark County Tourism website in 2012 total 2,790. Over 71.52% of visits in March were people that have never visited the site before.

March March 1 - 3 March 4 - 10 March 11 - 17 March 18 - 19 Total Total Visits 118 326 299 43 786Absolute Unique Visits 97 265 256 40 658Total Page Views 468 894 874 157 2393New Visits 63.56% 70.86% 74.92% 76.74% 71.52%

Annual Total Visits 2012 Totals January 741February 1263March 786Grand Total 2790

Annual New Visits 2012 Totals January 64.90%February 69.52%March 71.52%

4.20506 0.350421667

Agenda Item # 7iii)


5 of 6

Social Media Update

As of March 27, 2012 there are currently 583 people who like Lanark County Tourism (LCT) on Facebook and 281 followers on Twitter. According to Facebook the people who like us come from the following countries: 553 Canada 1 South Korea15 USA 1 Ecuador 4 United Kingdom 1 Egypt 2 Turkey 1 Hong Kong 2 Australia 1 Japan 2 New Zealand 1 Germany 2 Mexico 1 Brazil 1 Indonesia 1 Taiwan 1 Cambodia 1 Italy 1 Kazakhstan 1 Denmark

Upcoming Meetings April 3 Tay Valley Tourism Update April 10 Carleton Place Tourism Team Meeting April 12 Recreational Geology Seminar

9:30 am to 2:30 pm at Code’s Mill Inn and Suites April 16 Tourism Association Board Meeting April 16 Mississippi Mills Tourism Update April 17 Carleton Place Tourism Update April 24 Lanark Highlands tourism Update April 25 Ontario’s Highlands Board Meeting April 26 Ontario’s Highlands Marketing Meeting May 1 Perth Tourism Update May 2- 5 Travel Media Conference May 15 Drummond/North Elmsley Tourism Update May 15 Montague Tourism Update


None. 6. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

None to report at this time. 7. LOCAL MUNICIPAL IMPACT

None to report at this time.

Agenda Item # 7iii)


6 of 6

8. CONCLUSIONS

None. 9. ATTACHMENTS

None.

Agenda Item # 7iii)


1 of 4



Report #T-8-2012

of the Tourism Manager

LANARK COUNTY TOURISM ASSOCIATION (LCTA) TOURISM INFORMATION REPORT

1. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended:

THAT, the Lanark County Tourism Association (LCTA) Report # T-8 of the Tourism Manager be received as information only.

Agenda Item # 7iv)

Report #T-08-2012 Lanark County Tourism Association (LCTA) Information Report

of 100

2 of 4

2. PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to update the Community Development Committee on tourism projects of the Lanark County Tourism Association.

3. BACKGROUND

The Lanark County Tourism Association (LCTA) works collaboratively with the County of Lanark Tourism Department to foster and promote sustainable tourism for the economic prosperity of our communities. The Lanark County Tourism Association is a membership based, not-for-profit, destination marketing organization. The LCTA operates with a volunteer board of directors. Comprised of industry representatives, LCTA works in partnership with the County of Lanark to maximize the Association’s impact in the marketplace.

4. DISCUSSION Annual General Meeting On March 27, 2012, the Lanark County Tourism Association held its Annual General Meeting at the Carleton Place Canoe Club from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Approximately 30 people attended the meeting and networking breakfast. Manager Nicole Whiting from Ontario’s Highlands Tourism Organization presented an overview of regional tourism activities. Kathy Marcelline of the Ontario Tourism Marketing Partnership Corporation presented upcoming province-wide opportunities. Highlights and successes of 2011 were presented by Tourism staff. The 2012-13 LCTA Board of Directors was acclaimed and will meet on April 16 at 2pm in Smiths Falls.

2012-13 LCTA Board of Directors:

1. Norma Bingley, Lanark Highlands Business & Tourism

2. Jill Campbell, Perth & District Chamber of Commerce

3. Jackie Kavanagh Carleton Place Chamber of Commerce

4. Kim Leach, Town of Smiths Falls

5. Scott McLellan, Mississippi Mills Economic Development Committee 6. Bob Mingie and Jennifer Solf, Township of Lanark Highlands 7. Michael Rikley-Lancaster, Lanark County Museums Network 8. Anne Shropshire, Lanark County Museums Network

9. Ray Thompson, Lanark County Maple Syrup Producers

Agenda Item # 7iv)


of 100

3 of 4

Two (2) representatives appointed by Lanark County Council

10. Val Wilkinson, Town of Mississippi Mills

11. Sharon Mousseau, Township of Beckwith Packaging Workshops The Ontario’s Highlands Tourism Organization and the Lanark County Tourism Association recently offered two tourism packaging workshops. Businesses in attendance during the March 22 session in Pakenham and March 23 session in Perth developed a total of 13 draft packages for development. Packages to be promoted and sold online through Ontario’s Highlands reservation system are to be submitted by April 30, 2012. Upcoming Events Community listings posted on www.LanarkCountyTourism.ca as of March 28, 2012 are as follows. Festival descriptions and event photos can be accessed using the online event calendar found on the home page. Please post your events using the easy online form. Look for the menu item entitled “Submit your Event”.

April 1 Campfire Tales & Lessons with Cliff Bennett

April 1 to 5 Easter Bunny Hunt – Heritage House Museum

April 1 to 20 Cultures of the World Exploration Exhibition – Heritage House Museum

April 1 to 27 The Gifts of the North Exhibit – Heritage House Museum

April 1 Caring Clowns Troupe – Fulton’s

April 1 Steel Magnolias at the Studio Theatre

April 6 to 7 Pakenham Home Show

April 6 to 9 Fulton’s Easter Celebrations

April 6 Wheelers Easter Weekend

April 7 1st Annual Easter Egg Hunt in Stewart Park

April 7 Easter Fun – County Fair Mall

April 7 to 9 Wheelers Easter Weekend

April 12, 19 Sage Age Theatre – Fulton’s

April 13 to 15 Spring Home and Fashion Show

April 13 to 29 La Cage Aux Folles – Myriad Centre, Perth

Agenda Item # 7iv)


of 100

4 of 4

April 19 8th Annual IODE Bridge Luncheon

April 20 to 22 Valley Elite AA Hockey Tournament

April 21 to 22 Lanark – Perth Gun, Hunting and Sportsman Show

April 21 Fulton’s Spa Day & Jewellery Show & Sale

April 21 to 28 Arbour Week

April 21 Angels and Demons

April 22 Smiths Falls Spring Fling Running Thing

April 23 to 28 Carleton Place BIA Pitch-In Community Clean Up

April 27 to 28 Art In The Attic

April 27 to 28 Noises Off! Mississippi MUDDS

April 28 Festival of the Maples

April 28 Empty Bowls


None to report.

6. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Financial statements are reviewed regularly by the LCTA Board of Directors.

7. LOCAL MUNICIPAL IMPACT

None to report. 8. CONCLUSIONS

None.

9. ATTACHMENTS

None.

Agenda Item # 7iv)


of 100

1 of 3



Report #PD-12-2012 of the

Planning Approvals Administrator and

Facilities & Fleet Manager

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PROJECT MISSISSIPPI SOLAR PARK

1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION

“THAT the Clerk for the County of Lanark complete the “Municipal Consultation Form” for Mississippi Solar Park, outlining the following comments and/or concerns: 1. That Canadian Solar / Saturn Power consult with the County of Lanark

Emergency Management Coordinator prior to development of the “Communications and Emergency Response Plan”.

2. That a Civic Address be obtained from the Town of Mississippi Mills. Canadian Solar / Saturn Power shall consult directly with the Town in this regard. And that this address be provided to the County Emergency Management Coordinator.

3. That the applicant shall satisfy all the requirements of the County of Lanark, financial and otherwise, that may be required under established by-laws for processing the Municipal Consultation Form for Alternative Energy Projects.”

AND THAT a copy of this “Municipal Consultation Form – Technical Report” be forwarded to the Town of Mississippi Mills for information purposes.”

Agenda Item # 8i)

Report #PD-12-2012 Alternative Energy Project - Mississippi Mills Planning Approvals Administrator, Mary Kirkham

of 100

2 of 3

2. PURPOSE

This report is to recommend submission of the Municipal Consultation Form for the Mississippi Mills Solar Park.

3. BACKGROUND

The proposed Solar Project was reviewed by the Review Team, consisting of Mary Kirkham, Planning Approvals Administrator, Jonathan Allen, Facilities and Fleet Manager, Brian Anderson, Advisory Services Coordinator, Mississippi Valley Conservation and Rick Hannah, Emergency Management Coordinator. A copy of the “technical review report” as prepared by the Review Team is attached.

4. DISCUSSION See Appendix (i) “Technical Review Report”. 5. ANALYSIS AND OPTIONS

5.1 Adopt recommendation as presented, supporting the proposal. 5.2 Submit Municipal Consultation Form, not supporting the proposal. 5.3 Defer the report, pending further information. Staff recommends that 5.1 be adopted.

6. FINANCIAL IMPACT Alternative Energy facilities are assessed under the Assessment Act and therefore subject to property taxation. The rate is yet to be determined. The County of Lanark adopted a Tariff Fees By-Law (#2011-37) which established a ‘review fee’ of $1,500 for the Municipal Consultation Form. 7. LOCAL MUNICIPAL IMPACT The local municipality will be required to submit a separate “Renewable Energy Approval Consultation Form”.

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

3 of 3

8. CONCLUSIONS The review team concludes that the proposal can be supported by the County of Lanark, provided the identified issues are addressed.

9. ATTACHMENTS i) Technical Report prepared by Review Team.

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

26/3/2012

Municipal Consultation Form Technical Report Alternative Energy Project – Mississippi Solar Park

Mary Kirkham – Planning Administrator

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

1

Municipal Consultation Form Technical Report Alternative Energy Project – Mississippi Solar Park

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide Council with recommendations for submission of the “Municipal Consultation Form” required Renewal Energy Approval (REA) process.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION Canadian Solar submitted a Draft Project Description Report as the first step to completing the Renewal Energy Approval (REA) for a solar generation facility located at Part Lot 3 and 4 Concession 11, geographic Township of Pakenham, now in the Town of Mississippi Mills on November 7, 2011.

Mississippi Solar Park

Site Location – Pt Lot 3 & 4 Conc. 11 Pakenham

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

2

Canadian Solar Solutions Inc., in partnership with Saturn Power Inc., is proposing to develop a 10-megawatt (MW) solar photovoltaic facility, on approximately 40-ha parcel of land (Soils rating Farmington CLI 6).

Canadian Solar Solutions Inc. is a Canadian based company from Guelph Ontario and has retained Dillon Consulting Ltd an Ontario-based environmental and engineering consulting company, to coordinate the completion of the Renewable Energy Approval (REA) process. Saturn Power Inc. will partner with Canadian Solar to develop the Park Project.

CONSULTATION Municipal consultation is mandatory for all renewable energy projects requiring an REA, except for small wind projects. The Ministry of the Environmental provides applicants with a form that outlines what needs to be addressed with municipal officials. The form requests municipal feedback on matters related to: - Municipal services and infrastructure (such as the proposed road access); - The rehabilitation of areas disturbed and/or municipal infrastructure damaged during construction; - Emergency management procedures / safety protocols related to the ongoing management of the facility.

Consultation with the public is also mandatory. At an early stage of project planning, the applicant must notify landowners within 120 metres of the proposed project location and place a notice in a local newspaper.

Applicants must also hold at least two (2) community consultation meetings at the beginning of the process, once the project concept is clear. The first community consultation meeting was held on December 15, 2011 at the Almonte Community Centre (Upper Hall), Almonte. The final public consultation meeting is required when the applicant has gathered all of the information needed to make an REA application. The final public meeting was held March 19th, 2012 at the Almonte Community Centre (Upper Hall), Almonte.

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

3

LEGISLATION

Ontario Regulation 359/09 Renewable Energy Approvals under Part V.0.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, section 18 requires that the person who proposes to engage in a renewable energy project that requires approval under the Act, consults with the local municipality and upper-tier municipality in which the project location is situated. “Ontario Regulation 15/10 – Designations RE: Section 5 of the Act. Exception, prescribed by-laws etc. 3. By-laws, instruments and other restrictions that relate to the following classes of matters are prescribed for the purposes of clause 5 (4) (b) of the Act: 1. The prevention of injury to or the destruction of trees. 2. The protection of groundwater. 3. The designation and protection, including interim protection, of properties of cultural heritage value or interest, heritage conservation study areas and heritage conservation districts and the designation of properties of archaeological or historic significance pursuant to Parts II, III.1, IV, V and VI of the Ontario Heritage Act. 4. Any activity or matter that is the subject of a regulation made by a conservation authority pursuant to clauses 28 (1) (a), (b) and (c) of the Conservation Authorities Act. O. Reg. 15/10, s. 3.” As required under the REA process, the applicant has provided the required documents for municipal review. These include: a) Project Description Executive Summary; b) Construction Plan Report Executive Summary; c) Design and Operations Report Executive Summary; d) Decommissioning Plan Report Executive Summary; e) Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessment Report; f) Natural Heritage Assessment Records Review Report: g) Natural Heritage Assessment Site Investigation Report; h) Natural Heritage Assessment Environmental Impact Study Report; i) Natural Heritage Assessment Evaluation of Significance Report; j) Water Assessment Report; h) Self-Assessment of Protected Properties, Archaeological & Heritage Resources; i) Noise Study Report Executive Summary; j) Proposed Groundwater Monitoring; and k) Geotechnical Investigation Report.

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

4

PROJECT SUMMARY

1. Project Description: The proposed project consists of a 10-MW Class 3 solar facility, constructed on privately owned land which will be leased by Canadian Solar.

2. Environmental Constraints: The site primarily consists of woodland and pasture used for the grazing of cattle. Haydon’s Creek flows along the easterly side of the lands but is not on the lands to be developed.

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

5

Potential environmental effects were identified as follows, potential erosion and sedimentation, temporary loss of agricultural lands, minor removal of tree species, noise emissions from invertors and transformers and mitigative measures identified.

3. Construction Plan: To commence in August 2012 (depending on REA Approval), with completion date of April 2013. A “ Communications and Emergency Response Plan “ should be developed prior to construction. Construction will include: 1. Erosion control, clearing, ground levelling, grading and drainage; 2. Construction of site entrance, power and communications; 3. Installation of security lighting and fencing; 4. Laydown / construction staging areas and temporary facilities; 5. Interior access roads; 6. Construction of foundations; 7. Installation of structural supports; 8. Installation of and solar PV modules, project will include 52,260 solar PV modules or 2,180 racks; 9. Construction or electrical collection system, wiring and components;

Example of typical solar module road.

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

6

10. Once major construction has been completed, the site will be re-seeded / re- vegetated with a low growing, native plant species in order to reduce soil erosion.

Proposed Site Layout

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

7

4. Natural Heritage: The applicant prepared four Natural Heritage Assessment reports. These dealt with a records review, a site investigation, an environmental impact and evaluation of significance. The EIS report demonstrates how negative environmental effects of the project will be mitigated and sets out a program for ongoing monitoring of the effectiveness of the mitigation measures. The natural features that were identified as having a possible environmental effect were: Woodland A, Amphibian Breeding Habitat ABH 2 and Open Country Breeding Bird Habitat OCBB 1.

A monitoring and contingency plan has been developed and submitted to Ministry of Natural Resources.

Woodland A

ABH 2

OCBB 1

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

8

5. Water Assessment: The report concluded that there were no applicable water bodies within the project location or within 120 metres of the site. Haydons Creek, a tributary of the Mississippi River is located in excess of 200 m east of the site.

6. Groundwater Monitoring: Three residences are located on 12th Concession S Pakenham and are within close proximity of the site. In order to be pro-active the applicant prepared a groundwater monitoring plan in order to assess and mitigate any potential groundwater impacts from the development. The plan outlines the process to be undertaken in the event that a groundwater complaint arises.

7. Archaeological Potential: The Stage 1 background study found that the subject property exhibited potential for recovery of archaeological resources of cultural heritage value. However the Stage 2 property assessment, did not result in the identification of archaeological resources.

8. Geotechnical Assessment: The purpose of this review was to provide an overview of subsurface conditions in the site area and to provide preliminary geotechnical foundation design recommendations for solar panel frames.

SUMMARY The County of Lanark is required to respond through the Municipal Consultation Form on how the alternative energy project would affect: - Municipal services and infrastructure (such as the proposed road access); - The rehabilitation of areas disturbed and/or municipal infrastructure damaged during construction; - Emergency management procedures / safety protocols related to the ongoing management of the facility. Identifying any issues and provides recommendations to address concerns.

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

9

The documents, reports and studies provided by the applicant were reviewed by staff and a site visit was undertaken, to determine if the proposal would have any effect on Municipal (County) services and infrastructure, including emergency services.

1. Public Works A field inspection was carried out on the property to determine the impacts on forested areas from a potential solar installation. The report of the County forester is as follows: “The forested area appears to cover approximately 1/3 of the total project area. Tree species include Eastern White Cedar, White Spruce, Poplar and other small hardwood species. The area appears to be shallow soils that were formally used for pasture and have overgrown or in some areas never cleared for agriculture. The shallow soils indicate the species present and the quality of trees. Other than firewood and some cedar and spruce logs there is not a great deal of forest product potential for this area. “ Access to the proposed solar installation is off a Township Road, therefore no application for entrance is required by the County.

2. By-laws Tree Cutting By-law – the cut plan for the proposed Solar Farm is not in contravention of the County of Lanark Tree Cutting By-law #81-34. Tariff of Fees By-law – an invoice will be forwarded to Hatch Ltd. in accordance with By-law No. 2011-02 – Processing Application Fee for Renewable Energy. To date fee has not been paid. Rural Addressing and Parcels Policy By-law – In accordance with By-law 2010-42, the applicant will be required to obtain a “Civic Address” for the property.

3. Rural Addressing A Civic Address will be required and installed at the entrance to the site prior to any works being undertaken, including road construction and land clearing.

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

10

4. Emergency Services A “Communication and Emergency Response Plan” was not provided.

CONCLUSION Based on the reports and studies filed with the application, Mississippi Mills Solar Park and site inspections, the Review Team recommends that the Clerk for the County of Lanark submit the “Municipal Consultation Form” with comments outlined below.

RECOMMENDATIONS THAT the Clerk for the County of Lanark complete the “Municipal Consultation Form” for Mississippi Mills Solar Park Solar Project, outlining the following comments and/or concerns:

1. That Canadian Solar / Saturn Power consult with the County of Lanark Emergency Management Coordinator prior to development of the “Communications and Emergency Response Plan”.

2. That a Civic Address be obtained from the Town of Mississippi Mills. Canadian Solar / Saturn Power shall consult directly with the Town in this regard. And that this address be provided to the County Emergency Management Coordinator.

3. The applicant shall satisfy all the requirements of the County of Lanark, financial and otherwise, that may be required under established by-laws for processing the Municipal Consultation Form for Alternative Energy Projects.

4. That a copy of this “Municipal Consultation Form – Technical Report” be forwarded the Town of Mississippi Mills for information purposes. ___________________________ Mary Kirkham AMCT CMO PMO CMM1 Planning Approvals Administrator

Agenda Item # 8i)


of 100

of 35

THE COUNTY OF LANARK Community Development

April 4th, 2012

Report #PW-24-2012 of the Director of Public Works

PROPOSED ONLINE PUBLIC INPUT:

LANARK COUNTY COMMUNITY FORESTS FIVE (5) YEAR OPERATING PLAN 2013 - 2017

1. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS

“THAT, i) The Community Development Committee recommends that County Council

approves the proposed public consultation process for the Draft Lanark County Community Forest Five (5) Year Operating Plan, 2013 - 2017, as described in Report #PW-24-2012.

ii) The Clerk sends Report #PW-24-2012 to all local municipal Clerks, for information.

Prepared By: Jonathan Allen, Operations Manager

Agenda Item # 8ii)

Report #PW-24-2012 Proposed Online Public Input: Community Forest Five Year Operating Plan of 100

of 35

2. PURPOSE

The purpose of this Report is to seek Council approval of the proposed public consultation process for the Draft Lanark County Community Forest Five (5) Year Operating Plan, 2013 - 2017.

3. BACKGROUND

The existing Lanark County Community Forest Five (5) Year Operating Plan, which was developed by the Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority, expires in 2012. During the past year, our Forest Management Advisors, in collaboration with the Community Forest Working Group, have developed a new Draft Operating Plan for the period 2013 - 2017. The Draft Plan is attached at Appendix “A”.

4. DISCUSSION

Public input on the Draft Lanark County Community Forest Operating Plan is needed so that the County moves forward with a Plan, which will ensure the continued enjoyment of our forest properties while minimizing the environmental impacts.


Three (3) options are open to seek public input on the Draft Management Plan: Option 1. Hold a Public Information Centre (PIC). Option 2. Use the County’s Website to provide an opportunity for public review. Option 3. Options 1 and 2. Since the Draft Operating Plan is not a lengthy and complex document, detailed review of the document, by interested members of the public, should lead to substantive comments, which can then be considered by the Forest Working Group. Therefore, the Forest Working Group recommends Option 2 and suggests that a 60 day public review period would be sufficient. A Notice informing the public of the opportunity to comment on the Draft Operating Plan would be published in local papers and posted on the County’s Website. For those members of the public without access to the Internet, hard copies of the Draft Plan would be available at the Public Works Building. A Summary of the comments received would be presented with the Second Draft of the Operating Plan at the August 1st, 2012, Meeting of the Community Development Committee.

6. FINANCIAL IMPACT

Advertising costs can be accommodated within the proposed 2012 Community Forests Budget.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

7. LOCAL MUNICIPAL IMPACT

None. 8. CONCLUSIONS

Allowing the public to access and comment on the Draft Community Forests Five (5) Year Operating Plan 2013 – 2017, via the County’s Website, should enable the preparation of the final Draft of the Lanark County Community Forest Operating Plan, for County Council consideration, in August, 2012.

9. ATTACHMENTS Appendix “A” - First Draft Community Forest Five (5) Year Operating Plan

2013 - 2017.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

APPENDIX “A”

Lanark County Community Forest

Forest Operating Plan

2013 - 2017

Approved By: Lanark County: (Community Forest Owner) Sharon Mousseau, Warden, Lanark County Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority: (Forest Manager) Paul Lehman General Manager Date: _____________________

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

LANARK COUNTY COMMUNITY FOREST FOREST OPERATING PLAN

Preparation

This 2013-2017 Forest Operating Plan has been prepared for Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority as part of a five year Memorandum of Understanding for forest management services with Lanark County by: Upper Canada Forestry Service, Martin Streit R.P.F. The forest resource inventory maps were prepared by: Dorothy Hamilton, R.P.F. This draft 2013-2017 Forest Operating Plan has been reviewed by the Community Forest Working Group and is recommended to the Community Development Committee for consideration and then for public review: Jonathan Allen. Facilities and Fleet Manager, County of Lanark Susan Freeman, Deputy Reeve, Tay Valley Peter McLaren, Mayor, Lanark Highlands Cliff Bennett, Member of the Mississippi and Rideau Valley Field Naturalists Andrew Kerr-Wilson, Private, Lanark Stewardship Council Todd Thompson, Forest Industry Brian Anderson, Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority, Forest Manager Linda Touzin, District Forester, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Jeff Ward, Stewardship Coordinator, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

LANARK COUNTY COMMUNITY FOREST FOREST OPERATING PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1.0 Introduction 7

1.1 Forest Certification and Operating Standards 7

1.2 Review of Accomplishments of Memorandum of Understanding

with Mississippi Valley Conservation 7

2.0 Report of Past Operations 10

2.1 Harvesting Summary 10

2.2 Financial Summary 11

2.3 Property Inspections and Inventory 12

3.0 Five Year Operating Plan 17

3.1 Long-Term Thinning and Harvest Schedules 17

3.1.1 Red Pine Plantations 18

3.1.2 Natural Forests 19

3.2 Five Year Harvest Operations 2013-2017 19

4.0 Forest Operations 22

4.1 Harvest Plans (Prescriptions) and Tree Marking 22

4.2 Natural Heritage and Cultural Values 22

4.3 Silviculture 23

4.4 Roads and Forest Operations 23

5.0 Administration 24

5.1 Property Inspections and Inventory 24

5.2 Annual Work Plans and Reporting 25

Appendix 1: Environmental Management System Documents

Appendix 2: Maps: Harvest Areas 2006-2012

Appendix 3: 20 Year Harvest Schedule: Red Pine

Appendix 4: 25 Year Harvest Schedule: Natural Forests

Appendix 5: Maps: Harvest Areas 2013-2017

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

LANARK COUNTY COMMUNITY FOREST: FOREST OPERATING PLAN 2013 - 2017

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Lanark County Community Forest consists of 40 properties comprising 4,583

hectares (11,319 acres) owned by the corporation of Lanark County. The

properties were purchased by Lanark County between the years of 1938 and 1987

and consist of tracts of natural forest, treed plantations established in previous

farmland, lakes and wetlands. Strategic direction for the Community Forest is

described in the Community Forests Vision Statement and Guiding Principles

(2010). The Community Forest is managed in accordance with this long-term

direction to accommodate a wide variety of values and uses.

The environmental management system (EMS) for the Community Forest is

contained in a series of documents which are listed in Appendix 1. The goal of the

EMS is to provide a framework for the sustainable management of the Community

Forest and the ongoing assessment of the health and ecological integrity of forest

ecosystems and natural heritage values. Five-Year Forest Operating Plans are

one of the planning documents defined in the EMS. The EMS is described in detail

in the 2011-2030 Forest Management Plan.

This 2013 – 2017 Forest Operating Plan reports on the past activities carried out by

the Forest Manager, Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority (MVC) during the

2008-2012 Forest Operating Plan and provides a detailed five-year schedule of

activities for the 2013-2017 period. To provide continuity, the report on past

operations includes previously documented information from the two- year pilot

project (2006-2007) with MVC.

In keeping with managing for the long-term sustainability of the Community Forest,

the Five-Year Forest Operating Plan provides a 20 year forecast of thinning and

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

harvesting activities. The Five-Year Forest Operating Plan helps to ensure that

forestry and property administration activities are carried out in an organized

fashion.

1.1 Forest Certification and Operating Standards

As a participant in the Eastern Ontario Model Forest (EOMF) Certification Program,

Lanark County follows a management system which is compliant with the

standards of the Forest Certification Council (FSC). The management system

contains minimum standards for forest owners regarding protection of natural

values, planning, implementation and monitoring of forest management activities,

public consultation, aboriginal peoples’ rights and qualifications of forest managers

and forest operators. Forest certification provides an independent verification of

forest sustainability for the citizens of Lanark County.

The system is described in the Eastern Ontario Model Forest Information Report #

51 v.2, Forest Certification Program Policy and Procedures Manual (2007).

Activities on the Community Forest are subject to the annual EOMF - FSC

independent audit.

1.2: Review of Accomplishments of Memorandum of Understanding with Mississippi Valley Conservation

In 2006 A two year pilot project was initiated between the County of Lanark and

Mississipppi Valley Conservation to provide forest management services. At the

end of the project the arrangement was extended for an additional five years

through a Memorandum of Understanding. The purpose of the Memorandum of

Understanding is:

1. To establish a long term partnership between the County of Lanark and

Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority to work together to sustainably

manage the Lanark County Community Forest for a variety of uses; and

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

2. To establish roles and opportunities for partners to contribute to the

ongoing management of the Community Forest.

Over the course of this partnership the Community Forest has been managed in a

sustainable and cost-effective manner consistent with the goals of the

Memorandum of Understanding.

MVC developed and implemented the environmental management system (EMS)

which supports Lanark County’s participation in FSC forest certification. As part of

the EMS, MVC developed and presented a 20 year Forest Management Plan that

was endorsed by Lanark County Council in 2011. The 2011-2030 Forest

Management Plan incorporated a new digitized inventory including maps and aerial

photos. This inventory is maintained by the Forest Manager as the basis for future

planning and inventory projects.

Other accomplishments include the development of a template for conducting pre-

harvest Life Science Studies on the Community Forest and the completion of three

such studies as well as applying and receiving grants through OMNR Species at

Risk (SAR) stewardship funds that resulted in SAR inventories on 900 hectares

(2230 acres) of Community Forest.

Revenues generated through ongoing forest management activities help fund a

variety of additional initiatives. Throughout this partnership MVC representatives

have attended meetings and provided professional expertise and advice to Lanark

County Council, Community Development Committee, Community Forest Working

Group, Lanark County Trails Corporation as well as providing a voice on the EOMF

Certification Working Group and the Eastern Ontario Community Forest Managers

Group.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

This partnership also brings the resources of the Conservation Authority to the

table including knowledge and expertise in forest health, forest conservation by-

laws, fisheries and wildlife management and information management capabilities.

These accomplishments compliment Lanark County’s vision of sustainability for its

Community Forest.

2.0 REPORT OF PAST OPERATIONS

2.1: Harvesting Summary Table 1 summarizes the timber sales that have occurred on the Lanark County

Community Forest from 2008-2012, and separately lists activities from the two year

MVC pilot project (2006-2007). Maps showing the harvested compartments are

included as Appendix 2. All activities are described in detail in the annual State of

the Forest reports produced by MVC.

Red pine markets remained solid throughout the five year reporting period,

providing a stable source of revenue for Lanark County. Red pine is utilized by two

Renfrew County sawmills: Laverne Heideman and Sons and Ben Hokum and Sons

Lumber Company. Many of the red pine plantations include a small volume of

white spruce and other species.

The first hardwood tender on the Community Forest (North Sherbrooke 1 - Hands

Property) was harvested by Gibbons Logging in the winter of 2009-2010. The trees

cut were primarily firewood, with a small amount of hardwood sawlogs. Prior to

tendering, Lanark County commissioned an ecological inventory of the property

which identified significant values: these values were protected by no-cut buffer

zones. A second hardwood tender at the Lavant Main Block was inventoried and

marked. It was initially tendered in the fall of 2011, but bid prices were deemed by

Lanark County to be too low to accept. Lanark County will re-issue this tender

once hardwood markets recover from their currently depressed state.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Lanark County is blessed to have a diversity of timber products to offer for sale

because lumber markets can be highly cyclical. Products which are not desirable

for a period of time can quickly become in vogue, and visa versa. Maintaining a

balance of hardwood and softwood timber sales is the best means Lanark County

has to stabilize its long-term revenues and to maintain local employment

opportunities.

Table 1: Summary of Harvest Tenders 2006-2012

Compartment Plantation Natural Forest YEAR Area

(Ha) Volume (GMT)

Area (Ha)

Sawlogs (fbm)

Fuelwood (Cords)

MVC Two Year Pilot Project (2006-2007) Darling 4-5 33.0 2010.0 2007 Five Year Operating Period (2008 – 2012) Darling 8-12 25.3 1912.0 2008 Lanark 1 16.5 1337.2 2009 Dalhousie 7 11.1 622.8 2009 N Sherbrooke 1 15.2 10,031 135 2010 Dalhousie 4 and 8 24.4 2011 Darling 1-2 and 3 * 23.7 2012 Lavant Main* 3.5 41.5 2012

Totals 137.5 56.7 * Tender marked but not harvested in current operating period 2.2 Financial Summary Table 2 summarizes the costs and revenues of the 2008 – 2012 operating period

and the two year 2006- 2007 MVC pilot project. Investments in forest management

will increase the long-term revenues for Lanark County through improved timber

quality and growth while providing current benefits to the local economy.

The first seven years of the MVC - Lanark County partnership have seen the

development of an Environmental Management System (EMS) for the Community

Forest including forest policies (Vision Statement and Guiding Principles,

Recreational Policy), forest resource inventory, 20 Year Forest Management Plan,

Forest Operating Plans and forest certification. A timber sale program has been

implemented, and intensive property inspections carried out to support compatible

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

uses while preventing abuses. Even with these investments, Lanark County has

received a net income after expenses of $ 54,498.91.

Timber revenues include the stumpage collected to date. Revenues for areas

marked or sold but not harvested will be reported in the 2013 – 2017 Forest

Operating Plan. Revenues substantially exceeded expenses primarily because the

strong demand for red pine timber resulted in excellent bid prices and despite the

fact that depressed hardwood markets have limited timber sales of natural forest

stands. Timber markets and competition for tenders are highly variable, and future

revenues may vary accordingly.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Table 2: Lanark County Community Forest Costs and Revenues

2006-2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008-2012 2006-2012EXPENSESCommunity Forest AdministrationForest Administration 9,128.97-$ 5,835.36-$ 883.96-$ 3,584.92-$ 4,374.44-$ 14,678.68-$ 23,807.65-$ Property Inspections 2,033.58-$ 4,382.96-$ 1,275.90-$ 322.42-$ 5,981.28-$ 8,014.86-$

Forest Management: PlanningForest Resource Inventory 1,938.90-$ 2,187.33-$ 3,165.00-$ 5,352.33-$ 7,291.23-$ Forest Management Plan 5,342.65-$ 3,094.04-$ 8,436.69-$ 8,436.69-$ Forest Operating Plan and Timber Cruising 9,220.99-$ 2,646.25-$ 759.07-$ 3,405.32-$ 12,626.31-$

Forest Management: OperationsTimber Sales 14,832.18-$ 2,356.27-$ 5,515.65-$ 8,291.85-$ 3,708.90-$ 19,872.67-$ 34,704.85-$ Life Science Studies 1,410.00-$ 3,128.97-$ 4,538.97-$ 4,538.97-$ Forest Certif ication 3,500.00-$ 3,500.00-$ 3,500.00-$ 3,500.00-$ 14,000.00-$ 14,000.00-$

Subtotal: Forest Management 55,605.98-$ 81,598.05-$ All Expenses 37,154.62-$ 16,630.84-$ 13,362.84-$ 27,335.81-$ 15,436.45-$ 3,500.00-$ 76,265.94-$ 113,420.56-$

REVENUESTimber SalesDarling 4/5 60,591.45$ -$ 60,591.45$ Darling 8-12 29,253.30$ 29,253.30$ 29,253.30$ Lanark 1 43,875.55$ 43,875.55$ 43,875.55$ Dalhousie 7 12,579.21$ 12,579.21$ 12,579.21$ North Sherbrooke 1 4,963.88$ 4,963.88$ 4,963.88$ Dalhousie 4 and 8 16,656.08$ 16,656.08$ 16,656.08$ Darling 1/2, 3 and 4/5 -$ -$ Lavant Main -$ -$

-$ -$ All Revenues 60,591.45$ 29,253.30$ 56,454.76$ 4,963.88$ 16,656.08$ -$ 107,328.02$ 167,919.47$

Balance (Net Revenue) 23,436.83$ 12,622.46$ 43,091.92$ 22,371.93-$ 1,219.63$ 3,500.00-$ 31,062.08$ 54,498.91$ Estimates or amounts to be confirmed at the end of 2012 Forest Management Revenue 51,722.04$ 86,321.42$

Ag

end

a Item # 8ii)

Report #P

W-24-2012 P

roposed Online P

ublic Input: Com

munity F

orest Five

Year O

perating Plan

of 100

of 35

On an annual basis, forest management revenues averaged $27,985 or 87% of the

target of $32,000 in the former Business Plan (2006), largely due to the challenges

experienced issuing tenders for harvest of natural forests. Forest management

planning and operations costs were $13,600 per year, or 49% of the former

Business Plan (2006) target of $27,700 including a forest certification overage of

$9,000. Net annual forest management income was $14,385, exceeding the

former Business Plan (2006) annual target of $4,300.

Going forward, the reduced costs for the Forest Manager to maintain the existing

plans and inventories will offer increased opportunities for investments in the

Community Forest such as tree planting, trail and property maintenance, or other

land acquisition. For example, the production of the 2008-2012 Operating Plan

required the development of a plan format and the inventory of the properties to

develop a 20 year harvest forecast. The 2013-2017 Operating Plan follows the

2008-2012 Operating Plan format, and the update of the 20 year harvest forecast

only required minor field verification. As a result the cost of the 2013-2017

Operating Plan is approximately 1/3 of the 2008-2012 Operating Plan.

2.3 Property Inspections and Inventory (2008-2012) The Forest Manager carries out regular property inspections to ensure that the

properties are in good condition for recreation users, to address uses that are

inconsistent with the policies of Lanark County, and to cooperate with neighbouring

landowners on issues of joint interest and concern. Property inspections were

carried out as per the schedule of annual property inspections in the 2008-2012

Operating Plan, as a result of a complaint or request, or as part of the ongoing

forest management and property administration activities.

Forest inventories are carried out for all harvest and thinning areas to develop

forest operation prescriptions for tree marking. Prior to harvesting of natural

forests Lanark County also commissions a life science inventory of natural heritage

features.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Table 3 summarizes the property inspections and inventories carried out since

2006. 35 of 40 properties have been inspected and/or inventoried one or more

times. The remaining 5 properties have limited access and are judged to be of low

risk for concerns.

Table 3: Property Inspections and Inventories 2006-2012

PROPERTY EXPLANATION Annual Property Inspections Darling 4/5 Bowes Property road and creek access

point Darling 6 Pioneer cemetery, gravel pit Lanark 1 Abandoned gravel pit Lanark 2 Baird Property recreation trail Lavant Main Dixon Lake road and access point,

gravel pit Montague 1 Frequent noise and garbage complaints Property Inspections 2006-2007 Dalhousie 1,2/3,4,7,8,9,10,11 Darling 1/2, 3,4/5,8-12,15 Lanark 1,3,4,5/6,7,8/9 Lavant Main North Burgess 1 North Sherbrooke 1 South Sherbrooke 2,4

Develop 20 Year Harvest Schedule General Inspections: No concerns

Inspections 2008 Darling 15 Lanark 3, 4 Lavant 29 South Sherbrooke 2

General Inspections: No concerns

Inspections 2009 Dalhousie 4 Darling 14 Lanark 3 Pakenham 1


Inspections 2010 Dalhousie 3, 4, 8 South Sherbrooke 3, 4


Inspections 2011 Dalhousie 5, 8 Darling 1-2, 3, 6, 14 Lavant Main, 28

Verify 20 Year Harvest Schedule General Inspections: No concerns

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Inspections 2012 Property Administration Dalhousie 12 Darling 11, 12 Lavant Main

Boundary agreements

Lavant 26-27, 29 Access issues Dalhousie 7, 8 Darling 3

Water Crossings

Dalhousie 1, 2/3, 4, 5, 7, 8 Darling 4,5 Lanark 1 North Sherbrooke 1 South Sherbrooke 3, 4

Sign installations

Dalhousie 5 Request for tree removal Dalhousie 2, 3 Tree cutting, road construction Violations Of Lanark County Policy S Sherbrooke 3 Tree theft Dalhousie 5 Unauthorized camping Dalhousie 7 Encroachment Montague 1, S Sherbrooke 1 Garbage Trail Location Dalhousie 9, 10, 11 Lanark 3, 4 Lavant Main Big Ben Trail Pakenham 1/2 South Sherbrooke 2

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Forest and Natural Heritage Inventories Lanark 1 Lavant Main North Sherbrooke 1

Pre-harvest Life Science Inventory

Dalhousie 9, 11 Darling 8-12 Lavant 29 South Sherbrooke 2

SAR Stewardship Grant Life Science Inventory

Dalhousie 4, 7, 8 Darling 1-2, 3, 4/5, 8-12 Lanark 1 Lavant Main North Sherbrooke 1

Forest Operations Prescriptions

3.0 FIVE YEAR OPERATING PLAN 3.1 Long-Term Thinning and Harvest Schedules Sustainable timber harvesting provides substantial economic benefits to the

community while allowing for cost-effective management of the Community Forest.

Investments in forest management will increase the long-term revenues for Lanark

County through improved timber quality and growth.

The former Business Plan (2006) estimated the sustainable harvest levels for red

pine plantations and natural forests at 50 hectares per year. This harvest level was

estimated to generate annual revenues of $32,000. To verify that harvest levels

which meet or exceed the annual revenue target can be sustained, twenty (20)

year schedules of red pine thinning and (25) year schedules of natural forest

harvesting have been prepared (appendices 2 and 3). The 20 and 25 year periods

correspond to the cutting cycles (time period between thinning or harvest

operations) of red pine and natural forest, respectively. They are based upon local

knowledge of the Community Forest and field inspections by the Forest Manager.

The schedules are reviewed and updated as required in each Five-year Forest

Operating Plan. A twenty year summary is provided in table 4.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Table 4: Summary of Harvest Area and Projected Revenue for 2013 - 2032 PERIOD RED PINE NATURAL FOREST ANNUAL

REVENUE AREA REVENUE AREA REVENUE 2013-2017 81.3 $102,090 122.5 $60,125 $32,443 2018-2022 74.8 $101,580 127.6 $63,080 $32,932 2023-2027 74.6 $136,710 130.8 $60,430 $39,428 2028-2032 81.1 $146,300 122.3 $62,750 $41,810

Markets for all kinds of forest products are highly cyclical. Sustaining a balance of

red pine and natural forest harvest enhances the stability of Lanark County

revenues. It also provides local economic opportunities for forest operators with

traditional harvesting equipment (chainsaw and skidder) and for those with

mechanized harvesters.

Harvest levels on the Community Forest are of extremely low intensity and impact.

Thinning and harvest cuts focus on the removal of poor quality and diseased trees,

and typically retain 60 to 70 % crown cover after harvest. The annual harvest

level of red pine and natural forests recommended in this 2013-2017

Operating Plan is 40.75 hectares. This represents 1.0% of the forested area

of 3981 hectares identified in the 2011-2030 Forest Management Plan.

3.1.1 Red Pine Plantations The table in Appendix 3 provides a twenty year schedule and estimate of revenue

for the thinning of red plantations, and also includes the operations carried out

from 2006 - 2012. Appendix 3 includes only the operable red pine plantations

which comprise 319.8 hectares, or 87% of the 366 hectares of red pine plantations

identified in the 2011-2030 Forest Management Plan. It does not include stands

which are inaccessible, or poorly stocked stands which cannot support a

commercial harvest operation

The plantations are divided into two ecosite types: stands growing on sandy loam

soils suited to long-term succession to maple and other hardwood tree species,

and stands growing on sand and gravel soils more suited to white pine forests.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Plantations have been allocated for thinning based on the following principles:

1) Ensure regular thinning to maintain stocking for optimal growth,

2) Commence timely first thinning in young plantations,

3) Minimum annual revenue of $20,000, and

4) Balanced harvest area to provide stable harvest opportunities for loggers,

and to facilitate tree marking workload and regeneration efforts.

The sustainable harvest level for the twenty year period from 2013 - 2032 is 16

hectares per year, which is less than the former Business Plan (2006) estimate.

However, annual stumpage revenues for this period are projected at $24,334

compared to $18,000 in the former Business Plan (2006). This reflects the fact that

red pine markets have been among the most stable and profitable in the last five

year period. This level of harvest will ensure that the plantations continue to grow

to produce high value products, and to be managed for long term succession to

either tolerant hardwood or white pine forests.

As can be seen in the projections for the second ten year period from 2023 - 2032,

revenues from plantation thinning will improve over time as the size and quality of

trees in well- managed plantations increases, resulting in more sawlog and pole

products.

3.1.2 Natural Forests Many of the natural forests of the Community Forest were high-graded for sawlogs

or pastured by livestock prior to purchase by Lanark County. Most would benefit

from an improvement cut to remove the poor quality trees and release the better

quality growing stock. The table in Appendix 4 provides a twenty-five (25) year

schedule for the future harvest of natural forests, and includes the operations

carried out in 2006-2012.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Appendix 4 is an inventory and 25 year harvest schedule of the currently operable

natural forest stands on the Community Forest which comprise 631.9 hectares.

This represents only 17.7 % of the 3564.5 hectares of natural forests identified in

the 2011-2030 Forest Management Plan. This discrepancy is explained by six

factors:

1) Forests that are of previous agricultural origin, and have a history of

disturbance including fuelwood and sawlog harvest, grazing and land

clearing,

2) Oak and pine forests growing on shallow rocky soils,

3) Cedar forests growing on low, wet soils or with a history of agricultural

use,

4) Forests with access restrictions due to swamps and rocky soils, and

5) Small forest stands that occur in isolated portions of the compartments.

6) Properties designated by Lanark County for primarily recreational use

Over time and with good forest management, the heavily disturbed post-agriculture

stands will recover, and the operable area of natural forests will increase.

However, substantial areas will continue to have limited use for forestry operations

even in the long-term.

Appendix 4 identifies the forest type, planned harvest method (selection,

shelterwood) and an estimate of timber revenue available from harvest operations.

Natural forests have been allocated for harvest based on the following principles:

1) Silviculture need, including recovery of stands after the ice storm,

2) One commercial stand improvement cut every five year period,

3) Minimum annual revenue of $10,000 for the twenty year period, and

4) Balanced harvest area to provide stable harvest opportunities for loggers,

and to facilitate tree marking workload and regeneration efforts.

Based on this analysis, the sustainable harvest level for the 25 year period from

2013-2038 is 25 hectares per year, which is equal to the former Business Plan

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

(2006) estimates. However, annual stumpage revenues for this period are

projected at $12,445 compared to $14,000 in the former Business Plan (2006).

The closure of hardwood pulp mills in Cornwall and Portage du Fort and depressed

hardwood sawlog markets for the last five years have influenced the future revenue

projections.

Projected returns from forest management in natural forests are similar thoughout

the 25 year period. This is primarily a reflection of the lack of stand improvement

cutting between 1996, when the OMNR ceased forest management activities and

2010, when Lanark County carried out its first harvest operation at the Hands

property

3.2 Five Year Harvest Operations 2013-2017 Table 5 identifies the compartments scheduled for harvest in this 2013-2017

Operating Plan. Maps of the harvest areas are included in Appendix 5. Harvest

block size varies from 2.4 to 19.3 hectares for red pine and from 8.1 to 70 hectares

for natural stands. The smaller pine blocks will be grouped with adjacent areas to

facilitate the tender process. The variety in block size provides opportunities for

logging contractors of different capacity.

Stands are not scheduled for individual years to permit flexibility to adapt to

markets and timber demand and to meet the revenue objectives of Lanark County.

Harvest areas will be scheduled in the Annual Work Plans to be submitted to the

Community Forest Working Group each year for approval. The 20 Year Harvest

Schedule provides flexibility to amend the Forest Operating Plan as required by

switching harvest areas of similar size and forest type as conditions warrant.

Operational harvest boundaries (eg trails, rocky or wet areas, creeks) will be

determined when the harvest operations are laid out on the ground.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Table 5: Summary of Harvest Operations 2013-2017 COMPARTMENT RED PINE (HA) NATURAL FOREST (HA)

Dalhousie 4 8.1Dalhousie 11 70Darling 4,5 2.4Darling 6 12.3Darling 14 14.4Lanark 2 19.3Lanark 3 16.4Lanark 4 13.2Lanark 5/6 5.3Lavant Main 30South Sherbrooke 3 12.4

Total 81.3 122.5

4.0 Forest Operations

4.1 Harvest Plans (Prescriptions) and Tree Marking

Consistent with the requirements of the EOMF Certification Program, the Forest

Manager ensures that all activities are carried out by fully trained and certified

individuals. For each harvest area, a site specific harvest plan is prepared by a

member of the Ontario Professional Foresters Association. This harvest plan

outlines the forest operations prescription, access requirements, harvest and

property boundaries and prescriptions for protecting natural and cultural heritage

values. Prior to harvest, trees to be cut are marked with paint by Ontario Ministry

of Natural Resources (OMNR) certified tree markers.

4.2 Natural Heritage and Cultural Values

Natural heritage and cultural values are an important part of the Community

Forest’s legacy and are given special consideration for protection when planning

and implementing forestry operations. Section 10 of the 2011-2030 Forest

Management Plan provides a detailed description of this process.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

4.3 Silviculture

The 2011-2030 Forest Management Plan for the Lanark County Community Forest

outlines options for silviculture treatments such as tree planting and tending,

thinning, stand improvement, and pruning. Most harvest operations on the

Community Forest result in abundant natural regeneration of hardwood species

such as sugar maple, beech, and basswood without any additional treatments.

However where forest operations prescriptions call for regeneration of red oak or

white pine, regeneration treatments may be required. When a prescription

identifies the need for these treatments, it will be included and budgeted for in the

Annual Work Plan and budget for the Community Forest. Table 6 lists the forest

areas that will require regeneration treatments in the coming five years.

Table 6: Schedule of Planned Regeneration Treatments 2013-2017 COMPARTMENT AREA CURRENT

FOREST PLANNED FOREST

TREATMENT

Lavant Main 3.5 Red Pine White Pine Tree Planting and tending

Lavant Main 30 Red Oak Red Oak Prescribed burn or Tree planting and

tending Total 33.5

4.4 Roads and Forest Operations

The Standard Operating Procedures in the EOMF Policy and Procedures Manual

and the 2011-2030 Forest Management Plan describe best management practices

for building and maintaining roads and water crossings, logging, skidding and

trucking operations. Harvest operations which are carried out according to these

guidelines result in minimal impacts to the forest ecosystem. All operations carried

out on the Community Forest are monitored regularly by the Forest Manager and

assessed according to the detailed standards provided

in the EOMF Manual.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

5.0 Administration

5.1 Property Inspections and Inventory (2013-2017)

Ongoing property inspections are required to ensure that the properties, roads and

sites of cultural and recreational significance are maintained in good condition, to

address uses of the properties that are inconsistent with the policies of Lanark

County, and to cooperate with neighbouring landowners on issues of joint interest.

The property inspection program is described in Section 11.0 of the 2011-2030

Forest Management Plan.

Table 7 lists six properties where annual inspections are currently required due to

the occurrence of sites of recreational or cultural significance, roads and gravel

pits, or past noise and garbage complaints.

Table 7: Annual Property Inspection Schedule

PROPERTY REASON Darling 4/5 Bowes Property road and creek access

point Darling 6 Pioneer cemetery, gravel pit Lanark 1 Abandoned gravel pit Lanark 2 Baird Property recreation trail Lavant Main Dixon Lake road and access point,

gravel pit Montague 1 Frequent noise and garbage complaints

Forest inventories are carried out for all harvest and thinning areas to develop

forest operations prescriptions. Prior to harvesting of natural forests Lanark County

also commissions a life science inventory of natural heritage features.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

5.2 Annual Work Plans and Reporting

The Forest Manager provides an Annual Work Plan and budget to Lanark County

for review by the Community Forest Working Group. This Annual Work Plan

outlines forestry operations such as boundary layout, tree marking, thinning and

harvesting, and provides a schedule of property inspections planned for the year.

The Annual Work Plan also identifies (where available) opportunities for

cooperation between MVC and the Lanark County Stewardship Council or Lanark

County Trails Corporation on Community Forest projects such as trail

enhancements/ maintenance, pruning or tending.

The Forest Manager submits an annual State of the Forest Report to Lanark

County to document the activities which have been carried out on the Community

Forest each year and report on financial results. These reports are summarized to

report on past operations in each Five-Year Operating Plan.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

APPENDICES


Forest Operating Plan (2013 - 2017)

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Appendix 1 Environmental Management System Documents


DOCUMENT CONTENTS SUMMARY KEY REFERENCES Strategic Documents

Community Forests. Vision Statement and Guiding Principles. (July 20, 2010)

Vision statement, guiding principles, and objectives for the Community Forest. Community Forest Working Group management structure

Lanark County. 2006. Business Plan for the Lanark County Community Forests 2006 to 2010.

Recreational Use Policy (Aug 25 2009)

Objectives, recommendations and permitted uses for recreation on the Community Forest

Community Forest Planning Documents Forest Management Plan (FMP) (January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2030)

Community Forest History and Description Forest Type Description and Silviculture Natural Heritage and Cultural Values Description Guidelines for Areas of Concern for Protection of Natural Heritage and Cultural Values Monitoring and Assessment Forest Resource Inventory Maps

OMNR 1998a: A Silvicultural Guide For the Tolerant Hardwood Forest in Ontario, OMNR 1998b: A Silvicultural Guide For the Great-Lakes-St. Lawrence Conifer Forest in Ontario OMNR 2000: A Silvicultural Guide To Managing Southern Ontario Forestss OMNR 2010: Forest Management Guide for Conserving Biodiversity at the Stand and Site Scales.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Five-Year Forest Operating Plan (January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017)

Report on Past Operations Assessment of levels of sustainable harvest, thinning and revenue Five year harvest and thinning allocations Operating Standards Property Inspections

Eastern Ontario Model Forest. 2007. Forest Certification Policies and Procedures Manual (Information Report 51 Version 2).

EOMF Forest Certification Program Policy and Procedures Manual (Information Report 51 Version 2 2007)

Policies for certified forest owners Specific qualification requirements for activities (eg certified tree markers) Standard operating procedures for forest operations including tree marking, road construction, water crossings, and harvesting.

Annual Work Plan and Budget

Proposed operations and budget to be carried out by the Forest Manager on the Community Forest Planning function under the Five Year Operating Plan

Annual State of the Forest Reports

Annual summary of operations completed by the Forest Manager on the Community Forest Reporting function under the Five Year Operating Plan

Site Specific Planning and Implementation Documents Harvest plans/ prescriptions

Forest and site specific silviculture prescription and map Directions for tree marking, logging and establishment of areas of concern.

OPFA 2010: Practice Bulletin 10: Minimum Content For Prescriptions For Partial Harvesting on Private Land in Ontario OMNR 2004: Ontario Tree Marking Guide. Version 1.1

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

Stumpage Sale Agreements

Requirements for wood measurement and payment, contractor qualifications and forest operating standards.

Forest Operations Inspection Reports

Documentation of assessments of harvest operations carried out by Forest Manager to ensure compliance with standards.

Community Forest Inspection Form

Documentation of findings and recommendations of property inspections carried out by Forest Manager.

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

APPENDIX 2

Maps: Harvest Areas 2006 - 2012

Agenda Item # 8ii)


of 35

APPENDIX 3

20 Year Harvest Schedule: Red Pine

Appendix 3: Lanark County Community Forest: Red Pine 20 Year Harvest ScheduleStand Descriptions and Harvest Allocations

Township Compartment Stands Pine Ecosite TH EcositeArea (Ha) Area (Ha) 2006-2007 2008-2012 2013-2017 2018-2022 2023-2027 2028-2032

Dalhousie** 1 2073, 2294 16.6 16.6Dalhousie** 2/3 2485 north, 2672 8 8Dalhousie 4 458, 464, 471, 478, 521, 553 16.7 16.7 16.7Dalhousie** 5 2279, 2590 17.8 17.8Dalhousie 7 1131, 1148, 1156, 1227 11.1 11.1 11.1Dalhousie 8 456, 503 7.7 7.7 7.7Dalhousie 9 5215, 5255 14.4 14.4Dalhousie 10 5049, 5109, 5114, 5133 3.0 3.0Darling 1,2 2421 7.4 7.4 7.4Darling 3 4194, 4320 11.5 11.5 11.5

3 4216 3.8 3.8 3.83 4202, 4290 2.9 2.9

Darling 4,5 4330, 4364 33 33 334,5 4265 2.4 2.4

Darling 6 3870 12.3 12.3Darling 8,9,10 3688, 3690, 3571, 3749 21.6 21.6 21.6Darling 11,12 3588 3.7 3.7 3.7Lanark 1 2176 16.5 16.5 16.5Lanark 2 3377 6.6 6.6

2 3291, 3328 12.7 12.7Lanark 3 2004 16.4 16.4Lanark 4 1662 13.2 13.2Lanark** 5/6 1783 5.3 5.3Lanark** 7 West 880 8.3 8.3

7 East 880 8.0Lanark 8/9 2510, 2572 15.0 15.0Lavant Main 4762 3.5 3.5 3.5N. Sherbrooke 1 1048, 1078, 1105 8.0 8.0S. Sherbrooke 3 277, 317, 337, 375 8.5 8.5

3 334 3.9 3.9Area estimated Total 131.6 188.2 58.3 78.2 81.3 74.8 74.6 81.1

Total Area 319.820 Year AAC by Ecosite 6.6 9.4 Annual Allocation (2006-2032) 16.6

Total AAC 16.0 Annual Allocation (2013-2032) 15.6Average 5 Year Alloc. 80.0

** Compartments with substantial ice storm impacts Pine Ecosite (Ha) 25.3 34.9 38.8 24.6 25.3 34.91st Thinnings (Ha) 25.3 35.5 12.4 17.4

Available Area (Ha)

Ag

end

a Item # 8ii)

Report #P

W-24-2012 P

roposed Online P

ublic Input: Com

munity F

orest Five

Year O

perating Plan

of 100

of 35

Appendix 3: Lanark County Community Forest: Red Pine 20 Year Harvest ScheduleAllocation and Revenue Summary

Township Compartment Stands2006-2007 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2008-2012 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2013-2017 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2018-2022 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2023-2027 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2028-2032 Rev/ Ha Revenue

Dalhousie** 1 2073, 2294 16.6 2,400.00$ 39,840.00$ Dalhousie** 2/3 2485 north, 2672 8 1,200.00$ 9,600.00$ Dalhousie 4 458, 464, 471, 478, 521, 553 16.7 600.00$ 10,020.00$ 16.7 1,200.00$ 20,040.00$

Dalhousie** 5 2279, 2590 17.8 1,500.00$ 26,700.00$ Dalhousie 7 1131, 1148, 1156, 1227 11.1 12,579.00$ 11.1 1,500.00$ 16,650.00$ Dalhousie 8 456, 503 7.7 450.00$ 3,465.00$ 7.7 1,200.00$ 9,240.00$ Dalhousie 9 5215, 5255 14.4 600.00$ 8,640.00$ Dalhousie 10 5049, 5109, 5114, 5133 3.0 600.00$ 1,800.00$

Darling 1,2 2421 7.4 1,500.00$ 11,100.00$ 7.4 1,500.00$ 11,100.00$ Darling 3 4194, 4320 11.5 1,000.00$ 11,500.00$ 11.5 1,500.00$ 17,250.00$

3 4216 3.8 1,000.00$ 3,800.00$ 3.8 1,800.00$ 6,840.00$ 3 4202, 4290 2.9 1,800.00$ 5,220.00$

Darling 4,5 4330, 4363 33.0 60,591.45$ 33 2,400.00$ 79,200.00$ 4,5 4265 2.4 1,500.00$ 3,600.00$

Darling 6 3870 12.3 1,200.00$ 14,760.00$ Darling 8,9,10 3688, 3690, 3571, 3749 21.6 29,253.30$ 21.6 1,500.00$ 32,400.00$ Darling 11,12 3588 3.7 3.7 1,500.00$ 5,550.00$ Lanark 1 2176 16.5 43,875.00$ 16.5 3,125.00$ 51,562.50$ Lanark 2 3377 6.6 1,200.00$ 7,920.00$

2 3291, 3328 12.7 1,200.00$ 15,240.00$ Lanark 3 2004 16.4 1,500.00$ 24,600.00$ Lanark 4 1662 13.2 1,500.00$ 19,800.00$

Lanark** 5/6 1783 5.3 1,500.00$ 7,950.00$ Lanark** 7 West 880 8.3 1,200.00$ 9,960.00$ Lanark** 7 East 880 Overwhelming Ice DamageLanark 8/9 2510, 2572 15.0 1,000.00$ 15,000.00$ Lavant Main 4762 3.5 1,500.00$ 5,250.00$ 3.5 2,400.00$ 8,400.00$

N. Sherbrooke 1 1048, 1078, 1105 8.0 1,200.00$ 9,600.00$ S. Sherbrooke 3 277, 317, 337, 375 8.5 600.00$ 5,100.00$ S. Sherbrooke 3 334 3.9 800.00$ 3,120.00$

Actual Revenue 58.3 89,844.75$ 78.2 101,589.00$ 81.3 102,090.00$ 74.8 101,580.00$ 74.6 136,710.00$ 81.1 146,302.50$ Annual Revenue 44,922.38$ 20,317.80$ 20,418.00$ 20,316.00$ 27,342.00$ 29,260.50$

1st Thinnings 25.3 35.5 12.4 17.4

** Compartments which had ice storm salvage operations Allocation Principles1) Silviculture need , including recovery of stands thinned after the ice storm2) Complete first thinnings by 20223) Meet business plan financial requirements4) Minimum annual revenue of $20,000 5) Balanced area to provide stable harvest opportunities for loggers, and to facilitate tree marking workload and regeneration efforts for pine ecosites

Available Area (Ha)

Ag

end

a Item # 8ii)

Report #P

W-24-2012 P

roposed Online P

ublic Input: Com

munity F

orest Five

Year O

perating Plan

of 100

of 35

APPENDIX 4

25 Year Harvest Schedule: Natural Forests Appendix 4: Lanark County Community Forest: Natural Stands 25 Year Harvest ScheduleStand Descriptions and Harvest Allocations

Township Compartment Stands Tolerant Hardwood Oak Cedar Planned HarvestArea (Ha)

Dalhousie 4 527, 624 8.1 SelectionDalhousie 9 5100, 5134, 51121, 5136, 5191 40.4 SelectionDalhousie 9 5176, 5266, 5253 north, 21 Selection

Dalhousie 115272, 5280, 5284, 5309, 5333, 5336,

5338, 5340, 5343 70 SelectionDarling 1/2 2245, 2390 13.9 Stand ImprovementDarling 6 3988, 4106 13.8 Stand ImprovementDarling 8,9,10 3676, 3803, 3806 18.6 SelectionDarling 11,12 3639, 3728, 3752, 3849, 3935 37.5 SelectionDarling 11,12 3476, 3536, 3587, 3704 27.7 SelectionDarling 14 4049, 4196 14.4 Stand ImprovementLanark 1 2196, 2282 11 Patch CutLavant Main 4845, 5019 16.1 SelectionLavant Main 4668, 4675, 4729, 4731, 4785 40 SelectionLavant Main 4687, 4710, 4725, 4727, 4754, 4783 30 US/ SelectionLavant Main 4801, 4871 41.0 Selection

Lavant 284648, 4669, 4694, 4714, 4724, 4745,

4769, 4798, 4835, 4877 158.0 Selection

Lavant 29 3250, 3284, 3309, 3357, 3423, 3431, 3443 40.5 US/ SelN. Sherbrooke 1 1136, 1182 15.2 SelectionN. Sherbrooke 1 1080 14.7 Selection

Area EstimatedTotal 550.4 70.5 11

Total Area 631.9

Annual Cut (25 Year Cutting Cycle) 25.3Average 5 Year Allocation 126.4

Ag

end

a Item # 8ii)

Report #P

W-24-2012 P

roposed Online P

ublic Input: Com

munity F

orest Five

Year O

perating Plan

of 100

of 35

Appendix 4: Lanark County Community Forest: Natural Stands 25 Year Harvest ScheduleAllocation and Revenue Summary

Township Compartment Stands2006-2007 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2008-2012 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2013-2017 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2018-2022 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2023-2027 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2028-2032 Rev/ Ha Revenue 2033-2038 Rev/ Ha Revenue

Dalhousie 4 527, 624 8.1 450.00$ 3,645.00$ Dalhousie 9 5100, 5134, 51121, 5136, 5191 40.4 500.00$ 20,200.00$ Dalhousie 9 5176, 5266, 5253 north, 21 600.00$ 12,600.00$

Dalhousie 115272, 5280, 5284, 5309, 5333, 5336,

5338, 5340, 5343 70 500.00$ 35,000.00$ Darling 1/2 2245, 2390 13.9 350.00$ 4,865.00$ Darling 6 3988, 4106 13.8 350.00$ 4,830.00$ Darling 8,9,10 3676, 3803, 3806 18.6 500.00$ 9,300.00$ Darling 11,12 3639, 3728, 3752, 3849, 3935 37.5 500.00$ 18,750.00$ Darling 11,12 3476, 3536, 3587, 3704 27.7 500.00$ 13,850.00$ Darling 14 4049, 4196 14.4 450.00$ 6,480.00$ Lanark 1 2196, 2282 11.0 400.00$ 4,400.00$ Lavant Main 4845, 5019 16.1 500.00$ 8,050.00$ Lavant Main 4668, 4675, 4729, 4731, 4785 40 450.00$ 18,000.00$ 40 600.00$ 24,000.00$ Lavant Main 4687, 4710, 4725, 4727, 4754, 4783 30 500.00$ 15,000.00$ Lavant Main 4801, 4871 41.0 600.00$ 24,600.00$

Lavant 284648, 4669, 4694, 4714, 4724, 4745,

4769, 4798, 4835, 4877 58 450.00$ 26,100.00$ 50.0 450.00$ 22,500.00$ 50 450.00$ 22,500.00$

Lavant 293250, 3284, 3309, 3357, 3423, 3431,

3443 40.5 500.00$ 20,250.00$ N. Sherbrooke 1 1136, 1182 15.2 4,963.88$ 15.2 500.00$ 7,600.00$ N. Sherbrooke 1 1080 14.7 450.00$ 6,615.00$

Total 15.2 4,963.88$ 40 18,000.00$ 122.5 60,125.00$ 127.6 63,080.00$ 130.8 60,430.00$ 122.3 62,750.00$ 128.7 64,750.00$ Annual Revenue 3,600.00$ 24.5 12,025.00$ 25.52 12,616.00$ 26.16 12,086.00$ 24.46 12,550.00$ 25.74 12,950.00$

Actual RevenueStand Improvement Annual 5 Year Allocation (2006-2038) 107.4

Annual 5 Year Allocation (2013-2038) 126.4

Allocation Principles1) Silviculture Need2) 120 Hectares/ 5 Years over a 25 year cut cycle3) 1 Commercial Stand Improvement Operation Every 5 Year Period4) Stable Annual Revenue (Fluctuation less than 20% from 1 5 year term to next)5) Balance maple and oak ecosites to facilitate long-term regeneration efforts

Available Area (Ha)

Ag

end

a Item # 8ii)

Report #P

W-24-2012 P

roposed Online P

ublic Input: Com

munity F

orest Five

Year O

perating Plan

of 100

of 35

APPENDIX 5

Maps: Harvest Areas 2013-2017

TO BE INSERTED

Agenda Item # 8ii)


LCMTC Minutes – March 19th, 2012 1 of 8

MINUTES

SECOND BOARD MEETING OF 2012 LANARK COUNTY MUNICIPAL TRAILS CORPORATION

The Board met on Monday, March 19th, 2012 at 8:00 a.m. at the Lanark County Public Works Building, 99 Christie Lake Road, Perth, Ontario.

Members Present: Paul Frigon, Public, Vice-President

Susan McLenaghan, Public Member Lorne Hudson, Public Member David Allcock, Public Member

Bonnie Schnittker, LGL District Health Unit Councillor Pat Dolan, County of Lanark Councillor Brian Stewart, County of Lanark Councillor Jerry Flynn, Municipal Representative (arrived at 8:11 a.m.)

Staff/Others Present: Erica Patterson, Council and Clerk Services Assistant Regrets: Les Humphreys, Public, President

Steve Allan, Secretary-Treasurer Councillor Shaun McLaughlin, Municipal Representative David Percival, Public Member LCMTC BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Chair: Paul Frigon, Public, Vice-President 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 8:02 a.m. A quorum was present. 2. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

None at this time.

Agenda Item # 10ii)

Report of the Lanark County Municipal Trails Corporation (LCMTC) (verbal) Councillor Pat Dolan

of 100


3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

MOTION #LCMTC-2012-016

MOVED BY: Susan McLenaghan SECONDED BY: Pat Dolan

“THAT, the minutes of the Lanark County Municipal Trails Corporation Board of Directors meeting held on February 13th, 2012 be approved as presented.” ADOPTED

4. ADDITIONS & APPROVAL OF AGENDA

ADDITIONS Under New/Other Business Recording of Volunteer Hours Update on Mississippi Valley Field Naturalists

Under Communications Influencing Public Policy: A Practical & Experiential Learning Opportunity

Workshops MOTION #LCMTC-2012-017

MOVED BY: Bonnie Schnittker SECONDED BY: Susan McLenaghan

“THAT, the agenda be adopted as amended.”

ADOPTED 5. DELEGATIONS & PRESENTATIONS

None

6. COMMUNICATIONS i) Perth &District Chamber of Commerce Volunteer Fair Day: Request for

Volunteers ii) Influencing Public Policy: A Practical & Experiential Learning Opportunity

Workshops – attached page 8

Agenda Item # 10ii)


of 100



MOVED BY: Brian Stewart SECONDED BY: Pat Dolan

“THAT, the communications for the March Lanark County Municipal Trails Corporation Board of Directors, be received as information only.” ADOPTED

7. REPORTS

i) Update: Community Forest Working Group Secretary-Treasurer, Steve Allan No Report

ii) Update: Tay River Pathway Secretary-Treasurer, Steve Allan No Report.

iii) Eastern Ontario Trails Alliance (EOTA) Report (verbal) Councillor Pat Dolan

P. Dolan informed the board that the County Representative for EOTA has changed to Councillor Richard Kidd and that he has remained at the alternate.

Jerry Flynn arrived at 8:11 a.m.


MOVED BY: Brian Stewart SECONDED BY: Pat Dolan

“THAT, the Eastern Ontario Trails Alliance (EOTA) Report (verbal) be received as information.”

ADOPTED iv) Big Ben Memorial Trail Update

Vice President, Paul Frigon

P. Frigon reported that the BBMT is still in the process of finding a parking lot/trailhead location. One piece of land that was being considered ended up being privately owned. S. Allan and P. Frigon are to meet with Ms. Errett to finalize a location.

Agenda Item # 10ii)


of 100


The BBMT is anticipating the opening of the trail within a 2 year timeframe. MOTION #LCMTC-2012-020

MOVED BY: Susan McLenaghan

SECONDED BY: David Allcock

“THAT, the Big Ben Memorial Trail Report (verbal) be received for information.”

ADOPTED

v) Baird Trail Extension Update Secretary-Treasurer, Steve Allan No Report.

vi) Pakenham Community Forest Mountain Bike Trail Secretary-Treasurer, Steve Allan No Report.

vii) Policy and Trail Development Sub-Committee Update Vice-President, Paul Frigon P. Frigon reported that the sub-committee continues to meet on a monthly basis. P. Frigon also reported that the development of a member’s handbook is in progress that will include the history of the board and all the current policies. A draft of the handbook will be circulated to the board prior to June with the anticipation of final approval by County Council in November. S. McLenaghan also stated that the handbook will be a “living document.” MOTION #LCMTC-2012-021

MOVED BY: Lorne Hudson

SECONDED BY: David Allcock

“THAT, the Policy and Trail Development Sub-Committee Update be received as information.”

ADOPTED

viii) Marketing and Fundraising Sub-Committee Update President, Les Humphreys No Report.

Agenda Item # 10ii)


of 100


ix) CP Rail Abandonment Update Secretary-Treasurer, Steve Allan No Report.

x) Trailhead Ontario Conference June 17-19, 2012

MOTION #LCMTC-2012-022 MOVED BY: Jerry Flynn

SECONDED BY: Pat Dolan “THAT, a member of the Lanark County Municipal Trails Corporation be authorized to attend the Trailhead Ontario Conference from June 17 to 19th, 2012 with up to $500 of travel, accommodation, meals and conference registration costs being paid from the LCMTC 2012 Budget.”

ADOPTED

11. NEW/OTHER BUSINESS i) Recording of Volunteer Hours

The board was reminded to complete the volunteer hour’s document, which helps with the charitable status and indicates to council the level of effort undertaken by the board volunteers. MOTION #LCMTC-2012-023

MOVED BY: Bonnie Schnittker

SECONDED BY: Susan McLenaghan

“THAT, the total LCMTC members’ volunteer hours becomes part of the annual report given at the annual general meeting.”

ADOPTED

ii) Update on Mississippi Valley Field Naturalists Vice-President, Paul Frigon P. Frigon provided the background of the Gunn Creek Trail. P. Frigon reported that the MVFN are seeking a letter from the board inviting them to provide a presentation on the potential development of the Gunn Creak Trail.

Agenda Item # 10ii)


of 100



MOVED BY: Pat Dolan SECONDED BY: Jerry Flynn

“THAT, the LCMTC develop an official letter head for future correspondence.”

ADOPTED


MOVED BY: Lorne Hudson

SECONDED BY: Susan McLenaghan

“THAT, Paul Frigon be authorized to forward a letter to the Mississippi Valley Field Naturalists inviting them to provide a presentation on the Gunn Creek Trail at a future LCMTC meeting; AND THAT documentation of the trail development processes accompany the invitation letter to Mississippi Valley Field Naturalists.”

ADOPTED A general discussion was held on the County’s Integrated Community Sustainable Official Plan.

12. NEXT MEETING

Proposed Next Meeting: Monday, April 16th, 2012 13. ADJOURNMENT

The Board adjourned at 9:21 a.m. on motion by L. Hudson and S. McLenaghan

Paul Frigon Public, Vice President

Agenda Item # 10ii)


of 100


COMMUNICATIONS

Agenda Item # 10ii)


of 100


Agenda Item # 10ii)


of 100

of 7

Mazinaw-Lanark Forest Local Citizens Committee (LCC) Meeting Minutes March 12, 2012 – White Lake Fish Culture Station

LCC members in attendance: Non LCC members in attendance: Tom Sheppard –Chair, Trappers, Snowmobilers Matt Mertins – MLFC Amp Snider – Forest Industry (loggers) Tom Richardson - MLFC Helen Forsey – General Public Ildiko Apavaloae - MNR Peter McLaren – Municipalities(Lanark) Kyla Standeven - MNR John McCance – Ontario Prospectors Craig Dodds - MNR Hans Van Rosen – Conservation Groups Powerpoint Presentations: 2012-2013 Annual Work Schedule (Matt Mertins) 2010-2011 Annual Report (Matt Mertins) FSC Certification: High Conservation Values (Tom Clark) FMP Amendemnt 004 (Matt Mertins) Prescribed Burn Norcan Lake West (Matt Mertins) Handouts: (none) Item Discussion Action Meeting Start (9:30) Review Agenda: Additions / Deletions

Review Agenda

Agenda accepted

Review of Past Minutes

Minutes accepted.

Action Items

24-01-11 #2: Tom will send out final copy of LCC report to members. CLOSED 24-01-11 #3: Gareth to follow up with Ken to get more specifics on Condition 34 and follow up with Tom. CLOSED 24-01-11 #4: Ildiko [Gareth] and Tom S. will present action plan when finalized. OPEN 24-01-11 #5: Gareth to look into Shabot Obaadjiwan values paper. CLOSED

Agenda Item # 10iv)

Report of the Mazinaw-Lanark Forest Management Committee (verbal) Councillor Peter McLaren

of 100

of 7

Presentation of 2012-2013 AWS (Matt Mertins) At LCC inspection stage before AWS can be approved.

MNR has reviewed AWS and Matt has resubmitted the AWS incorporating MNR comments. Expecting MNR approval middle to late March. Then 15 day inspection period begins for public. Operations can formally commence April 1st, 2012 but most harvest operations do not start until later in the year when the bush is a bit drier. Much more area has been included in the AWS then will be harvested on to give the operators flexibility due to market fluctuation and to include unfinished blocks from the previous AWS. Areas of renewal and maintenance are shown on the maps. The areas on the maps show the gross amount of area; not all area shown will necessarily be tended/planted/etc due to on the ground circumstances. Will be planting white pine, red pine and white spruce. MLFC plans to manual spread white pine seed that have been stored for a long time; want to use it before it looses viability. Helen concerned regarding chemical tending proposed for block 9058. Planned prescribed burn in block 9055 (south of Norcan Lake) to control ironwood for oak regeneration. One branch road (Burnt Lake) planned for construction.

03-12-12 #1: Ildiko to resend internet link to AWS to LCC members. 03-12-12 #2:: Helen requests an updated list of acronyms, specifically the forest units. 03-12-12 #3:: Matt to determine if the 55% for planting relates to whole plan. 03-12-12 #4:: Matt to forward email/information on chemical tending. 03-12-12 #5:: Discuss the difference between terms ‘non-routine’ and ‘routine’ road maintenance and whether the two definitions still need to be separated and defined in AWS. To be discussed during next AWS development. 03-12-12 #6::

Agenda Item # 10iv)


of 100

of 7

Matt to send out presentations to LCC in pdf format (pls not to Helen, she is on dial up – no large attachments).

Presentation of the 2010-2011 Annual Report (Matt Mertins)

Enhanced annual report covers activities 2006-2011. Report is to determine how consistent activities were with what was planned in the FMP. In general, actually harvest to planned is around 60%, from 1993 to 2011. Reduction in harvest is due to many factors such as: bypass areas, reduced markets, wind damage. Slight increase in average annual harvest over time. Natural regeneration is slightly decreasing while artificial regeneration is increasing. Mainly reflects an increase of on the ground efforts. The annual report compares the amount of wildlife habitat area through the plan, example: deer summer habitat has reduced by 11% because the forest has gotten older, deer winter habitat has increased by 3%. It is important to note that during this time the forest resource inventory was updated; that will affect these habitat area predictions. Significant events that happened during the FMP that effect implementation: microburst blowdown and economic slowdown. Achieved less clearcuts than planned, creates less young forest. Majority of non-compliance pertain to access road and water crossings; 29 minor non-compliance over FMP. Many can be corrected. SFL tries to correct these through operators training and by working closer with operators who seem to run into issue more than others. MNR issues work orders and fines. SFL is putting extra effort into increasing regeneration and silviculture success for even aged stands units. Frequency of forest disturbance is moving towards that planned in the FMP. Objectives achieved: 11/12 social and economic, 6/9 values dependent on forest cover, 2/3 for silviculture. Determination of sustainability was confirmed; most objectives met and where not met there is progress being made towards meeting those objectives.

LCC makes motion and acceptance of AWS and AR.

Agenda Item # 10iv)


of 100

of 7

FSC Certification: High Conservation Values (Tom Clark)

In order for SFL to achieve certification a high conservation values report is needed. This will be completed by Tom Clark. Full assessment audit is scheduled for the last half of September. Certification gives access to more markets locally and globally. HCV: biological, ecological, social or cultural value at a regional or global scale. HCV report describes how a forest manager addresses special values in the report. Conservation of Biodiversity: species at risk (already well protected in current FMP), endemics (native to here and only here), seasonal concentrations of a species (there are deer yards in plan), regionally significant species (e.g. beaver that creates habitat for other species), edge of range species (red spruce? hickory?), conservation areas (Algonquin to Adirondacks corridor, designated Conservation Reserves and Provincial Parks), other areas of concern for biodiversity. Large Landscape Forests: large scale natural forest landscape characterized by long-term species persistence (due to occur in southern Ontario due to fragmentation). Rare, Threatened or Endangered Ecosystems: naturally rare ecosystems (e.g. possible relict communities, muskeg in southern Ontario around Ardoch, wild rice along Mississippi R., floating bog in Weslemkoon Lk), declined ecosystems (old growth; Quinn Lake white pine, north west corner of Lavant Perch Lake pines, Effingham red spruce area of interest of federal government, Billow(sp?) Lake hardwoods), relict large landscape level forest (e.g. Madawaska Land Use Area, Enhanced Management Areas), diverse or unique forests (e.g. Areas of Natural and Scientific Areas (ANSIs)). Ecological Services: drinking water (large aquifer east of Almont by Burnt Lands ANSI, gravel ridges and

03-12-12 #7:: everyone to provide list of names of sites/places to check out, email or mail to Matt. 03-12-12 #8:: Matt to send HCV presentation to LCC members (pls not Helen, on dial up).

Agenda Item # 10iv)


of 100

of 7

eskers), drought and flood, erosion, fire barrier, agriculture/commercial fisheries. Local community needs/livelihoods (remote lake access zones: some have specific AOCs, typically remote lakes in enhanced management areas; traditional/current needs of First Nation communities (native values report published for this area), prospectors). Critical to local identity: critical to native culture (wild rice, wild leek, pictographs), critical to non-native culture (wild leek, hunting; remote character lake covered by AOC, are there archaeological sites related to non-native values?, former log slides and kilns, trail systems, old stone mill). Overlapping values that individually did not meet thresholds for elements in the other categories (special places).

Review of Media Notification Protocol (Craig Dodds)

Deferred to next meeting or will be completed by email.

FMP Amendment 004 (Matt Mertins)

Agenda Item # 10iv)


of 100

of 7

To allow for the addition of full tree logging in Silvicultural Ground Rules in shelterwoods. This method is not identified in FMP. This would be an exception to the guide so it needs a monitoring program. Concern lies with damage to residual trees using this method. The monitoring process would focus on damage to residual forest, i.e. monitor to ensure damage is not occurring or occurring to an acceptable minimum. Rationale for adding this method is to make biofibre extraction during harvest more efficient and economically feasible as well as supports efforts to manage shelterwood stands more intensively/effectively. Concern was expressed by LCC members regarding the nutrients being removed from the area and to the soil structure. SFL points out there is lots of material left (have investigated this and looked at sites after operations) on site and additional nutrients are provided through fallen leaves/needles, rain, etc, also harvest is on long term rotation. The full tree logging is already done in clearcut areas. There are no plans to do this full tree logging in areas that are not planned for planting/regeneration. Will add wording around sensitive sites/shallow soils to amendment. Shelterwood systems essentially retain 50% of trees.

Norcan Lake West Prescribed Burn (Matt Mertins)

Planned to be ~25 ha in size. SFL pays MNR Fire in Haliburton to carry out burn; SFL does not have the expertise. There will be a post burn report in the annual report. Purpose of burn is to regenerate oak and control its competition (ironwood), oak has ecological adapted to develop under burns, prescribed burns provide training for MNR Fire. There is an issue, pale-bellied frost lichen (endangered) is present in this block. Status of burn is uncertain until lichen’s extant can be confirmed.

New Business:

Agenda Item # 10iv)


of 100

of 7

Request for a presentation addressing future water issues. Possible presenter: Paul Egginton (Lanark Stewardship Council), Gary Neilson (MNR). District update: Gareth Davies is now the new Bancroft Minden forester, Ildiko is the new forester for Mazinaw Lanark, Linda Touzin is still in an acting role with region, Vince Ewing has taken an acting position with the region and Sam Itani, two new acting managers for the area teams (Peter Mabee and Jeff Schosser). Helen suggests that MNR make a serious effort to increase members of LCC and get full representation or change the quorum. SFL is continuing to investigate and trail methods for biofuel production. Right now the energy produced from biofuel doesn’t cover the cost of the operation. Distance is a big factor especially with rising cost of diesel. There are benefits silviculturally, etc for pursuing biofuel. John would like to bring attention to the Rideau Corridor Landscape strategy. The Rideau watershed does impact the forest. Final report should be out in December 2012. Efforts to get wild parsnip on noxious weed list.

Next Meeting: TBD, possibly in May.

Agenda Item # 10iv)


of 100

First Public Workshops for the

Rideau Corridor Landscape Character Assessment a Success!

A very big THANK YOU! to all who attended the first round of public consultation

workshops held March 6-8 along the Rideau Corridor. It is great to see the passion and enthusiasm people have for the Rideau and to gather invaluable feedback and information about places in the Rideau Corridor that are important to them. For those unable to attend the workshops, the presentation, maps, handouts and comment sheet are all available on the project website www.rcls-sacr.ca. The public is also encouraged to participate through other ways including: via social media, contributing to an online photographic library of the Rideau Corridor’s landscapes, and attending the next round of community workshops to be held in the summertime. Information about participating in these opportunities and about the project itself can be found on the web site www.rcls-sacr.ca.

Follow us on @RideauCLS.

The Rideau Canal is a National Historic Site, Canadian Heritage River, and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. As part of the 2007 World Heritage Site designation, the World Heritage Committee recommended that the Rideau Canal’s visual protection be strengthened outside of the established buffer zone to ensure the visual values of the setting are protected alongside environmental values. As part of its commitment to the Rideau Corridor Landscape Strategy, Parks Canada is facilitating a Landscape Character Assessment to identify key features and values of the Rideau Corridor in order to support more effective planning and management of the Rideau Corridor’s landscape into the future. For further information on the Landscape Character Assessment project, please contact: Rideau Canal, Parks Canada [email protected] 613-283-5170 For further information on the Rideau Corridor Landscape Strategy, please contact: Doug Struthers Chair, Rideau Corridor Landscape Strategy [email protected] 613-269-4791

Agenda Item # 10vi)

Report of the Rideau Corridor Landscape Strategy (verbal) Councillor Bill Dobson

of 100

Les consultations publiques sur l’évaluation du caractère du paysage du corridor Rideau remportent un franc succès!

Un très grand MERCI! à toutes les personnes qui ont participé aux premières

consultations publiques tenues du 6 au 8 mars le long du corridor Rideau. Il est encourageant de constater la passion et l’enthousiasme des gens pour le canal Rideau, et ces rencontres nous ont permis de recueillir leurs impressions de même que des renseignements sur les endroits qui leur tiennent à cœur dans le corridor Rideau. Les personnes qui n’ont pas pu assister aux ateliers peuvent accéder à la présentation, aux cartes, au matériel distribué et à la fiche de commentaires sur le site Web du projet au www.rcls-sacr.ca. Le public est invité à participer d’autres façons, notamment par les réseaux sociaux, en contribuant à une photothèque en ligne des paysages du corridor Rideau et en assistant aux prochaines consultations publiques, qui auront lieu cet été. Vous trouverez des renseignements sur ces séances et sur le projet en général sur le site Web suivant : www.rcls-sacr.ca.

Suivez-nous sur @SACRideau

Le canal Rideau est un lieu historique national, une rivière du patrimoine canadien et un site du patrimoine mondial de l’UNESCO. Dans le cadre de la désignation en 2007 de site du patrimoine mondial, le comité du patrimoine mondial a recommandé que la protection visuelle du canal Rideau soit renforcée au-delà de la zone tampon établie afin d'assurer la protection des éléments visuels tout en y préservant l’environnement. Dans le cadre de son engagement à la Stratégie d’aménagement du corridor Rideau, Parcs Canada encadre une évaluation de caractère visuel du paysage visant à identifier les principales caractéristiques et les éléments de valeur du corridor Rideau, cela dans le but de soutenir une gestion et une planification plus efficaces du paysage du corridor Rideau dans le futur. Pour de plus amples renseignements sur le projet d’évaluation du caractère du paysage, veuillez contacter : Canal-Rideau, Parcs Canada [email protected] 613-283-5170 Pour de plus amples informations sur la stratégie d’aménagement du corridor Rideau, veuillez contacter : Doug Struthers Président, stratégie d’aménagement du corridor Rideau [email protected] 613-269-4791

Agenda Item # 10vi)

Report of the Rideau Corridor Landscape Strategy (verbal) Councillor Bill Dobson

of 100