View - The Municipality of Lambton Shores

THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF LAMBTON SHORES 

Regular Meeting of Council 

Meeting Number: 02-2013 

Date of Meeting: Monday, January 14, 2013 

Time: 

Place of Meeting: 

06:30 p.m. 

Village Complex, Thedford 

AGENDA 

Pages 

1. Call to Order 

2. Declaration of Pecuniary or Conflict of Interest 

3. Confidential Business - Open Council will adjourn for the Closed 

Session at 6:30 p.m. (Doors will reopen at 6:45 p.m.) 

3.1 Closed Session Minutes - December 3, 2012 

3.2 Closed Session - December 11, 2012 

3.3 Closed Session Minutes - December 17, 2012 

3.4 Correspondence from Eugene Burgin - Re: Request to Purchase 

Land (Authorization to Close - Section 239 (2) c of the Municipal 

Act) 

4. Consent Agenda 

4.1 Correspondence from the Honourable Michael Chan, Minister of 

Citizenship and Immigration - Re: Nominations for the Ontario 

Medal for Young Volunteers 

4.2 Correspondence from Roger Howard, Rice Development 

Corporation - Re: Appreciation for Planner 

4.3 2012 Highlights of the Lambton Shores Nature Trails 

Accomplishments 

4.4 Highlights - December 13, 2012 of the St. Clair Region 

Conservation Authority Meeting 

4.5 CL Report No. 04-2013 - Re: Applications to be heard by the 

Committee of Adjustment on January 24, 2013 

1 - 1 

2 - 2 

3 - 3 

4 - 4 

5 - 6 

5. Confirmation of Minutes from Previous Meetings 

5.1 Regular Council Meeting - December 11, 2012 7 - 9

5.2 Special Council Meeting - December 14, 2012 10 - 13 

5.3 Regular Council Meeting - December 17, 2012 14 - 31 

6. Delegations, Public Meetings & Presentations 

6.1 7:00 p.m. - Public Meeting on Proposed Water and Wastewater 

Rates By-law (See TR Report No. 05-2013) 

6.2 7:10 p.m. - Public Meeting for a Zone Amendment Applicaiton ZO- 

10/2012 being a General Amendment for Location and Size of 

Accessory Buildings within the Municipality of Lambton Shores 

(See PL Report No. 01-2013) 

6.3 7:30 p.m. - Public Meeting for a Zone Amendment Applicaiton ZO- 

12/2012 for Bruce Hiscott - 9983 Northville Crescent (See PL 

Report No. 03-2013) 

6.4 7:40 p.m. - Public Meeting for a Zoning By-law Amendment 

Application ZO-12/2012 for Michael and Jenna Beernink - 9 Water 

Street, Arkona (See PL Report No. 02-2013) 

6.5 7:50 p.m. - Bob Sharen - Re: Public Conduct @ Meetings 

6.6 8:00 p.m. - Wayne Edlington - Re: Questions Regarding the 

Dismissal of John Byrne and the Proposed New Direction of 

Council 

6.7 8:10 p.m. - Rob Taggert - Re: Review of Grand Bend Harbour 

Water Depth and Dredging Requirments and Hazards to Marine 

Navigation 

6.8 8:20 p.m. - Sharon Weitzel, Lambton Shores Community 

Association - Re: Concerns & Updates on Short Term Rental 

Committee Issues (See CL Report No. 03-2013) 

32 - 33 

34 - 35 

7. Correspondence & Petitions 

Correspondence - Receive and File 

7.1 Laura M. McKeen, Lawyer with CohenHighley - Re: Kevin & 

Wayne Misselbrook - 11 and 13 Woodward Ave., Grand Bend 

(The Brookside Cottages) 

36 - 42 

Correspondence - For Council Direction 

7.2 Sara Milne - Re: Cut to Transportation Subsidies by Lambton 

Elderly Outreach 

7.3 Susan Mills, Manager of the Grand Bend & Area Chamber of 

Commerce - Re: Concerns Regarding Parking, Pedestrian Safety 

and Traffic Congestion in Grand Bend 

7.4 Dennis Dunkley, 1st Officer - Canadian Motorcycle Cruisers - Re: 

Request to the Municipality for Sponsorship 

43 - 43 

44 - 45 

46 - 47

8. Consideration of Committee Minutes and Staff Reports 

Planning 

8.1 PL Report No. 01-2013 - Re: Zoning By-law Amendment 

Application ZO-10/2012 - General Amendment for Location and 

Soze of Accessory Buildings for the Municipality of Lambton 

Shores 


Application ZO-12/2012 for Michael and Jenna Beernink - 9 Water 

Street Arkona 


Application ZO-11/2012 for Bruce Hiscott - 9983 Northville 

Crescent 

8.4 PL Report No. 04-2013 - Re: Suncor Energy Cedar Point Wind 

Power Project & Nextera Energy Canada Jericho Wind Power 

Project Municipal Consultation Form & Municipal Consultation 

Package 

48 - 52 

53 - 57 

58 - 69 

70 - 70 

Community Services 

8.5 D.C.S. Report No. 01-2013 - Re: Communities in Bloom Update 71 - 91 

8.6 D.C.S. Report No. 04-2013 - Re: Former Military Camp Water 

Servicing Agreement 

8.7 D.C.S. Report No. 05-2013 - Re: Harbour Depth Maintenance 

Prgram Review 

8.8 D.C.S. Report No. 07-2013 - Re: Project Update: Grand Bend 

Sewage Treatment Facility (Status of Part II Orders and BCF 

Scope Change Application) 

92 - 99 

100 - 125 

126 - 127 

Finance & Administration 

8.9 TR Report No. 02-2013 - Re: Signing Authority 128 - 129 

8.10 TR Report No. 03-2013 - Re: Annual By-laws 130 - 134 

8.11 TR Report No. 04-2013 - Re: 2012 Supplemental Tax Billings & 

Write Offs 

8.12 TR Report No. 05-2013 - Re: Water and Wastewater Rates 2013 

and 2014 

8.13 TR Report No. 06-2013 - Re: Annual Audit Reporting 

Requirements 

135 - 137 

138 - 141 

142 - 145 

8.14 TR Report No. 07-2013 - Re: 2013 Wages for Non-Union Staff 146 - 152 

8.15 TR Report No. 08-2013 - Re: Interim C.A.O. 153 - 155

8.16 CL Report No. 01-2013 - Re: Accountabilty & Transparency - 

Update on the 2012 Freedom of Information Requests & Reqeust 

for Information from the Ombudsman 

8.17 CL Report No. 02-2013 - Re: Good Neighbour Award - Wendy 

Hoy & Judy Watt 

8.18 CL Report No. 03-2013 - Re: Short Term Rental Issue - Grand 

Bend 

156 - 166 

167 - 181 

182 - 197 

9. By-laws & Resolutions 

9.1 By-law 01-2013 - Re: Provide for an Interim Tax Levy & to Provide 

for the Payment of Taxes & to Provide for Penalty & Interest 

Charges (See TR Report No. 03-2013) 

9.2 By-law 02-2013 - Re: Authorize the Borrowing of Money to Meet 

Current Expenditures of Council (See TR Report No. 03-2013) 

9.3 By-law 03-2013 - Re: Appoint Signing Authorities (See TR Report 

No. 02-2013) 

9.4 By-law 04-2013 - Re: Authorize Agreement with the Department 

of National Defence, Canada (See D.C.S. Report no. 04-2013) 

9.5 By-law 06-2013 - Re: Establish Water & Wastewater Usage & 

Consumption Rates for 2013 & 2014 (See TR Report No. 05- 

2013) 

9.6 By-law 07-2013 - Zone Amendment - Beernink (See PL Report 

No. 02-2013) 

9.7 By-law 08-2013 - Re: Zone Amendment for Lambton Shores (See 

PL Report No. 01-2013) 

9.8 By-law 09-2013 - Re: Confirming Resolutions to Date 198 - 198 

10. Accounts 

There were no Municipal accounts for Council to review. 

11. Notice of Motion 

11.1 Notice of Motion from Councillor Bonesteel - Re: Charitable 

Donation Boxes throughout the Municipality 

199 - 199 

12. New Business 

An opportunity for an emergent issue to be discussed by Council. 

13. Councillor Reports 

An opportunity for Members of Council to make a report.

14. Opportunity for the Public to Seek Clarification 

Please Note: As per By-law 37-2012, Section 15, Subsection 13 - 

Questions must pertain to items on the agenda, and be for the 

purpose of clarification only, and not for the purpose of making 

statements. 

15. Adjourn

From: Roger Howard [mailto:roger@ricedevelopment.ca] 

Sent: December-19-12 3:23 PM 

To: Patti Richardson 

Subject: RE: 

Thanks Patti. We just need to sell some houses!! Hoping to start a spec home shortly. 

And thank you for all your help over the year. It really does make a difference working with someone who 

looks for ways to make things happen rather than ways to say no. I know I speak for Dave as well when I 

say we really appreciate the opportunity to work with you and the relationship we have… 

Have a great Christmas as well and best wishes for 2013. 

Roger 

Roger Howard 

RICE DEVELOPMENT CORP. 

17 Dean Street 

Brampton, Ontario 

L6W 1M7 

(p) 905-796-3630, ext. 236 

(f) 905-796-6360 

(c) 416-434-2803 

From: Patti Richardson [mailto:prichardson@lambtonshores.ca] 

Sent: December-19-12 3:02 PM 

To: roger@ricedevelopment.ca 

Subject: 

HI Roger 

Was out in your subdivision looks fantastic Good Work. 

Have a great Christmas 

Patti 

2

2012 Lambton Shores Nature Trails (LSNT) Accomplishments 

- LSNT-Landowner Round-Table Partnership Meeting at the Legacy Centre in Thedford 

- Trail upgrades, mapping, blazing & trailhead sign installations 

(‘L’ Lake, Ausable River Cut CA, Lambton County Heritage Forest) 

- Building Partnerships (ABCA, SCRCA, three local farmers, LS Council, CIB & PFCPC, 

Lake Smith Conservationists, Libro, Individual Volunteers & Supporters) 

- Preparation of LSNT Protocol Guidelines 

- Fundraising & Donations (‘Stepping into Spring Fundraiser Dance’, Municipality Grant, 

Lake Smith Conservationists Donation, Trin’s Fashions of Forest Donation, PFCPC Sign 

Donation. Libro ‘Share the Future’ Donations & Donations by Private Individuals) 

- ‘Hike with the Mayor & Councilors’ on the Ausable Hidden Valley Trail (44 participants) 

- LSNT Logo Design & Nature Trail Video by Harald Rosenfeld of Port Franks 

- Forest Trail System proposal & fact-finding hike of Exeter’s McNaughton-Morison Trail 

- Construction of first log-supported boardwalk in Ipperwash Dunes & Swales Forest 

- Public Outreach (LSNT workdays, guided nature trail hikes, CIB support activities 

towards Home Hardware Community Involvement Award, ‘Open Doors’ participation, 

Forest Fashion Show, attendance at Forest Skatepark & Trail Public Meeting, Alvinston 

Trail Planning Meeting, presentation to Forest Probus Club, Forest Home & Garden Show 

display, presentation at North Lambton Health Clinic Seniors’ Dinner 

- Publicity - Newspaper Articles in Lakeshore Advance & Forest Standard 

- Promotion of LSNT activities in LS Weekly Email Update, in Ausable Port Franks 

Optimist Club Newsletter, in Living & Playing in LS Quarterly, on posters 

- LSNT became a Community Committee of Council 

- Launching of LSNT website www.lsntblazers,com and LSNT link on Lambton County 

Regional Trail Committee website 

- Dune grass planting in Ausable River Cut CA & purchase of two(2) benches for this location 

- Publishing of 2012 LSNT Pamphlet 

- Preparation of LSNT Brochure Insert for LS 2013 Leisure Guide 

- GPS documentation of all ATV & other trails in Ipperwash Dunes & Swales Forest with 

expert SCRCA support 

- Installation by LS Community Services of roadside ‘Nature Trail’ signs at upgraded trails 

and two(2) LSNT benches at PF Community Centre trail head before year-end 

2013 Lambton Shores Nature Trails (LSNT) Plans 

1. Nature trail development in Ipperwash Dunes & Swales Forest and ongoing nature trail 

upkeep throughout Lambton Shores & Vicinity 

2. Wheelchair-accessible 8 x 12 Lookout Platform with 900’ crushed limestone access path 

3. Fund Applications (Combined $150,000Trillium Fund for LS Organizations, LS Grant, 

Mountain Equipment Co-op Fund. Lake Smith Conservationists Support, Family Donations) 

4. LSNT Signature Events (Spring Dance & Fall Hike with Mayor & Councilors) 

5. LSNT Brochure 

6. Youth Outreach (Public Schools, Church Groups, Hockey & Soccer Clubs, Scouts, … 

7. Ongoing promotion/planning of Port Franks Mud Creek Pedestrian Bridge – Klondyke 

Trail - Forest Railway Track Trail - Port Franks-Pinery Bikeway 

3

St. Clair Region Conservation Authority Meeting 

Highlights – December 13, 2012 

In our continuing efforts to keep our municipalities informed of our progress on the conservation front, 

we have compiled a list of highlights from the SCRCA board meeting held in December. For details, 

please refer to the entire meeting package which can be found at 

www.scrca.on.ca/MeetingPackages.htm 

Conservation Areas: Renovations and upgrades continued on washroom buildings and visitor centres. 

In addition, a large amount of trial work was undertaken including the replacement of sections of 

boardwalk at the Coldstream CA, construction of a pedestrian bridge at Warwick CA (still needs to be 

installed), and new signage along trails at Strathroy CA. A number of downed trees as a result of 

Hurricane Sandy were removed to clear trials at the Lambton County Heritage Forest. 

Watershed Conditions: The month of November has continued the trend of lower than average 

precipitation with less than 50% of the anticipated rainfall reported throughout the watershed. Lake 

levels continue to be well below normal. Predictions for Lake Huron indicate we could be heading for 

record low levels. 

Fish Habitat Review: Based on requests from our member municipalities, the Conservation Authority 

provides fish habitat review for drainage works. To date in 2012, we have/are reviewing 276 

applications. This is up significantly from last year when a total of 184 applications were reviewed. Mr. 

Bilton indicated that the inter‐agency Drainage Act & Section 28 Regulations Team (DART) will be 

holding a training session on the new Drainage Act and Conservation Authorities Act Protocol for drain 

maintenance and repair activities in Florence on January 14. 

Healthy Lake Huron Program: A cover crop workshop was held on November 8. Anne Verhallen, 

OMAFRA Soil Management Specialist was the speaker. From the meeting, 3 farmers indicated they were 

interested in participating in OMAFRA trial plots next year and one farmer was interested in pursuing a 

grant for improvements to a manure storage facility. 

Funding Applications: The biology department has been very busy seeking grant opportunities to help 

support our wide ranging program to create habitat, protect species at risk and to promote sound 

conservation practices. Currently, we have 25 active applications. We have applied for $1,230,000 worth 

of grants. To date we have received $541,000 as a result of these applications and there is still $664,000 

pending a decision from the funders. 

MNR Approval of Final CA Regulation Amendments: The board approved amendments to the SCRCA 

Regulation 171/06 “Development, Interference with Wetlands & Alterations to Shorelines & 

Watercourses”. The purpose of the amendments was to streamline the permitting process undertaken 

through 36 individual regulations. The amendments enabled delegation and extending validity of 

permits. 

For more information contact: 

Brian McDougall, General Manger 

519 245‐3710 ext. 236, bmcdougall@scrca.on.ca 

4

THE MUNICIPALITY OF LAMBTON SHORES 

CL Report No. 04-2013 Wednesday, January 9, 2013 

TO: 

FROM: 

Mayor Weber and Members of Council 

Carol McKenzie, Clerk 

RE: Applications to be heard by the Committee of Adjustment on January 24, 

2013 

RECOMMENDATION: 

For information only. 

The Committee of Adjustment will meet on Thursday, January 24, 2013 to hear the 

following applications: 

David Gilcrest Architect, Agent for Christ Anglican Church 

Application A-01/2013 

– Minor Variance 

The Applicant is requesting approval of a minor variance from the provisions of Zoning 

By-law 1 of 2003 as they relate to lands known as 20 Main St., South, to permit the 

expansion of the existing parking area which will: 

a) have a west side yard setback of 0 metres whereas the By-law requires 3 

metres; 

b) have a north side yard setback of 1.5 metres whereas the By-law requires 3 

metres; 

c) have an east side yeard setback of 1.5 metres whereas the By-law requires 3 

metres. 

The Applicant is proposing to construct a wooden fence on the west side and a natural 

buffer on the north side. 

The Applicant is also requesting a variance from Section 3.29.8a) of Zoning By-law 1 of 

2003 to allow a parking area to not be bound by curbs, whereas the By-law requires that 

a parking area be bound by curbs and be surface treated with concrete or asphalt. 

Steve Seddon, Agent for Tanya Krantz – Minor Variance Application A-02/2013 

Mr. Seddon, on behalf of the Applicant, is requesting approval of a minor variance from 

the provisions of Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 as they relate to lands known as 15 Elmwood 

Ave., to permit: 

a) a front yard setback of 2.25 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 

setback of 6 metres; 

b) side yard setbacks of 0.85 metres & 1.43 metres, whereas the By-law requires 

1.2 metres and 3 metres. 

c) a rear yard setback of 1.89 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 

5

setback of 6 metres. 

d) An unenclosed deck to be located 0.97 metres from the front lot line whereas the 

By-law would allow an unenclosed deck to project to within 4 metres from the 

front lot line. 

If you have any questions or would like more information on the applications, please 

contact Jackie Mason at the Forest Office. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Carol McKenzie 

Clerk 

Report prepared by Jackie Mason, D/Secretary of the Committee of Adjustment 

6


Date of Meeting: December 11, 2012 

Regular Council Meeting 

Members Present: Mayor Bill Weber 

Deputy Mayor Elizabeth Davis-Dagg 

Councillor Doug Bonesteel 

Councillor Lorie Scott 

Councillor Martin Underwood 

Councillor Doug Cook 

Councillor John Russell 

Staff Present: 

Acting C.A.O. / Treasurer Janet Ferguson 

Clerk Carol McKenzie 

Director of Community Services Brent Kittmer 

Administrative Assistant Roberta Brandon 

1. CALL TO ORDER 

Mayor Weber called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. 

2. DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY OR CONFLICT OF INTEREST 

The Mayor asked members of Council to declare any pecuniary or conflict of interest 

that they may have with the business itemized on the agenda and none were declared. 

3. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS 

The confidential business was re-scheduled to the end of the meeting to accommodate 

the delegations. 

4. CONSENT AGENDA 

There were no items listed for the consent agenda. 

5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS 

There were no minutes from previous meetings for Council to review. 

6. DELEGATIONS, PUBLIC MEETINGS & PRESENTATIONS 

6.1 Nancy Vidler & Karen Alexander – Re: Phragmites Management Plan 

Nancy Vidler and Karen Alexander appeared before Council on behalf of the Lambton 

Shores Phragmites Community Group to outline details on a Phragmites Management 

Plan. 

7

Minutes of the December 11, 2012 Council Meeting 

Ms. Vidler provided a progress report to date on the accomplishments of the Phragmites 

Group such as identifying phragmites in Grand Bend and assisting in coordinating 

restoration work, working with the Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority in 

completing a grant application to the Great Lakes Guardian Community Fund and other 

grant applications and meeting with local MPPs and MPs to educate and promote 

Phragmites management, to name a few. 

Ms. Vidler further updated Council on proposed new projects such as ongoing 

education and support to communities west of Port Franks, creating partnerships with 

St. Clair Region Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Natural Resources and 

developing a “pilot” training workshop for municipal employees with the Ontario 

Phragmites Working Group. 

Issues such as mapping, communication, illegal and environmentally destructive 

activities and legal and ineffective activities were also outlined by Ms. Vidler along with 

a proposed solution and recommendation to combat the ongoing phragmites problem in 

Lambton Shores. 

Karen Alexander further provided information to Council on the Lake Huron Centre for 

Coastal Conservation and its priorities, those being water quality, coastal processes, 

biodiversity and climate change and Council concurred that these groups continue in 

the direction they are going and that staff prepare a report as to how to proceed in 

assisting with this matter. 

12-1211-01 Moved by: Councillor Russell 

Seconded by: Councillor Scott 

That staff prepare a report to expedite the elimination of phragmites 

within Lambton Shores and identify partners for this initiative. 

Carried 

7. CORRESPONDENCE & PETITIONS 

There was no correspondence or petitions for Council to review. 

8. CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE MINUTES AND STAFF REPORTS 

Administration & Finance 

8.1 CL Report No. 144-2012 – Re: The Economic Development Task Force – 

Report Review 

On behalf of the Economic Development Task Force Councillor Underwood reviewed 

the Lambton Shores Economic Task Force recommendations for the establishment of 

an Economic Development Committee. 

Councillor Underwood explained that the ETF had put together two different overall 

recommendations, the first, to fulfill the primary mandate of the EFT, that being to 

prepare a preliminary recommendation to Council for inclusion in the Strategic Plan and 

8


the second being, to undertake the exploratory and background work necessary to 

establish an Economic Development Committee. 

He further reviewed those recommendations in detail and it was recommended that the 

term for committee members be amended to read for the term of Council. 

12-1211-02 Moved by: Councillor Underwood 

Seconded by: Councillor Bonesteel 

That the Economic Development Task Force Report be accepted 

as amended. 

Carried 

9. BY-LAWS & RESOLUTIONS 

There were no by-laws or resolutions for Council approval. 

10. ACCOUNTS 

There were no municipal accounts presented for Council approval. 

11. NOTICE OF MOTION 

There were no notices of motion presented. 

12. NEW BUSINESS 

There were no emergent issues presented for Council to discuss. 

13. COUNCILLOR REPORTS 

Council members had nothing to report. 

14. OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEEK CLARIFICATION 

Jordy Speak asked if the answers to those questions from the survey conducted by the 

Economic Development Task Force were available and he was advised that they were 

available upon request. 


Seconded by: Councillor Russell 

That Council goes into a “Closed Session” at 3:51 p.m. to 

discuss a personal matter under Section 239 (2) b of the 

Municipal Act. 

Carried 

Council rose at 4:53 p.m. and there was nothing to report. 

12-1211-04 Moved by: Councillor Cook 


That the December 11, 2012 Council meeting adjourns at 4:53 p.m. 

Carried 

9



Special Council Meeting 








A/C.A.O. Treasurer Janet Ferguson 



Mayor Weber called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. 


The Mayor asked members of Council to declare any pecuniary or conflict of interest 

that they may have and none were declared. 

Mr. Gary Scandlan, Watson & Associates presented the updated Development Charges 

report and provided an overview of the Development Charges Act, and the 

requirements that municipalities are mandated to follow. One of the key components of 

the process is for the municipality to identify and anticipate the amount, type and 

location of future growth, the servicing needs to accommodate the growth, the capital 

costs to provide the services, and to consider the funding options to provide the 

services for new growth. It was noted that if a municipality does not have a 

Development Charges by-law, the cost for providing the services would be on the tax 

rate. 

Mr. Scandlan reviewed the Lambton Shores’ growth forecast, and the services 

considered, and the “proposed full calculated charge” for residential and non-residential, 

and provided a comparison of the proposed charge with the charges from 21 other 

municipalities. 

During the ensuing discussions, the items that industrial developers consider when 

looking to locate in a community were reviewed, as were possible reductions or phase 

in options that would help encourage growth. Also considered was the methodology of 

charging large users (commercial and industrial) on a “square metre” basis and the 

possibility of shifting some of the water or waste water capital costs to the 

water/wastewater rates was also considered. 

Mr. Scandlan advised that the information in the report would remain valid for 1 year, 

and during that time period, Council could have another review of the information and 

decide if there is a preferred methodology 10or 

a different combination of methods for

charging for growth related services. Council could also take another look at the 

population projections and the proposed services and projects. 


Seconded by: Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg 

That Section15.13 of the Procedural By-law be waived to allow 

public discussion on the development charge. Carried 

Martin Schoeley cautioned against charges that were so high that businesses would be 

discouraged, and the importance of classifying bone fide agricultural operations as 

agriculture, thereby exempt, as the large size of the operations would make a “per 

metre” charge prohibitive. 

Adrian Roelands provided information on the large greenhouses he owns in Enniskillen, 

and provided information on water usage and benefits for the municipality. 

Dick Matzka noted that Wally Kratz and the Ad Hoc Committee had disputed the 

population projections, and that if the numbers aren’t accurate, it will result in more 

costs for the residents. Also, he advised that greenhouses should be considered our 

“industry” and welcomed. 

Deryck Walden advised that there is the option in the Development Charges Act to 

exempt industrial and reiterated that agriculture is our “industry”. Mr. Scandlan advised 

that the policies are set by Council, and it is important for Council to go through the 

process to determine what the rates should be and to receive public feedback on the 

proposed charges and also to obtain guidance from the advisor on the implications of 

phase ins or reductions. 

Paul Pittao advised that when the fee was initiated in 2005, it was phased in over 3 

years, which was beneficial to builders and homeowners. He did note that most of his 

customers come from London or Kitchener etc and are familiar with the need to pay 

Development Charges; however, if the fees continue to rise, it may become a deterrent, 

especially when the adjacent municipality does not have development charges. 



That the existing rates be frozen for 1 year, and that the numbers 

are revisited within the 1 year study lifetime , and that the rate for 

commercial and industrial be 33% of the charge, and that 

agricultural greenhouses are determined to be “bone fide” 

agricultural businesses and are exempt from the charges, and that 

a review take place within 6 months and full discussions take place 

on population, and master plan. 

NOT PASSED- LATER REWORDED... 

Clarification was sought on Councils wishes direction, and it was confirmed that the 

residential development charge would be frozen at that current charge for the term of 

the by-law, as opposed to specifying 1 year only, which would provide some flexibility 

for Council. Also, the development charge 11for 

all commercial and industrial would be

charged 33% of the actual rate, agricultural greenhouses would be exempt as they are 

agricultural operations, however, any retail component of the greenhouse would be 

charged the commercial rates. 



That the Lambton Shores development charge be held at the 

current rate within the term of the by-law, and that; 

Council reconsider the development charge by-law prior to 

November 16, 2013. 

Carried 

A discussion was held on changing the Sewage Master Plan to amend its scope, and it 

was noted that as this item was not stated as being part of the agenda, the discussion 

should be deferred, and the Director of Community Services asked to provide a report 

on how to reconsider the parameters of the Sewage Master Plan. 

A further discussion ensued on the existing policies that were in place and it was noted 

that if a property is in an area that is identified as part of the current expansion area, a 

sewage development charge would be applicable. The new by-law requires this as well. 

12-1214-03 Moved by: Councillor Bonesteel 

Seconded by: Deputy Mayor Dagg 

That prior to June 30, 2013, staff provide a report on changing the 

future service area or sewage expansion area, and include 

information on how development charges apply in those areas. 

Carried 

Water and Wastewater Review 

Treasurer Janet Ferguson advised Council that the last water /wastewater rate review 

was completed 3 years ago, and adjustments are being proposed to ensure cost 

recovery for the water and waste water system. It was suggested that in order to meet 

the first billing cycle in 2013, any amendment to the rates should be approved at the first 

meeting in January. 

Gary Scandlan provided background information on the Provincial legislation pertaining 

to water and waste water, reviewed current and forecasted consumption rates and 

flows, capital needs, life cycle costs and the necessary reserves, and the operation of 

the systems, and how these factors impact the rates. 

Discussions ensued on changes to the Building Code that affect usage rates, the new 

regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the responsibilities on members of 

Council, and the legislated regulations the systems operators are required to follow. 

Mr. Scandlan had been asked to provide information on cost recover options for the 

Grand Bend and Area Sewage Treatment Facility including allocating costs to current 

users, and on the tax base. 12

If the costs were recovered from the property taxes, the per household charge would 

increase the cost for properties not on the system by $ 160.00 annually, and would 

reduce the cost for those properties on the system by $ 278.00 annually. Mr. Scandlan 

provided an alternative, which would be to charge a septage charge on properties with 

septic tanks for the portion of the plant dedicated to treating septage pumpouts, which 

would ensure that those who use (or could use) the system pay for the system. 



That the Water and Wastewater Rates report prepared by Watson 

and Associates, dated December 14, 2012 be received, and that 

Council supports the recommended increases to the water and 

wastewater rates as outlined in the Watson & Associates 

presentation and that staff prepare the necessary by-law and 

advertise that the rate will be further considered at the January 14, 

2013 Council meeting. Carried 

4. Opportunity for the Public to Seek Clarification 

Mayor Weber advised those in the audience of Section 15, Subsection 13 of the 

Procedural by-law that states the purpose of this portion of the meeting was for the 

public to seek clarification on a decision of council on items on the agenda. 

Cam Ivey noted that if costs for the Sewage treatment plant are charged across the tax 

base, commercial operators would pay as well, which would raise the rates and possibly 

deter the sector of the community Council is trying to attract. 

Mayor Weber read a press release pertaining to the Chief Administrative Officer John 

Byrne. 

Lynda Rapley, Lakeshore Advance asked where the funds would be coming from to pay 

the severance costs, and if a new C.A.O. would be hired. Mayor Weber advised 

Council would be going through a process to hire a new C.A.O. 

Cam Ivey asked if Council would be reviewing its “Code of Conduct”, as apparently the 

confidential information had been disclosed to the public. Mayor Weber advised that if a 

formal complaint was received, it would be processed. 

Justin Speake asked if a forensic audit should be undertaken on the current and past 

Council term. 

5. ADJOURN 

12-1214-05 Moved by: Councillor Scott 

Seconded by: Councillor Underwood 

That the December 14, 2012 Council meeting adjourn at 1:55 p.m. 

Carried 

13



Regular Council Meeting 



Councillor Dave Maguire 




Councillor Doug Cook 



Acting C.A.O. / Treasurer Janet Ferguson 


Director of Community Services Brent Kittmer 

Administrative Assistant Roberta Brandon 


Mayor Weber called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and asked that everyone rise for 

a moment of quiet reflection and/or prayer for the tragic event that recently occurred in 

Connecticut. 


That Mayor asked members of Council to declare any pecuniary or conflict of interest 

that they may have with the business itemized on the agenda and Councillor Cook 

declared a conflict with item #8.5 as he previously owned the house involved with the 

vibration issues on Main Street South in Forest and item #8.8 as he signed the grant 

application for Christmas lights for Arkona. 

Councillor Underwood also declared a conflict of interest with item #8.5 regarding the 

vibration issue for Main Street South in Forest as he owns property on Main Street. 

With the consent of Council the order of the agenda was amended to accommodate the 

delegations, public meetings and presentations portion of the meeting. 

6. DELEGATIONS, PUBLIC MEETINGS & PRESENTATIONS 

6.1 Council Appointment to Fill the Position of Ward 4 Council Representative 

Mayor Weber advised those in attendance that when notified of the resignation of 

Councillor Ruth Illman, Council had reviewed the options for filling the seat and opted to 

appoint a person to fill the vacant Ward 4 seat. The process used previously was 

reviewed, approved and included requiring the candidates to prepare and present a 

response to the following questions: 

14


1. What do you feel are the most pressing issues the Municipality is facing? 

2. What do you think the top Municipal priorities should be? 

3. If you could achieve one goal, what would it be? 

The process was advertised, and resulted in 4 persons submitting applications. 

Mayor Weber further noted for the record that one or more of the candidates had been 

contacted by a member of Council for an interview and a discussion ensued as to 

whether or not municipal protocol had been followed and if this situation would “taint” 

the process. A discussion ensued on the process approved by Council and whether or 

not the process would prohibit speaking to the candidates outside of the Council 

meeting. The decision was made to allow the candidates to proceed with the speeches. 

The process required the speaking order to be determined by drawing lots, and 

Administrative Assistant Roberta Brandon drew the names, and the first candidate 

chosen was Steve Robinson. 

Mr. Robinson announced that he was retracting his application as he had been 

contacted by a Council member, and in his opinion, the process was tainted, as the 

member had not following the approved process by contacting candidates outside of the 

process, which he considered inappropriate. 

A further discussion ensued on whether the process should be reconsidered, and a 

recorded vote was requested: 

12-1217-01 Moved by: Councillor Maguire 


That, due to the questions surrounding the process to appoint a 

member to the Vacant Ward 4 Seat, Council reconsider the 

process. 

Carried 

Those in support of the motion: 

Councillor Cook, 

Mayor Weber, 

Councillor Maguire 

Those opposed to the motion: 

Councillor Scott, 

Councillor Underwood, 

Councillor Bonesteel, 

Councillor Russell, 

Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg 

The three remaining candidates Sarah Hornblower, Sandra Dowhan and Ken McRae 

presented their responses to the preauthorized questions, and at the conclusion of the 

speeches, Mayor Weber thanked the candidates for their interest in serving the 

residents of Lambton Shores and called for a short break. 

15


At the conclusion of the break, Mayor Weber called for a motion from the Council. 



That K en McRae be appointed to fill the vacant Ward 4 Council 

seat. 

Carried 

After a brief recess, Ken McRae was sworn in as the Councillor for Lambton Shores – 

Ward 4. 

4. CONSENT AGENDA 

4.1 Correspondence from Dan Mathieson, Chair, MPAC Board of Directors – 

Re: Update on the Work being Done at the Municipal Property Assessment 

Corporation 

4.2 Correspondence from Natasha K. Brenders, Director General – 

Infrastructure Operations, Federal Economic Development Agency for 

Southern Ontario – Re: Applications for Funding 

Council reviewed those items listed as part of the Consent Agenda. 



That the following items on the Consent Agenda be received and 

filed. 

- 4.1 Correspondence from Dan Mathieson, Chair, MPAC Board 

of Directors – Re: Update on the Work being Done at the Municipal 

Property Assessment Corporation 

- 4.2 Correspondence from Natasha K. Brenders, Director 

General – Infrastructure Operations, Federal Economic 

Development Agency for Southern Ontario – Re: Applications for 

Funding. 

Carried 

5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS 

5.1 Regular Council Meeting – December 3, 2012 

5.2 Special Council Meeting – December 4, 2012 

5.3 Special Council Meeting – December 7, 2012 

The minutes of the regular Council meeting held December 3rd, 2012 and the minutes 

of the special Council meetings held December 4th and 7th, 2012 were reviewed. 



16


That the minutes of the regular Council meeting held the 3rd day of 

December, 2012 and the minutes of the special Council meetings 

held the 4th and 7th day of December, 2012 be accepted as 

presented. 

Carried 

7. CORRESPONDENCE 

Correspondence – Receive and File 

7.1 Edith Wilmot-Quigg, Development Consultant - Sarnia/Lambton Economic 

Partnership – Re: Community Branding 

Council reviewed information from Edith Wilmot-Quigg, Development Consultant with 

the Sarnia/Lambton Economic Partnership concerning the creation of a brand for 

Lambton County. 

12-1217-05 Moved by: Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg 

Seconded by: Councillor Cook 

That correspondence from Edith Wilmot of the Sarnia/Lambton 

Economic partnership on community branding be referred to the 

Acting Facilitator of Recreation and Leisure for further action. 

Carried 

7.2 Roy Merkley – Re: Green Energy Act 

Correspondence from Roy Merkley noting his appreciation for Council’s recent actions 

and direction on wind turbines was reviewed. 



That correspondence from Roy Merkley regarding Council’s recent 

actions and direction on wind turbines be received and filed. 

Carried 

7.3 Jane Muegge, Agricultural & Rural Economic Development Advisor – Re: 

Premier’s Award for Agri. Innovation Excellence 

Council reviewed information on the Premier’s Award for Agricultural Innovation 

Excellence. 



That information provided from Jane Muegge, Agricultural & Rural 

Economic Development Advisor regarding the Premier’s Award for 

Agricultural Innovation and Excellence be received for information. 

Carried 

17


Correspondence – For Council Direction 

7.4 Correspondence from the Mayors’ Coalition for Affordable Sustainable and 

Accountable Policing – Re: Newsletter 

Council reviewed correspondence from the Mayors’ Coalition for Affordable, 

Sustainable and Accountable Policing that requested local municipalities to join the 

Mayor’s Coalition to advocate for fair and equitable costs for police services across the 

country. 



That the Municipality of Lambton Shores join the Mayor’s Coalition 

for Affordable, Sustainable and Accountable Policing. Carried 

8. CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE MINUTES AND STAFF REPORTS 

8.1 Minutes of the Lambton Shores Fire Board Meeting held November 29, 2012 

Council reviewed the minutes of the November 29th, 2012 meeting of the Lambton 

Shores’ Fire Board. 



That the minutes of the Lambton Shores Fire Board meeting held 

the 29th day of November, 2012 be received and filed. 

Carried 

Planning 

8.2 PL Report No. 41-2012 – Re: Winter Road Maintenance Services Agreement 

with Rice Development 

In PL Report No. 42-2012 Planner Patti Richardson advises of a request from Rice 

Development Group for the Municipality to provide winter road maintenance services at 

their subdivision in Grand Bend, even though the roads within this subdivision have not 

been assumed by the Municipality. The recommended process was for the Developer to 

enter into an agreement with the Municipality for this service. 



That Council pass a by-law authorizing the execution of a Winter 

Road Maintenance Services Agreement between Rice 

Development Company Inc. and the Corporation of the Municipality 

of Lambton Shores as it relates to their Grand Bend Subdivision 

Phases 1 and 2, Registered Plan 25M-42 and on lands described 

as Parts 3, 6, 9, 12, 13 and 14 and the south 59 metres of Part 11, 

Plan 25R8424 and Part 1 Plan 25R10009. 

Carried 

18


8.3 PL Report No. 44-2012 – Re: Assumption By-law – Pinery Bluff’s Road 

In PL Report No. 44-2012 the Planner reported that the two year maintenance period 

had lapsed for the Pinery Bluff Subdivision and Municipal staff was satisfied that the 

works required by the agreement have been completed in compliance with the 

subdivision agreement the Pinery Bluff Road, therefore, the road can be assumed by 

the Municipality as part of the Lambton Shores road system. 



That PL Report No. 44-2012 respecting the assumption of Pinery 

Bluff Road be received and filed and that the by-law to assume 

Pinery Bluff Road be approved. 

Carried 

8.4 PL Report No. 45-2012 – re: Assumption By-law – Gill Road Subdivision – 

Harbourside Village, Registered Plan 510 

It was reported in PL Report No. 45-2012 that the two year maintenance period has also 

lapsed for Phases 1 and 2 of Gill Road (Harbourside Village) Subdivision and as 

Municipal staff was satisfied that the works required for Phases 1 and 2 had been 

completed in compliance with the subdivision agreement those roads within Phases 1 

and 2 be assumed as part of the Municipal road system. 


Seconded by: Councillor Maguire 

That PL Report No. 45-2012 respecting the assumption of Erin 

Place in Phases 1 and 2 and Hayter Drive be received and filed 

and that the by-law to assume Erin Plan in Phases 1 and 2 and 

Hayter Drive be approved. 

Carried 

Community Services 

8.5 D.C.S. Report No. 116-2012 – Re: Forest Main Street, South Vibration 

Testing 

Information was provided to Council in D.C.S. Report No. 116-2012 on vibration 

readings performed on Main Street South in Forest by AMEC Environment & 

Infrastructure in response to concerns about vibrations expressed by a resident at 60 

Main Street. 

It was noted that direction from Council was needed if further action was to be taken by 

staff on this issue and Council agreed that no further action be taken. 

Council did concur that when reconstruction of Main Street South does occur 

consideration be made of replacing the watermain at that same time to make for a more 

efficient use of capital dollars. 

19




That the home owner for 60 Main Street, South in Forest be 

advised that the Municipality will not take any further action 

regarding the vibration issue in her home and that the road and 

watermain re-construction of Main Street South in Forest be 

allocated as needed to the 10 year Capital forecast. 

8.6 D.C.S. Report No. 117-2012 – Re: 2013 Volunteer Recognition BBQ 

Director of Community Services noted that when the Municipality of Lambton Shores 

received the Home Hardware Community Involvement Award at the 2012 National 

Communities in Bloom Competition, the award included the opportunity to have Mark 

Cullen, renowned gardening expert, come to the community for a meet and greet and 

speaking engagement. It was suggested that the speaking engagement could be part 

of the 2013 Volunteer Recognition BBQ as the event recognizes the community’s 

involvement. 



That the 2013 Volunteer Recognition BBQ be scheduled in 

September 2013 to accommodate the attendance of Mr. Mark 

Cullen. 

Carried 

8.7 D.C.S. Report No. 118-2012 – Re: Walker Road – Long Term Approach 

Further to issues previously discussed relating to Walker Road and the short term effort 

of pulverizing and grading the existing asphalt surface in the worst 500 m stretch of the 

road, Council considered potential alternatives for rehabilitating the road as a long term 

basis. 

Due to its original construction methodology and the heavy traffic conditions that Walker 

Road is subjected to, Council agreed that the most cost effective alternative for 

rehabilitating this road would be to return it to a permanent gravel surface on an as 

required basis up to Goosemarsh Line. It was noted that this represents the lowest 

capital cost to the Municipality and allows for a prompt response when deterioration 

occurs. 



That the long term approach for Walker Road (from Haig Line to 

Goosemarsh Line) be such that the roadway is pulverized and 

returned to a permanent gravel surface on an as required basis. 

Carried 

8.8 D.C.S. Report No. 119-2012 – Re: 2013 Capital Request Form 

20


Council reviewed a request from the Arkona Lions and the Arkona Community 

Foundation for the purchase of additional Christmas lights for Townsend Line and 

Arkona Road in downtown Arkona. It was noted that the two groups were willing to 

match municipal dollars for this project up to $3,000.00 



That D.C.S. Report No. 119-2012 be approved and the request for 

additional street light for Arkona be added to the 2013 Capital 

Budget for consideration. 

Carried 

8.9 D.C.S. Report No. 120-2012 – Re: Grand Bend Historical Walk Proposal 

Information was provided in D.C.S. Report No. 120-2012 on a proposal received from 

the Grand Bend Historical Walk Committee for a historical walk signage program in 

Grand Bend. The nature of the program is to install signage to recognize significant 

historical locations in the community. 

It was noted that the proposed signs would be placed at locations with an interesting 

fact or story relating to the history of Grand Bend and the people and events that made 

it in to the popular community that it is today. 



That the Council supports the proposal for historical walk signage in 

Grand Bend and authorizes staff to work with the Grand Bend 

Historical Walk Committee to implement the historical walk signage. 

Carried 

8.10 D.C.S. Report No. 121-2012 – Re: Forest Lagoon Proposal – Bird Watching 

Platform and Program Proposal 

Information on a proposal submitted by CH2MHill OMI, St. Clair Conservation Authority, 

Lambton Shores Communities in Bloom and the Lambton Shores Nature Trails 

Committee to utilize the Forest lagoons as a way to increase wildlife habitat and make 

them accessible to the public was provided in D.C.S. Report No. 121-2012. 



That, with respect to the Forest Lagoon Bird watching platform and 

program proposal, Council approves Phase One of the proposal 

and permits a wheelchair accessible trail and viewing platform to be 

constructed at the Forest Lagoons; and further 

21


That Council approves Phase Two of the proposal contingent upon 

funding availability, and permits a trail extension on the south of the 

lagoons to be constructed and to be maintained by the Lambton 

Shores Trail Committee, and that trees and shrubs be planted at 

the lagoon property; and further 

That Council recognize the former railway property from Rotary 

Civic Square to the lagoons on Brush Line as part of the Forest 

Walkway Trail System; and further 

That staff be directed to oversee the project to ensure works 

constructed on Municipal property are satisfactory. Carried 

8.11 D.C.S Report No. 122-2012 – Re: Update on the “Great Exchange” Program 

Proposal 

A brief status update respecting the proposal for “The Great Exchange” program was 

provided in D.C.S. Report No. 122-2012. It was noted that the challenge with 

developing a proper report for Council to consider has been the lack of available 

information with respect to the participation by the community and the quantity of waste 

that would be dropped off. 

12-1217-19 Moved by: 

Seconded by: 

That D.C.S Report No. 122-2012 regarding an update on the “Great 

Exchange” Program be received and filed. 

Carried 

Administration & Finance 

8.12 TR Report No. 86-2012 – Re: 2013 Municipal Insurance Renewal 

The Treasurer Janet Ferguson provided information on the annual municipal insurance 

renewal from Frank Cowan Company Limited. Ms. Ferguson noted that the 2013 

renewal reflects a 3.8% premium increase over the 2012 level. 



That the annual Municipal Insurance renewal with Frank Cowan 

Company Limited be approved as outlined in Treasurer`s Report 

No. 86-2012. 

Carried 

8.14 TR Report No. 89-2012 – Re: Draft November Year to date Financial 

Statements 

Information on the Draft Operating and Capital Financial Statements as of November 

30, 2012 was provided in TR Report No. 89-2012. 

22




That the Draft Year to Date Operating and Capital Statements for 

the period ending November 30, 2012 be accepted as presented. 

Carried 

8.15 TR Report No. 90-2012 – Re: Municipal Infrastructure Investment Initiative 

and Asset Management 

As part of the Provincial program for Municipal Infrastructure Strategy the Province has 

introduced a funding program for infrastructure related to roads, bridges, water and 

wastewater. This program has a maximum funding of 90% of the project or $2,000,000. 

and projects must be completed by December 2014 and the Treasurer noted that in 

order to submit an expression of interest in the pre-screening step for this grant program 

a motion of Council is needed. 



That staff be authorized to submit an expression of interest for the 

grant program under the Municipal Infrastructure Investment 

Initiative Capital Program and that the following resolution is 

passed: 

The Municipality of Lambton Shores is committed to developing a 

comprehensive asset management plan that includes all of the 

information and analysis as described in Building Together: Guide 

for Municipal Asset Management Plans by December 31, 2013. 

Carried 

8.16 CL Report No. 145-2012 – Re: Council Appointments to Committees and 

Boards 

CL Report No. 145-2012 provided information on the current appointments to internal 

and external Boards and Committees, and noted that these appointments will expire at 

the end of December, 2012. Members reviewed and discussed the appointments and 

made changes to those appointments. 



That the Council appointments to Committees remain the same 

with the exception that Councillor Ken McRae be appointed as 

Council representative to the Forest B.I.A., Lambton Shores Fire 

Board and as alternate to the Bi-Municipal and further that Deputy 

Mayor Davis Dagg is appointed as a representative on the Bi- 

23


Municipal Committee, and Councillor Bonesteel be appointed as 

Council representative to the Official Plan Committee, and the 

Kettle & Stony Point First Nation Committee. Carried 

6.2 Patty Hayman, Director of Planning, St. Clair Region Conservation 

Authority – Re: Request for Funding towards a Dynamic Beach Area Study 

Patty Hayman, Director of Planning with the St. Clair Region Conservation Authority 

appeared before Council to present the St. Clair Region Conservation Authority Draft 

2013 Budget for consideration and direction to the Council representative for voting 

purposes as well. 

In addition to presenting this draft budget, Ms. Hayman provided details on a request for 

Lambton Shores to assist in funding a Dynamic Beach Area study. She noted that this 

is a shared project with the City of Sarnia and the request to Lambton Shores is for 

$28,500.00 in addition to the regular conservation programs. 



That Council agrees in principle to participating in the Dynamic 

Beach Area study proposed by the St. Clair Conservation Authority 

and that funding request for this study be referred to the 2013 

budget discussions. 

Carried 

8.13 TR Report No. 88-2012 – Re: St. Clair Region Conservation Authority 

TR Report No. 88-2012 regarding the St. Clair Region Conservation Authority was 

discussed during the delegation portion of the meeting and details provided on 

proposed projects for the Conservation Authority. 



That Council supports the Draft 2013 budget for the St. Clair 

Conservation Authority. 

Carried 

8.17 CL Report No. 146-2012 – Re: Proposed County Smoke Free Outdoor 

Spaces By-law 

As directed by Council, information on the proposed County of Lambton Smoke-Free 

Outdoor Spaces by-law was advertised in the “Living in Lambton Shores” and posted on 

the Municipal website and Facebook. The comments received were provide to Council, 

and the matter was considered. 



24


That Council for the Municipality of Lambton Shores does not 

support the proposed County of Lambton Smoke Free Outdoor 

Spaces by-law. 

Carried 

8.18 CL Report No. 147-2012 – Re: Requests for Municipal Resolution for 

Agricultural Buildings with Solar Installations 

Clerk Carol McKenzie provided information on the advice received from the Municipal 

Solicitor and comments from the Lambton Shores Fire Chiefs dealing with rooftop solar 

panels. Included in Report 147-2012 for Council review was a proposed policy 

respecting solar installations on agricultural buildings to deal with safety issues. 

It was noted that 3 separate applications for rooftop solar panels had been received, 

and a Council resolution of support would assist the residents with FIT Program 

application, and that the approval does not indicate support for the design and integrity 

of the structure, but for the “construction and operation of each project”. 



That the policy outlined in CL Report No. 147-2012 for the policy 

respecting solar installations on agricultural buildings and safety 

issues be adopted as presented. 

Carried 



WHEREAS Doug and Janet Willsie propose to construct and 

operate a rooftop solar facility on 9519 Northville Road, in the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores under the Province’s FIT Program; 

AND WHEREAS the Applicant has requested that Council of the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores indicate by resolution Council’s 

support for the construction and operation of the Project on the 

property; 

AND WHEREAS, pursuant to the rules governing the FIT Program 

(the “FIT Rules”), Applications whose Projects receive the formal 

support of local Municipalities will be awarded Priority Points, which 

may result in the Applicant being offered a FIT Contract prior to 

other persons applying for FIT Contracts; 

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: Council of the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores supports the construction and 

operation of the Project on the lands. 

This resolution’s sole purpose is to enable the Applicant to receive 

Priority Points under the FIT Program and may not be used for the 

25


purpose of any other form of municipal approval in relation to the 

Application or Project or any other purpose. Carried 



WHEREAS Karl Elliott proposes to construct and operate a rooftop 

solar facility on Concession 4, Lot 20, in the Municipality of 

Lambton Shores under the Province’s FIT Program; 




property; 















WHEREAS Rock Glen Campground proposes to construct and 

operate a rooftop solar facility on 8685 Rock Glen Road, in the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores under the Province’s FIT Program; 




property; 






26









9. BY-LAWS & RESOLUTIONS 



That the following by-laws are read a first, second and third time, 

passed and numbered appropriately, signed by the Mayor and 

Clerk and engrossed in the by-law book: 

- By-law 134-2012 – Appointments to Committees of Council 

- By-law 135-2012 – Re: Assuming a Highway – Pinery Bluff Drive 

- By-law 136-2012 – Re: Assuming a Highway – Erin Place, Hayter 

Drive 

- By-law 137-2012 – Re: Authorizing Winter Road Maintenance 

Services with Rice Development 

- By-law 139-2012 – Confirming Resolutions to Date. Carried 

- 

The Treasurer provided an update on the Development Charges information session 

held on Friday, December 14, 2012 and the amended by-laws were presented. 



The Council of the Municipality of Lambton Shores approves the 

Development Charge Background Study, dated November 16, 

2012, as amended, inclusive of the capital forecast therein, in which 

certain recommendations were made relating to the establishment 

of a development charge policy for the Municipality of Lambton 

Shores pursuant to the Development Charges Act, 1997; and 

determines that no additional public meeting will be required to be 

held as part of the approval process. 

Carried 



That the Development Charges By-law 139-2012 and Municipal 

Connection Charge By-law 140-2012 be passed and become 

effective January 1, 2013. C 

Carried 

10. ACCOUNTS 

27


10.1 TR Report 85-2012 – Re: November, 2012 Cheque Listing 

Council reviewed the Municipal accounts for the month of November, 2012. 

12-1217-34 Moved by: Councillor McRae 


That the Municipal cheque listing for the month of November, 2012 

in the amount of $1,593,325.43 be accepted as presented. 

Carried 

11. NOTICE OF MOTION 

11.1 Notice of Motion from Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg – Re: Debt Reduction 

Strategy 

A brief discussion occurred on the Municipal debt for capital expenditures and the need 

to review possible scenarios to reduce this debt. 



WHEREAS other Ontario municipalities are recognizing the threat 

of a pending “fiscal cliff” and instituting expedited debt reduction 

strategies; 

AND WHEREAS the Ontario government is cutting back on 

municipal payments in order to reduce its significant deficit; 

AND WHEREAS principal and interest payments limit our 

municipality’s options and opportunities; 

AND WHEREAS the 2013 annual principle and interest payment 

will be $1,783,288.36 

NOW THEREFORE, Council supports a program to expedite a debt 

reduction strategy and refers this matter to staff for a report and 

initial implementation in the 2013 budget. 

Carried 

11.2 Notice of Motion from Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg – Re: Preparing the 2013 

Budget in a Comparable Format to Lambton County 

Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg asked Council to consider the following motion: 



28


That Council direct staff to prepare the 2013 budget in a 

comparable format to Lambton County without Admin Allocations 

but with the maintenance of our existing business units. 

The Motion was Later Withdrawn 

A discussion occurred on the current format of the Municipal budget document and 

Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg asked for Council to consider a similar format to that of the 

Lambton County budget however as the budget document has already been prepared 

for 2013 Council felt that this was a matter for discussion later in the year prior to the 

preparation of the 2014 budget document. 

11.3 Notice of Motion from Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg – Re: Reconsideration of 

Resolution # 12-1203-14 

Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg brought forward the following motion: 



That Motion # 12-1203-14, noted below be reconsidered: 

That D.C.S. Report No. 114-2012 regarding a reference sheet for 

the Grand Bend Sewage Treatment Facility be received and made 

available to the public on the Municipal website. 

Motion Defeated 

12. New Business 

TR Report No. 91-2012 – Re: C.A.O. / Interim C.A.O 



That TR Report No. 91-2012 regarding the C.A.O. / Interim C.A.O. 

be brought forward as an emergent issue. 

Carried 

Council discussed the need to find a suitable candidate for the position of C.A.O. for the 

Municipality and the Acting C.A.O Janet Ferguson advised that she has researched 

Municipal Associations that have data bases of persons available or interested in this 

type of position on an interim basis. It was noted that this interim person could also 

guide the process of filling the position of C.A.O. on a permanent basis, in accordance 

with the Municipal hiring policy. 



29


That the Acting C.A.O. Janet Ferguson, Mayor Weber, Deputy 

Mayor Davis-Dagg and Councillor Underwood be part of the hiring 

process to fill the position of Interim C.A.O. from those requests for 

proposals that will be sought. 

Carried 

13. COUNCILLOR REPORTS 

Councillor Bonesteel reported that he had met with Thedford Bog farmers, had attended 

a Lambton Shores Nature Trail Committee meeting and thanked committee volunteers 

for their input and staff for their assistance in 2012 and wished everyone a Happy 

Holiday season. 

Councillors Underwood, Russell, Scott and Maguire offered up their appreciation of staff 

for their assistance over the past year and also offered up seasonal greetings as well. 

Deputy Mayor Davis-Dagg offered up Holiday Wishes and asked that a list of Council’s 

achievements of the past year be put together. 

Councillor McRae thanked Council for their support in choosing him as Council 

representative for Ward 4. 

Mayor Weber reported that in light of the rumours going around he would like the 

residents of the Municipality to know that he had no intentions of resigning as Mayor of 

the Municipality and further advised that he has received questions from the public as to 

what Council’s new direction is. He further advised that 2012 had been a very busy year 

for Council and wished everyone a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. 

14. OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEEK CLARIFICATION 

Glen Baillie asked for clarification on the Deputy Mayor’s email address. 

Wayne Edlington asked what was Council’s new direction, asked for further information 

as to why John Byrne had been let go and what the legal costs associated with Mr. 

Byrne’s termination totalled. 

Bob Sharen asked when the official plan would be discussed by Council and why 

Council was paying for a generator for the Grand Bend Legion. The Mayor noted that 

the generator for the Grand Bend Legion was a Municipal expense as the Grand Bend 

Legion is one the Municipal emergency centres. 

Lew McGregor asked for information on the termination of John Byrne. 

Andy Page asked if there were funds allocated in the budget for a sound system for the 

Village Complex. 

Cam Ivey asked who the member of Council was that had contacted Mr. Robinson for 

an interview. 

30


Alvin Stewardson asked for reconsideration of the proposed trail to run between King 

and Broadway Streets in Forest. 

Kimberly Powell-McConaghy asked which member of Council had contacted Mr. 

Robinson for an interview. 

Gerry Rupke asked what the present Council had done in their two years of service to 

reduce the Municipal debt. 

Shirley Andraza also asked what the present Council had done to reduce the Municipal 

debt and if Councillors understood the format of the current Municipal budget document. 

3. CONFIDENTIAL 



That the Council meeting goes into a “Closed Session” at 9:28 p.m. 

to discuss Closed Session minutes and a personal matter under 

Section 239 (2) b of the Municipal Act. 

Carried 

Council rose from the Closed Session at 9:57 p.m. with nothing to report. 

15. ADJOURN 



That the December 17, 2012 Council meeting adjourns at 9:57 p.m. 

Carried 

31

Lambton Shores Mayor and Council, 

The Grand Bend Cruising Club would like to draw your attention to the ever increasing issue of safety in 

the local harbor and river. 

As you are most likely aware we are currently experiencing historic low levels in the Great Lakes. The 

low water levels combined with the lack of dredging in the Grand Bend harbor and river are serious 

safety issues for boaters. This past season saw numerous groundings; some resulting in minor damage 

and others more severe results. 

While other harbors and ports along the Lake Huron shoreline dredge on a yearly basis, no dredging has 

taken place in Grand Bend in many years. The consensus from the Canadian and United States boating 

communities is that Grand Bend is off the list of "Ports of Call" for fear of problems due to the water 

depth. 

Our harbor is a very diverse and lucrative source of revenue generation for private business, and all 

levels of governments. Local business depends on the tourism revenue generated as a result of the 

proximity to local retailers, restaurants, and marine related services compared to other harbors. We 

think council would agree this issue needs to be addressed immediately to prevent any further revenue 

loss. 

Grand Bend has one of the greatest beachfronts in the Great Lakes but we prevent it’s accessibility to 

transient and local boaters. The transient docks and washroom facilities require refurbishing to 

compliment the stunning beach front improvements. The current facilities available to transient boaters 

do not promote the image that Grand Bend is a desirable place to visit and ultimately, we are turning 

away transient marine traffic. 

In the interest of preventing any more boating communities and tourism from leaving or bypassing 

Grand Bend, our organization is interested in knowing if there is a plan to address these issues in the 

short term. What is council’s long term commitment to the harbour? Council needs to ensure that a 

portion of revenues generated from the harbour are reinvested back into the port, and put in place a 

sustainment plan and budget for any necessary future actions or requirements. 

32

We had an excellent harbor which is currently in drastic need of attention to once again return it to a 

"Safe" "Port of Call" for the many boaters on the Great Lakes. 

Respectfully, 

Board of Directors 

Grand Bend Cruising Club 

Cc/ 

Ministry of Natural Resources, 

Coast Guard, 

Bev Shipley MP 

Monty McNaughton MPP 

Canadian Power and Sail Squadron 

Ministry of Fisheries and Oceans 

Ausable Bayfield Conservation 

Harbor Master G.B. 

33

L A M B T O N S H O R E S C O M M U N I T Y A S S O C I A T I O N 

DRAFT 

Lambton Shores Community Association 

P.O. Box 107 

Grand Bend, ON 

N0M 1T0 

August 9,2012 

To the Mayor and all members of Council: 

At our Annual meeting on July, 7, 2012, the Chair of the Plan 24 

Committee submitted her report. Among other things the Report 

details the failure of by-law enforcement to follow through on 2 

Committee of Adjustment meetings that required compliance by the 

owners of 11 and 13 Woodward St. 

A re-cap of activities to date includes: 

November 10, 2011- neighbours received the Committee of Adjustment 

notice of the hearing to be held 

Thursday, November 24, 2011- At least fourteen letters were sent 

objecting to the minor variance application and six of those people were 

in attendance at the hearing. 

November 25, 2011 -The report given to Council was that "The Committee 

deferred this application in order for the Applicant to work with the 

neighbours who opposed the application to come up with a solution that 

would be suitable to all concerned. The Applicant was granted 60 days to 

submit a new proposal and should that 60 days lapse, the fence must be 

brought into compliance with the requirements of Fence By-law 80 of 

2008." 

February 10, 2012- a re-notification letter was sent to neighbours, 

indicating that another Committee of Adjustment hearing was being held 

on Thursday, February 23, 2012. 

February 29, 2012 -The report submitted to Council by the Committee 

stated "The Committee refused this application as, in the opinion of the 

Committee, the variances were not minor in nature, the intent of the 

fence by-law was not maintained, and the variances were not desirable 

for the appropriate development or use of the land." 

Neighbours were all sent a copy of the Decision of the Committee of 

Adjustment, restating that an application requesting a variance from the 

provisions of the Fence By-law to permit: 

P . O B O X 107, G R A N D B E N D , O N , N 0 M 1 T 0 

• E M A I L L S C o m m u n i t y A s s o c @ g m a i l . c o m 

34

– 2 – January 11, 2013 

a) a maximum fence height of 3.66 metres in the interior side and rear 

yards, whereas the maximum height permitted is 2 meters; and 

b) a maximum fence height of 2.74 metres in the front yard whereas the 

maximum height permitted is 0.91 metres were refused . 

The reasons were stated and the information regarding appealing the 

decision to the Ontario Municipal Board was given with the last date for 

an appeal being March 14th, 2012. There was no appeal made to the 

O.M.B. 

An inquiry elicited the following information: “Carol McKenzie 

confirmed that a letter has been sent to the Misselbrook’s requiring 

them to bring the fences and gates at 11 and 13 Woodward St. into 

compliance with the Committee of Adjustment ruling this past winter. 

They have been given a timeline to comply that is usually prescribed 

by the courts before action is taken (around two weeks) and have been 

notified that if the fences and gates are not in compliance by the 

demand date then by-law enforcement will charge them.” 

The letter was sent out about July 9 th. 

It has come to our attention that the owners of 11 and 13 Woodward St., 

still have not complied with the order. LSCA is deeply concerned that 

by-law enforcement is not happening. This is another example of the 

apparent incompetence or unwillingness of current by-law enforcement to 

do its job. 

If Council fails to ensure that by-laws are NOT being enforced it is our 

determination that the Municipality may have liability issues. 

Certainly, if any resulting fines are not a large enough deterrent 

Council needs to rethink its approach to all by-law enforcement issues. 

Council may also find itself with more by-law battles if enforcement 

does not follow through. 

If actions set in motion by the Short Tern Rental Committee and Council 

have no follow through, there can be no confidence that Council or Bylaws 

have any teeth. 

The LSCA is asking Council to enforce its by-laws as requested by the 

Plan 24 Committee and the Lambton Shores Community Association. 

I trust we will hear back from the Municipality on this matter as soon 

as possible. 

Sincerely, 

Sharon Weitzel per 


35

7 th Annual Canadian Motorcycle 

Cruisers National Rally 

Aug. 2, to Aug. 5, 2013 

Forest Fairgrounds 

LETS WELCOME THE CANADIAN MOTORCYCLE CRUISERS 

NATIONAL RALLY PARTCIPANTS TO OUR REGION 

CANADIAN MOTORCYCLE CRUISERS 

The Canadian Motorcycle Cruisers 

Sarnia Chapter 016 will be playing 

host to members from all across 

Canada at our 7th annual CMC 

national rally. 

This non profit event is a chance to 

showcase what our region, Sarnia 

and Lambton County has to offer. 

Hundreds of members will be 

visiting our community of August 2- 

5, 2013. Many of the members will 

be camping at the Forest 

Fairgrounds, however many more 

will be looking for 

accommodations, places to dine 

attractions to visit and of course 

shopping establishments. 

Planned group rides are a 

mainstay of this event. We will 

have groups riding all over Sarnia 

and Lambton County to show all 

the hidden treasures this wonderful 

area has to offer, from our beautiful 

waterfront and historical sites to 

our famous chip trucks. 

The Canadian Motorcycle Cruisers 

(CMC) is Canada’s first and largest 

“ALL CANADIAN” riding club. The 

Canadian Motorcycle Cruisers is a 

non profit club with NO dues, 

membership is 100% free. 

The CMC is currently at 95 

chapters with over 5,000 members’ 

country-wide and growing 

everyday!! 

We are a family-based social riding 

club with chapters hosting a variety 

of events. Our members come with 

years and thousands of kilometers 

of riding experience. We welcome 

every kind of motorcycle in our 

riding club. The mandate of our 

riding club is: It doesn’t matter the 

brand, as long as you ride! 

We have hosted the National rallies 

in communities across Canada and 

we look forward to bringing it to 

Sarnia and Lambton County and 

showcasing our community to our 

visiting members. 

Each member will be receiving a 

Welcome package and have the 

opportunity to experience our 

wonderful hospitality. 

We want to showcase as much as 

possible and invite you to look over 

our sponsorship package to see 

how your business or organization 

can get involved 

For more information, please do 

not hesitate to contact me. 

Thanking you in advance, 

Dennis Dunkley 

1st Officer 

CMC 016 Sarnia 

Canadian Motorcycle Cruisers 

519 332 3056 46 

ddunkley2@cogeco.ca

Become a Sponsor 

7 th Annual Canadian Motorcycle Cruisers 

National Rally 

Don’t miss this opportunity 

Join us in promoting our community/region 

Excellent opportunity to promote your organization or 

business 

Help foster civic pride and let’s help create memories! 

GOLD PRESENTING SPONSOR 

$1000 + 

Sponsor will receive: 

Recognition on all media 

correspondence 

Recognition on our Ontario 

forum 

Recognition on our chapter 

forum with a link to your 

business or organization 

Opportunity to place your 

banner at the fairgrounds 

Recognition on our events 

flyer/program 

Opportunity to place promotion 

material in welcome packages 

Other Sponsorship Opportunities are 

available and the above packages can 

be changed to suit your needs. 

For more information, contact; 

Dennis Dunkley 

1st Officer 

CMC 016 Sarnia 

Canadian Motorcycle Cruisers 

519 332 3056 ddunkley2@cogeco.ca 

SILVER SPONSOR $500 + 

Recognition on our chapter forum 

with a link to your business or 

organization 

Recognition 

on our chapter forum, 

Opportunity to place your banner 

at the fairgrounds 

Opportunity to place promotion 

material in welcome packages 

BRONZE SPONSOR $250 + 

Recognition on our chapter forum 

Opportunity to place your banner 

at the fairgrounds 

CMC have hosted our national Rallies in 

communities across Canada – Now it’s 

our turn! 

2007 MIDLAND 

2008 CARDINAL 

2009 PORT ROWAN 

2010 HALIFAX, NOVA SCOTIA 

2011 OTTAWA, ONTARIO 

2012 RUSSELL, MANITOBA 

2013 SARNIA, FOREST - 

LAMBTON COUNTY, ONTARIO 

YES I would like to sponsor the 2013 Canadian Motorcycle Cruisers National Rally 

SPONSORSHIP AMOUNT $ 

NAME OF COMPANY OR ORGANIZATION 

CONTACT NAME 

ADDRESS 

TEL: 

E-MAIL: 

METHOD OF PAYMENT PLEASE CHECK and MAIL BACK; CMC 016 Sarnia C/ODennis Dunkley, 185 Parker St Sarnia On N7T 6G3 

PLEASE INVOICE 

CHEQUE Please make cheque payable to- CMC 016 Sarnia Memo: National Rally 2013 

47 

CREDIT CARD PayPal- ddunkley2@cogeco.ca

THE MUNCIPALITY OF LAMBTON SHORES 

PL Report No. 01-2013 Monday, January 7, 2013 

TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 


Patti Richardson, Senior Planner 

Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZO-10/2012 

Location: General Amendment for Location and Size of 

Accessory Buildings 

Applicant: Municipality of Lambton Shores 


That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZO-10/2012, 

initiated by the Municipality of Lambton Shores to amend: 

(a) Section 3.3.4 of Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 to change the 

maximum lot coverage allowed for all detached accessory 

buildings or structures on a lot in any residential zone to 93m² 

or 10% of the area of the lot, whichever is less subject to the 

following restrictions: 

i) for buildings and structures of 67 m² of lot coverage or less 

a maximum height of 5.5 metres shall be permitted; and 

ii) for buildings and structures with lot coverage between 68 m² 

to 93 m² a maximum height of 6.1 metres shall be permitted. 

(b) Section 3.3 of Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 to permit all 

accessory building and structures to be located in the front 

yard where a lot abuts a watercourse, provided it is not located 

any closer to the front lot line, side lot line or exterior side lot 

line than is permitted for a dwelling in the residential zone in 

which it is located 

be APPROVED and the attached implementing by-law be 

enacted. 

REPORT 

Summary of the Application 

The proposed zoning By-law Amendment Application proposes to amend: 

(a) 

Section 3.3.4 of Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 to change the maximum lot coverage 

allowed for all detached accessory buildings or structures on a lot in any residential 

48

zone from 67 m² or 10 % of the area of the lot whichever is less to 93 m² or 10% of 

the area of the lot, whichever is less subject to the following restrictions: 

i) for buildings and structures of 67 m² of lot coverage or less a maximum height 

of 5.5 metres shall be permitted; and 

ii) 

for buildings and structures with lot coverage between 68 m² to 93 m² a 

maximum height of 6.1 metres shall be permitted. 

(b) Section 3.3 of Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 to permit all accessory buildings and 

structures to be located in the front yard where a lot abuts a watercourse, provided 

the proposed building or structure is not located within the required front yard. 

Currently, accessory buildings and structures are only permitted in an interior side 

yard and a rear yard. 

Correspondence 

No correspondence has been received to date. 

Discussion 

As Council will recall the amendment being proposed originated from recommendations 

forwarded to Council from the Committee of Adjustment. At their March 22, 2012 

meeting the Committee of Adjustment passed the following resolution: 

Moved by D. Burr 

Seconded by M. Gilpin 

That the Committee of Adjustment recommend to the Council of the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores that Section 3.3.4 of Zoning By-law 1 of 

2003 be amended to include the following changes: 

Total lot coverage of all accessory buildings and structures on a lot in any 

residential zone shall not exceed 93m² or 10% of the lot area, whichever is 

less, with the following restrictions: 

a) 67 m² and under shall have a maximum height of 5.5 metres. 

b) 68 m² to 93 m² shall have a maximum height of 6.1 metres. 

Carried. 

Moved by D. Hales 

Seconded by B. Gordon 

That the Committee of Adjustment recommend to the Council of the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores that it authorize an amendment to Section 

3.3.3 of Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 to include the following changes: 

49

a) A detached accessory building or structure may be erected in the 

front yard of properties that abut a watercourse, provided it is not 

constructed within the required front yard setback. 

Carried. 

The Committee’s recommendations to Council were based on the large number of 

minor variance applications considered by the Committee over the past five years, 

relating to the size and height of detached accessory buildings and location within the 

front yard where al lot abutted a watercourse. The reason provided by the applicants in 

support of the requested variances in size and height included storage of larger 

recreational vehicles or to accommodate recreational activities such as workshops. The 

reason supporting requests for accessory buildings to be located in the front yard, 

where to locate the proposed buildings out of a hazardous area, being either a shoreline 

or floodplain. 

As the current trend does not show signs of change the Committee felt an amendment 

to the Zoning By-law was warranted. 

Planning Staff have reviewed the recommendations of the Committee and concur with 

their recommendations as they represent a reasonable approach to trend in the area for 

larger accessory structures. Further, the locating of accessory building in front yards on 

property which abut a watercourse or Lake Huron results in buildings being located 

outside of hazardous area association with the Lake Huron shoreline and floodplains 

and seems more practical in these situations where access around the dwelling is 

usually restricted by the dwelling location, lot width, natural vegetation and topography. 

I would suggest however that any dwelling located within a front yard on a lot abutting 

the lake or a watercourse be required to not only provide a front yard setback in 

compliance with the requirements for dwellings in the zone in which they are located, 

but to also provide side yards incompliance with the requirements for dwellings in the 

zone in which they are located. This will ensure that adjacent owner will not have 

accessory buildings closer to their side lot lines than is currently permitted by the by-law 

and maintain a uniform approach to building setbacks in the neighbourhood. 

Summary 

I can recommend that this application be approved subject to the recommendation 

respecting side yards for accessory buildings being incompliance with the requirements 

for dwellings in the zone in which they are located, as the Committee suggestions to 

Council reflect the current needs of the Lambton Shores residents and good planning. I 

have prepared an implementing by-law which incorporates the by-law changes 

contained in the Recommendation section of this report. If Council is in favour of the 

recommended changes, then they can approve the attached by-law. 

Respectfully submitted 

Patti L. Richardson 

Senior Planner 

50


BY-LAW 08 OF 2013 

Being a By-law to amend By-law 1 of 2003 

WHEREAS: the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores passed 

a comprehensive Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 on the 4th day of February, 2003; and 

AND WHEREAS: Council deems it desirable to amend the said By-law; and 

AND WHEREAS a public meeting was held on January 14, 2013 under Section 34(12) of 

the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990; 

NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores 

enacts as follows: 

1. Section 3.3.3(a) of Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 is amended by adding to the end 

of the section the following: 

“, except that a detached accessory building or structure may be permitted in the 

front yard of a lot that abuts a watercourse including Lake Huron, provided it is 

not located any closer to the front lot line, side lot line or exterior side lot line 

than is permitted for a dwelling in the residential zone in which it is located.” 

2. Section 3.3.4 of Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 is deleted and replaced with the 

following: 

“The Total Lot Coverage of all Accessory Buildings and Structures on a lot in a 

Residential Zone shall not exceed 93 square metres or 10% of the Lot Area of 

the lot whichever is less. This percentage shall be included as part of the 

Maximum Lot Coverage calculation Permitted in the Residential Zone 

requirements. The Height of any Accessory Building or Structure shall be as 

follows: 

i) for buildings and structures of 67 square metres of lot coverage or less a 

maximum height of 5.5 metres shall be permitted; and 

ii) for buildings and structures with lot coverage between 68 square metres to 93 

square metres a maximum height of 6.1 metres shall be permitted. 

The Height of the Building or Structure shall be measured from the finished floor to 

the highest point of the Building and Structure. Despite the foregoing the 

51

construction of fences shall conform to the Municipality of Lambton Shores 

Fencing By-law. 

3. This By-law comes into force and effect upon being finally passed. 

Read a FIRST and SECOND time this 14 th day of January, 2013. 

READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 14 th DAY OF January, 2013. 

___________________________ 

MAYOR – Bill Weber 

___________________________ 

CLERK – Carol McKenzie 

52


PL Report No. 02-2013 Monday, January 8, 2013 

TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZO-12/2012 

Location: 9 Water Street, Arkona 

Owner: Michael and Jenna Beernink 



submitted Michael and Jenna Beernink, requesting 

amendments to the Lambton Shores Zoning By-law 1 of 2003, 

as it relates to that part of lands known as 9 Water Street 

described as Lot 29, Registered Plan 5 to amend the Zoning 

from Residential 3 (R3) to Residential 1 (R1) so that one 

single detached dwelling can be constructed on the entire 

property be APPROVED and the attached implementing bylaw 

be enacted. 

REPORT 


The Applicants, Michael and Jenna Beernink, are requesting an amendment to Zoning Bylaw 

1 of 2003 as it affect the south half of lands known as 9 Water Street in Arkona and 

described as Lot 29, Registered Plan 5, from Residential 3 (R3) to Residential 1 (R1), so 

that a new single detached dwelling can be constructed on the entire lot comprised of 

Lots 29 and 30, Plan 5. The north part of the property, being Lot 30, Plan 5 is zoned 

Residential 1 (R1). 

Location 

The subject lands are located on the northeast corner of Water and Smith Streets in 

Arkona. The property is currently vacant, but until just recently was occupied by a two 

unit dwelling, which has been demolished. Lands to the north, east and west abut 

existing single detached dwellings and the lands to the south are occupied by a three 

unit townhouse (See ATTACHMENT 1). 


No correspondence has been received to date. 

53

Discussion 

The lands are currently designated “Residential” in the Lambton Shores Official Plan. 

The designation would allow the lands to be used for single detached residential 

dwelling purposes. 

Council will recall that at their December 3, 2012 meeting they considered a request from 

Mike and Jenna Beernink, to deem the two lots they own, being Lots 29 and 30, 

Registered Plan 5 (AK), not to be lots in a Registered Plan, so that they could be joined to 

create one lot to accommodate a new single detached dwelling proposed to be 

constructed by the Beerninks. At that meeting Council passed the following resolution: 



That Council approve a by-law deeming Lots 29 and 30, Registered Plan 

5 (AK), Municipality of Lambton Shores, not to be lots in a registered plan. 

Carried 

Council also approved By-law 130 of 2012, the deeming by-law. 

Summary 

I can support the applicants´ request and recommend the application be approved, as 

the use intended for the lot complies with the Residential designation on the lands and 

is in keeping with the character of the area. I have prepared an implementing by-law 

which incorporates the by-law changes contained in the Recommendation section of 

this report. If Council is in favour of the application, then they can approve the attached 

by-law. 




54

ATTACHMENT 1 

ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION ZO-12/2012 

LOCATION: 9 Water Street, Arkona (Lot 29, Plan 5) 

APPLICANT: Michael and Jenna Beernink 

55


BY-LAW 07 OF 2013 

Being a By-law to amend By-law 1 of 2003 

WHEREAS: the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores passed 

a comprehensive Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 on the 4th day of February, 2003; and 

AND WHEREAS: Council deems it desirable to amend the said By-law as it relates to 

lands known as 9 Water Street in Arkona and described as Lot 29, Registered Plan 5; and 

AND WHEREAS a public meeting was held on January 14, 2013 under Section 34(12) of 

the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990; 

NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores 

enacts as follows: 

1. Schedule ‘A-9’ to Zoning By-law 1 of 2003 is hereby amended by changing the 

zone symbol that applies to those lands as indicated on Schedule ‘A’ to this Bylaw 

from the: 

“RESIDENTIAL 3 (R3)” 

to the 

“RESIDENTIAL 1 (R1)” 




___________________________ 


___________________________ 


56


PL Report No. 03-2013 Tuesday, January 9, 2013 

TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



Zoning By-law Amendment application ZO-11/2012 

Location: 9983 Northville Crescent 

Owner: Bruce Hiscott 



submitted Bruce Hiscott, requesting amendments to the 

Lambton Shores Zoning By-law 1 of 2003, as it relates to 

lands known as 9983 Northville Road be TABLED until the 

February 11, 2013 Council Meeting to allow the applicant to 

meet with Municipal Staff and the MTO to discuss in more 

detail the site setbacks and upgrades required to allow a trailer 

sales establishment to be located on the lands in order to 

ensure that the zoning provisions approved by Council provide 

for the proper development of the lands incompliance with 

proper site planning and the Ministry of Transportation 

requirements; and 

That the public hearing scheduled for January 14 proceed so 

that anyone in attendance can convey to Council their support 

or concerns respecting the application. 

REPORT 


The Applicant, Bruce Hiscott, is requesting an amendment to the Commercial 4 (C4) 

zoning on lands known as 9983 Northville Crescent to add as a permitted use on the 

lands a “Travel Trailer Sales Establishment”. The Zoning By-law defines a “Travel Trailer 

Sales Establishment” as 

“means land and/or buildings used for the display for sale of travel trailers 

and includes the servicing, repair, cleaning, polishing and greasing of such 

vehicles and the sale of accessories and related products and the leasing or 

renting of such vehicles, but does not include a motor vehicle sales 

establishment as defined in this By-law.” 

58

Location 

The subject lands are located on the northwest corner of Highway 21 (Lakeshore Road) 

and Northville Crescent in Northville. The property has an area of approximately 4600 

m², a frontage of 44 metres on Northville Road and 86 metres on Highway 21. The 

property was vacant until just recently when a trailers sales establishment was 

located on the lands in contravention of the Zoning By-law and without site plan 

approval. Lands to the west are occupied by Oak Grove Trailer Park, which is 

comprised predominately of park model homes. Lands to the east, across Highway 21, 

are occupied by a campground. Lands to the north are owned by the Ausable Bayfield 

Conservation Authority and used for conservation purposes and lands to the south are 

owned by the Applicant and occupied by a building which houses his business Ultra 

Panel Systems (Sunrooms). (See ATTACHMENT 1). 


Correspondence has been received from Marvin and Alma Childs, owners of Oak Grove 

Trailer Park, which is located on lands immediately abutting the subject lands to the 

west. Mr and Mrs Child are requesting that any approval of the application include a 

requirement for a buffer between their property and the subject lands in the form of a 3 

metre high solid wood fence. 

Correspondence has been received from John Morrisey, Corridor Management Planner, 

Planning and Design Section, Southwest Region of the Ministry of Transportation. The 

Ministry advises that it has no objection to the zoning, however the applicant should be 

aware that Ministry permits are required to establish the use and as a condition of 

Ministry permits, the owner should be made aware of the following items: 

The owner shall submit a site plan, site servicing plan, grading plan and drainage 

plan for the proposed development to the Ministry for review and approval. The 

Ministry may also require a Storm Water Management Report upon review of 

these plans; 

All new buildings and structures integral to the development (including storm 

water management facilities) must be setback a minimum of 14 metres from the 

highway property limit. Parking shall be setback a minimum of 3 metres; 

Direct access onto Highway 21 will not be permitted. All access to the property 

shall be via Northville Crescent, located towards the rear of the property. The 

existing access to Highway 21 (shared with the adjacent neighbour) shall be 

modified as per Ministry standard CSAS-31-without taper. Once modified, the 

access to Highway 21 will be for the benefit and use of the adjacent neighbour 

only; 

Parking areas of sufficient size to accommodate the number of vehicles expected 

to visit the proposed development must be provided and maintained; 

The loading and unloading of trailers/vehicles/equipment is not permitted on 

Highway 21. The applicant will need to demonstrate that the property can 

accommodate the turning movement of delivery vehicles; and 

59

The owner shall erect a fence/barrier along the highway property limit including 

the daylight triangle, setback a minimum of 0.3 m from the highway right of way 

limit. 

Discussion 

The lands are designated “Northville Policy Area” in the Lambton Shores Official Plan. 

Permitted uses in this designation include a range of housing accommodations, local 

and tourist oriented commercial development including seasonal recreational 

campgrounds, institutional and open space uses. Policies in the plan also indicate that 

commercial development shall be directed towards the existing commercial nodes at the 

intersection of Highway 21 and the north entrance of Northville Crescent and in the area 

adjacent to Highway 21 between Port Franks and the south entrance of Northville 

Crescent and shall be subject to the commercial polices of the plan. Uses permitted by 

the commercial policies are those commercial uses intended to serve the day to day 

needs of the residents of the community, and tourists visiting or traveling though the 

municipality. 

Two of the objectives noted in Section 13.2 of the Lambton Shores Official Plan for the 

Northville Policy Area are as follows: 

 

 

To provide a range of commercial services to service the needs of the 

adjacent area and tourists; 

To ensure that development occurs in a manner which will enhance the 

aesthetics of the area and be compatible with the pattern of existing 

development. 

The Northville Policy Area policies in the Official Plan also indicate that direct access to 

Highway 21 will be discouraged. New development should be required to be accessed 

through service roads or Northville Crescent. The plan encourages the use of shared 

driveways, particularly for commercial development. Further, safe and adequate access 

shall be provided and access points to roads will be limited and designed to minimize 

any danger to vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Shared properly designed access shall 

be provided, wherever possible. Adequate off-street parking and loading spaces shall 

be located behind or beside the commercial establishment, where possible and the site 

shall be sufficiently landscaped. 

The lands are currently zoned Commercial 4 (C4) in the Lambton Shores Zoning By-law 

1 of 2003. Uses permitted in this zone include motor vehicle repair establishment, motor 

vehicle service establishment, bonded warehouse, farmers market, gasoline retail 

facility with accessory convenience store, drive in restaurant, truck stop and building 

structures and uses, including offices and a dwelling unit, accessory to a permitted use. 

The zoning on the lands also establishes the following regulations: 

a) Minimum Lot Area: 7,000 m² 

b) Minimum Lot Frontage 100 metres 

c) Minimum Front Yard Setback 30 metres 

d) Minimum Exterior Side Yard Setback 60 10 metres

e) Minimum Interior Side Yard 10 metres 

f) Minimum Rear Yard Setback 10 metres 

g) Maximum Building Height 12 metres 

i) Minimum Landscaped Open Space 10% 

The subject lands are located in that area of Northville permitted to be developed for 

commercial and residential uses by the Official Plan. The trailer sales use on the site 

was established on the lands in contravention of the Zoning By-law and without 

site plan approval. The commercial use, being proposed complies with the Official 

Plan with respect to use and as such I can support its inclusion in the Zoning. 

However there are other issues which need to be addressed which are as follows. 

Any zoning proposed for the development of the lands should include a provision which 

requires that a screen and setback be provided from the trailer park to the west. I would 

suggest that any open storage or parking area be located a minimum of 3 metres from 

the west lot line adjacent to the trailer park and that a 2.4 metre high fence be installed 

on the property line. This is similar to the requirements for buffering contained in Zoning 

By-law 1 of 2003 which requires that a 3 metre planting strip be provided on a 

commercial lot where it abuts a residential zone or use and that the planting strip when 

planted have a minimum height of 1 metre. Staff are suggesting that rather than the 

providing a buffer strip containing a vegetative screen that a solid wood fence be 

installed. The fence provides an instant screen which is far easier to maintain. However, 

that applicant could also enhance the area by augmenting the fence with some 

landscaping. Planting strips are intended to not only provide a screen from a 

commercial use they are also intended to provide a physical separation. 

Currently the zoning by-law requires that parking be provided at a rate of 1 space per 37 

m² of gross floor area. The applicant indicates that the use does not include any 

buildings, only the storage of the trailers which are for sale. Staff are not sure how a 

business transaction could be conducted on the site without some form of office unless 

one of the trailers would be used for such purpose. I would suggest that a minimum of 

2 designated parking spaces be required. Currently, the Zoning By-law requires that 

staff and customer parking areas and access driveways be hard surfaced with asphalt, 

concrete or paving stones and bound by a curb. Open storage areas which include the 

trailer storage area are required to be maintained with a stable surface treated so as to 

prevent the raising of dust. This is generally considered to be a gravel parking area 

which is properly graded and drained. The hand drawn site plan submitted with the 

application does not indicate what surface treatment is to be used for the trailer storage 

area which is considered to be open storage. 

New uses proposed to be established on lands are required to submit and have 

approved a site plan and to enter into a site plan agreement with the Municipality prior 

to the site being used for the new business. Unfortunately, the applicant located the 

use on the lands prior to getting the appropriate municipal and Ministry of 

Transportation approvals. The applicant has submitted a hand drawn site plan for 

purposes of this application. The plan as submitted does not satisfy municipal 

requirements for site plan approval. The plan does not have any measurements and as 

such it is difficult assess even from a preliminary perspective. It is unclear what 

setbacks are being provided to the trailer 61storage 

area from the lot lines and from

Northville Crescent and Highway 21. Generally a minimum landscaped strip of 6 metres 

is required along road allowances. The Ministry of Transportation has submitted 

comments respecting the development of the lands and is requiring prescribed setback 

from Highway 21 of 3 metres for parking areas and 14 metres for buildings and 

structures. Although, the Ministry indicates that parking areas may be located within 3 

metres of lot line abutting Highway 21, this has not in the past include open storage 

which is required to be located the same distance as buildings and structures from the 

highway, which is 14 metres. It should be noted that the Ministry’s setbacks are greater 

than setback in the C4 zone affecting the property and as a result other amendments to 

the C4 zone maybe required. 

In light of the concerns respecting site development I would recommend that this 

application be tabled to the February 11, 2013 Council meeting in order to allow the 

applicant, planning staff and the MTO to meet and discuss in more detail what site 

setbacks and site improvements are required. 

The applicant’s proposal to utilize an underutilized property within an established 

settlement area conforms to the Provincial Policy Statement which directs development 

and intensification within existing settlement areas. 

Summary 

Although I can support the applicant’s request to include a travel trailer sales 

establishment as a permitted use on the lands, as the use complies with the Official 

Plan, insufficient information respecting development of the lands has been submitted to 

ensure proper site development in compliance with the zoning by-law, municipal site 

planning requirements and the requirements of the Ministry of Transportation. 

Therefore, in order to ensure that the zoning provisions approved by Council provide for 

the proper development of the lands incompliance with proper site planning and Ministry 

of Transportation requirements, I recommend the application be TABLED until the 

February 11, 2013 Council Meeting, to allow the applicant to meet with Municipal Staff 

and the MTO to discuss in more detail the site setback and upgrades. However, the 

public hearing scheduled for January 14 should still be held and anyone in attendance 

allowed to convey to Council their support or concerns respecting the application. 




62

ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION ZO-11/2012 

LOCATION: 9983 Northville Crescent 

APPLICANT: Bruce Hiscott 

ATTACHMENT 1 

63


PL Report No. 04-2013 Wednesday, January 9, 2013 

TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



Suncor Energy Cedar Point Wind Power Project and 

NextEra Energy Canada Jericho Wind Power Project 

Municipal Consultation Form and Municipal Consultation Package 


For information. 

REPORT 

Council will recall that at their November 5, 2012 meeting they authorized Staff to retain 

a consultant to review the reports submitted as part of the application for a Renewable 

Energy Approval for Suncor Energy’s Cedar Point Wind Power Project. Staff have been 

unable to retain the services of a consultant to review the reports as all large 

engineering firms who have the varied professional staff necessary to review all the 

aspects of the reports are retained by wind energy companies and thus have a conflict 

and will not be retained by Lambton Shores. 

As such staff are reviewing the reports in order to complete for Council review and 

submission to the Province, the Municipal Comments solicited by the Province as part 

of the Application for a Renewable Energy Approval (REA application). Staff has also 

reviewed other Municipalities comment forms for consideration and reference. The 

response also builds on Clerks report 138-2012 and will meet the reporting 

requirements. It is anticipated that a draft Municipal Comments for the Suncor Energy 

Cedar Point Power Project will be presented to Council for review at the January 28, 

2013 Council Meeting. 

Since November the Municipality has also received the reports submitted as part of the 

application for a Renewable Energy Approval for the NextEra Energy Canada Jericho 

Wind Power Project. Staff are also reviewing these reports and anticipate that a draft of 

the Municipal Comments for the NextEra Energy Canada Jericho Wind Power Project 

will be presented to Council for review at the February 7, 2013 Council Meeting. 

Trusting this is satisfactory. 




70


D.S.C. Report No. 01-2013 Friday, November 30, 2012 

TO: 

FROM : 

RE: 


Brent Kittmer, Director of Community Services 

Communities in Bloom - Update 


It is recommended that D.C.S. Report No. 01-2012 be 

approved and the Lambton Shores Communities in Bloom 

Committee continue with their efforts in the program. 

REPORT 

Lambton Shores has been a proud competitor in the Communities in Bloom (CIB) 

program for the past five years; three at the provincial level, and the past two at the 

National level. On October 13, 2012 we received the news that Lambton Shores had 

won its population category with a 5 Bloom rating and special recognition being given to 

the committee’s Native Tree Project. Lambton Shores was also recognized for its 

outstanding volunteers as the recipient of the Home Hardware Community Involvement 

Award. We were also a finalist for the Youth Involvement Award. The Committee Co- 

Chairs, Catherine Minielly and Grace Dekker, presented the awards to Council at the 

October 15, 2012 meeting. 

The success of Communities in Bloom would not be possible without a collaborative 

effort between the Municipality, residents, service clubs, community groups and 

businesses. There is a significant amount of coordination, planning and communication 

required in order to maintain the program, and the Committee should be highly praised 

for their efforts with the program over the past five years. The charts below summarize 

the marks Lambton Shores has earned during years of competition. As it can be seen, 

the marks have gradually improved each year. 

71

Provincial Competition 

Category 

Top Mark 

2008 

Actual 

2009 

Actual 

2010 

Actual 

Tidiness 125 100.5 107 111 

Environmental Awareness 125 101 107 108 

Community Involvement 125 109 111 112 

Natural & Cultural Heritage 125 94 90 95 

Tree Urban Forest Management 125 102.5 99 98 

Landscaped Areas 125 99.5 105 104 

Floral Displays 125 107 110 111 

Turf & Ground Covers 125 92 93 97 

Total 1000 805.5 822 836 

Percent 80.55% 82.20% 83.60% 

Blooms 4 Blooms 5 Blooms 5 Blooms 

2008- Floral Displays Award; Special Mention- Dedicated to Community Partners 

2009- Community Involvement Award; Special Mention- Grand Bend Beach Enhancement 

2010-Tidiness Award; Special Mention- Knox Presbyterian Church 

National Competition 

Category Top Mark 2011 Actual 2012 Actual 

Tidiness 150 132.25 134.25 

Environmental Action 150 134.5 134.75 

Heritage Conservation 150 133.75 132.75 

Urban Forestry 175 149 146.25 

Landscaping (Turf & Ground Covers) 200 173.75 174 

Floral Displays 175 157.5 159.5 

Total 1000 880.75 881.5 

Percent 88.08% 88.15% 

Blooms 5 Blooms 5 Blooms 

2011 - Finalist for Environmental Action Award, Special Mention – Grand Bend Beach 

Revitalization 

2012 - Winner of Community Involvement Award; Finalist for the Youth Involvement 

Award; Special Mention-Native Tree Project 

The 2012 Evaluation Form is attached. This document contains the scores achieved 

under each category along with the judges’ comments and recommendations for the 

coming years. The Co-Chairs had a chance to speak with the municipalities in our 

category and it appears to have been a tight race, with all five participants receiving the 

5 Bloom rating. A copy of the evaluation has been distributed to the Area Managers 

72

and the Project & Infrastructure Manager to review and perhaps incorporate some of the 

recommendations into municipal operations. 

As the recipient of the Home Hardware Community Involvement Award, Lambton 

Shores not only gains national recognition for its volunteers, but also the chance to have 

gardening expert, Mark Cullen, come to our municipality. The committee is working out 

all the details of this exciting event and it is hoped to be a major fundraiser for the 

Lambton Shores program. 

Communities in Bloom program participants have continued to benefit from the program 

in many ways, including: increased civic pride and community involvement; participation 

from all ages and walks of life; positive benefits for the tourism, hospitality and retail 

industries; and, improved quality of life. Specifically in Lambton Shores, Communities in 

Bloom has brought people together from opposite ends of the recently amalgamated 

municipality to work together toward a common goal. The program has created 

successful partnerships between all garden clubs, the beautification committee, 

horticultural society, and has gained support from the BIA and Chamber of Commerce, 

as well as many other service clubs, community groups and businesses. 

The Lambton Shores Committee met on Monday, November 26, 2013 to discuss future 

plans for the program. The committee members that were present at the meeting 

unanimously agreed that they would like to continue on with the program at a 

competitive level by entering the Class of Champions category. This is a competition 

amongst past winners. Class of Champions is similar to that of the National 

competition, however we would not be eligible for the Outstanding Achievement 

Awards. Lambton Shores would be placed in either the large, medium or small 

population subcategory, depending on the number of entrants. Judges would still tour 

and evaluate the community in a similar manner to the national level. 

The committee has worked hard to get as many people in Lambton Shores involved in 

this program and to not carry on at a competitive level, may result in people losing 

interest. There are a number of communities that have not carried on after successfully 

winning at the national level and it is something that is noticed when you visit these 

areas. Having the judges come to evaluate the community gives the residents and staff 

that extra push to make the community the best it can be. 

73

The committee is requesting Council’s consent to continue on with the program in 2013. 

If Council’s consent is received, the committee would like to incorporate the following 

items into their 2013 plans. Many of the items are a continuation of past projects but 

have incorporated the recommendations from the judges’ evaluation. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Committee has identified the theme colours for 2013 as Shades of Pink. For 

flower suggestions and more information on Communities in Bloom, visit 

www.lambtonshores.ca. 

The Committee plans to continue the Native Tree Program by stressing the 

importance of replacing trees that have been or will be destroyed by the Emerald 

Ash Borer. The Committee would like to work with the municipality on 

developing a policy with regards to the replacement of trees in public spaces 

infected with the EAB. Three new feature trees have been selected – the Red 

Oak, the Serviceberry and the Eastern Hemlock. The brochure on native trees 

distributed by CIB has been updated with the 2013 tree selections. 

The Heritage Plaque Program that recognizes the historical buildings of our 

municipality, and the annual Trash Bash events will continue for 2013. 

CiB will continue its partnerships with local service clubs, area garden clubs, the 

Lambton Shores Nature Trails Committee, the Hillside Green Thumb Gardeners, 

Doors Open and the Phragmites Group. It will also seek out new partnerships as 

required. 

The Committee would like the Adopt-A-Pot/Plot program to take a different 

direction this year by planting herbs, vegetables or flowers in the pots throughout 

Lambton Shores. Adopters will water, weed and now harvest the pots. 

The Committee will build on the success of the Community Gardens in Grand 

Bend, Thedford and Arkona and try to establish gardens in Forest and Port 

Franks as well 

Lambton Shores “In Bloom” will see new categories introduced in 2013 to open 

up the contest to more residents. 

The Communities in Bloom Committee wishes to extend its thanks to Council for its 

support in the Communities in Bloom program in 2012. It is hoped that the value of the 

program for the community is still apparent and that Council will continue to support it in 

the coming years. 


Brent Kittmer, P.Eng. 

Director of Community Services 

Report Prepared by Shannon Prout – Acting Facilitator of Recreation & Leisure 

Attachments: 

1. 2012 Evaluation Form 

74

Evaluation 

2012 

Form 

Lambton Shores, 

Ontario 

75

2012 Evaluation Form 

Community: 

Province: 

Lambton Shores 

Ontario 

Category: 10,001 – 20,000 

The evaluation is based on 8 criteria, divided into the 6 following sections, 

assessing 4 sectors of the community: 

Tidiness 134.25 / 150.00 

Environmental Action 134.75 / 150.00 

Heritage Conservation 132.75 / 150.00 

Urban Forestry 146.25 / 175.00 

Landscape (including Turf & Groundcovers) 174.00 / 200.00 

Floral Displays 159.50 / 175.00 

* Community Involvement is included in each of these sections 

Total 881.50 / 1000.00 

Percentage : 88.15% 

Bloom rating: 

5 blooms 

Bloom rating: 

Up to 55%: 1 bloom. 56% to 63%: 2 blooms. 64% to 72%: 3 blooms 

73% to 81%: 4 blooms. >82%: 5 blooms. 

Mention : 

Native Tree Project 

Representative (s) of Community 

Name: Catherine Minielly Function : CiB Committee Co-chair 

Name: Grace Dekker Function : CiB Committee Co-chair 

Name: Ruth Illman Function : Municipal Councillor 

Judges 

Name: Bob Lewis Name: Lucie Gagné 

Evaluation date: 29 July – 01 August 2012 

2 | P age 

76

IMPORTANT NOTES: 

Evaluation is adjusted to the climate and environmental conditions of the community. 

Some aspects of the evaluation might not be applicable: scoring will be prorated. 

The score will vary from the previous year based on the facts that the evaluation form is subject to modifications 

each year and that the evaluation is based on the perception of the current Judges. 

SECTORS OF EVALUATION 

Municipal: 

- Municipal properties, parks and green spaces, streets, streetscapes 

- Properties owned and run by municipality such as Museums, historical sites 

Business and Institutions: 

Properties owned and managed by 

- Business : commercial sector, shopping centres, commercial streets, industrial parks, manufacturing plants 

- Institutions : schools, universities, churches, hospitals, service and community organization buildings (YMCA, 

Legion), private museums, Canada Post 

- Tourism bureaus, Chamber of Commerce offices 

- Farms : in rural communities, farms can be considered in this section 

Residential: 

- Citizens and Citizen groups acting within their own properties 

- Residential property owners, rate payer groups 

Community Involvement: 

The principle of community involvement is so fundamental to the program that it deserves to be evaluated in each of 

the sections of evaluation. Community Involvement will continue to be a highlight of the awards ceremony 

- Individuals & Service and citizen groups – all contributing to various aspects of community improvement 

- Organized clubs such as horticultural societies, garden clubs, community associations 

- Social clubs such as Rotary, Lions, Optimist 

- Participation (financial and/or in-kind or employee participation) by the Municipality, Businesses and Institutions. 

77


GENERAL COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS 

On behalf of Communities in Bloom, the municipality of Lambton Shores is to be congratulated for participating 

in the National Edition. 

The Communities in Bloom Committee and all associated volunteers, organizations, service groups, business 

supporters and the Municipal Council are to be congratulated for the excellent job in implementing a fantastic 

Community in Blooms program that has embraced all aspects of the program and that appears to have helped 

greatly to foster a green environment and to help improve the quality of life and the aesthetic appearance of the 

municipality of Lambton Shores. 

A special thanks to the Dynamic Trio of Catherine Minielly, Grace Dekker, Ruth Illman who have shown great 

leadership in coordinating all the efforts of the program and for conducting an excellent evaluation tour. The 

Judges would also like to thank the CiB Committee members, volunteers, residents and Municipal staff for their 

hospitality, special events and exceptional tour. It was great to see the wonderful support for the CiB Program 

demonstrated by Mayor Bill Weber, the Deputy Mayor and all the Councillors – thank you. 

The Community profile document provides a wonderful testimony to the achievements of all participants in the 

Program. All participants are to be congratulated for the terrific results that they have achieved over the years. 

All of these items have been included in the evaluation although, due to limited space, only some are actually 

referred to in this evaluation report. Our apologies go out to those that we have not acknowledged and to the 

four residents that we did not meet. 

Lambton Shores is an attractive town, with good first impressions being gained as you approach the various 

community entrance signs. These impressions are confirmed as you enter the core areas and the proliferation 

of floral displays, great landscaping, and tidy well kept neighbourhoods. From the results achieved it appears 

that forward looking, well developed Strategic Plans, Official Plan, various Community Development Plans and 

many community programs including Communities in Bloom have been very successful in uniting several small 

towns into the amalgamated Municipality of Lambton Shores while at the same time recognizing and building on 

and maintaining the unique culture, heritage and function/vocation of the original towns – well done!! 

Much has been achieved over the years that Lambton Shores has been participating in the Program. It is 

encouraging to note that past recommendations have been acted upon promptly where possible. With that in 

mind, there are several new recommendations mentioned in the six areas of evaluation for continued 

improvement and advancement towards higher levels of achievement. There are opportunities for expanding 

the “greening” of events, added protection of the urban forest, increasing commercial participation in the floral 

program, expanding heritage tours and increasing recycling and water conservation. 

4 | P age 

78

TIDINESS 

Tidiness includes an overall tidiness effort made by the municipality, businesses, institutions, and residents of the 

community. Elements for evaluation are green spaces (parks, etc.), medians, boulevards, sidewalks, streets, municipal, 

commercial, institutional and residential properties, ditches, road shoulders, vacant lots and buildings and signage, with 

regard to weeds, maintenance and repair, litter clean-up (including cigarette butts and gum), graffiti and vandalism. 

Max 

Actual 

Municipal 

Tidiness, order, cleanliness and first impressions 15 13.5 

Community anti-litter awareness programs 5 4 

Effective bylaws & policies and enforcement; for litter control, graffiti prevention including 

notices & posters 

10 8.5 

Cleanliness of public green infrastructure: parks, streetscapes (sidewalks, planters, etc.) 15 14 

Cleanliness of urban signage and furniture such as benches, litter and recycling containers 15 13.75 

Business & Institutions 

Tidiness, order and cleanliness and first impressions. 15 13.5 

Condition of buildings (exterior maintenance), grounds, sidewalks and parking lots 15 13.5 

Condition of urban furniture: benches, litter and recycling containers 5 4 

Residential 

Tidiness, order and cleanliness 20 18 

Condition of buildings, grounds and yards 15 13.5 

Community Involvement 

Public participation in community, neighbourhood or individual street tidiness, clean-up 

programs, activities and annual maintenance (including promotion, organization, innovations 

involving youth and seniors, etc.) 

Support – financial and/or in-kind or participation by the Municipality, Businesses and 

Institutions for community clean-up programs 

10 9 

10 9 

Tidiness Total 150.00 134.25 

79


TIDINESS 

Observations: 

Great first impressions of Lambton Shores – everywhere we went the municipality was clean, neat and very little 

or no litter or graffiti. In the rural areas, the ditches were relatively clean and many residents cut the turf along 

the road way of their primary residence. 

A terrific contribution by all segments of the community (community groups, service clubs, individuals, 

businesses, the municipality, CiB) in keeping the town tidy was very evident. 

Kudos to the beach clean-up program – excellent service to the users!! 

The street furniture in Thedford was neat, effective and could be an ideal model for all others. 

Recommendations: 

Strive for consistency in providing garbage and recycling containers in all locations – this should help continue to 

ensure a tidy community and continue to promote recycling. 

Continue to provide street and park furniture in all locations. 

Keep up all the great efforts in community clean-up. 

Continue to explore means of removing green material in hard surfaces, particularly in high profile locations; 

these hard surface weeds and grasses diminishes the impact of the hard work of everyone involved in the 

community general clean up projects. Some options include treatment with industrial vinegar, hot water (weed 

steamer), pressure washer, flame (Weed Garden Propane Torch) and manual removal. 

6 | P age 

80

ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION 

Environmental action includes efforts and achievement by the municipality, businesses, institutions, and residents of the 

community, with respect to: policies, by-laws and best practices, 3-R initiatives (reduce/reuse/recycle), waste reduction, 

landfill sites, hazardous waste collections, water conservation, naturalization, environmental stewardship activities, and 

environmentally friendly transportation, under the guiding principles of sustainable development. 

Municipal 

Sustainable development strategy: policies, guidelines, long-term planning / vision; effective bylaws 

/ policies and their enforcement; and public education programs and activities. 

Waste management programs such as 3-R (recycling, re-use, reduce), composting and including 

activities such as landfill site management, shredding of Christmas trees & handling of hazardous 

waste including e-waste collection 

Water conservation and reduction programs: efficient appliance incentives or promotion, efficient 

irrigation and use of non-potable water, water restriction policies 

Energy conservation programs such as alternate forms of energy (ex. geothermal, biomass, wind, 

solar), efficient street and signal lighting and shielding for night skies issues & promotion of energy 

audits 

Environmental actions such as: 

Greening of operations fleet for park maintenance: such as conversion to higher efficiency vehicles, 

use of alternative fuels and air quality programs: monitoring, anti-idling advisory / bylaws, efficient 

use of vehicle fleet such as use of crew cabs, bicycles, any other energy-saving transportation. 

Development and expansion of bike lanes and recreational pathways. 

Initiatives and Innovation, such as: green roofs, green walls; re-use of sites; engineered wetlands 

and bio-walls. 

Brownfield redevelopment, remediation, land reclamation. 


Participation in the environmental effort : such as waste management (recycle, reuse, reduce), 

water conservation, energy conservation, brownfield management 

Corporate environmental innovation / stewardship, initiatives, activities (Ex. Environmental clean-up 

activities) 

Residential 

Max 

Actual 

20 18.5 

10 8.75 

10 8.75 

10 8.75 

20 18.75 

10 8.5 

10 8.75 

Participation in the 3-R (recycle, reuse, reduce) initiatives and composting 20 18.5 

Adoption of water conservation practices & policies including rainwater collection. 15 13.5 


Public participation in public forums and policy development on environmental issues 5 4.25 

Public participation in community, neighbourhood or individual street environmental activities and 

programs (including, promotion, organization and evidence of taking ownership), etc.) 

Support – financial and/or in-kind or participation by the Municipality, Businesses and Institutions 

in public environmental activities and programs 

10 8.75 

10 9 

Environmental Action Total 150.00 134.75 

81

ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION 

8 | P age 


Observations: 

The Judges were impressed with the multiplicity of environmental activities/achievements throughout the 

community such as: comprehensive waste management program ; Blue Flag designation at the two Marinas 

and the Grand Bend Beach; protection of sand dunes; street light conversion; LEED direction for buildings; 

S.W.I.M. project; Return the Landscape at Grand Bend Beach; Nature Trails Committee; Phragmites working 

group; businesses environment actions (green initiatives); Environmental commitment and environmental 

awareness; and Aquafest promoting the environment. 

It is also great to see so many different groups, individuals and businesses involved in environmental activities. 

It is very encouraging to see the emphasis that all levels of the community place on the natural environment 

including native trees, protection of dunes, organic gardening and oak savannah. 

Garbage tags appear to be an effective tool and incentive to promote recycling. 


Expand the Grand Bend Environment Committee and or create similar committees in all community centers to 

help execute and advise on the City Environmental Action Plan. 

Continue to work with all groups for a concentrated plan of action to help eradicate/control Phragmites. 

Consider looking towards more user friendly collection and disposal of yard waste – convenient drop off 

locations or bi-weekly collection of brown bags – compost the collection and recycle to city landscapes or to 

local residents. 

Encourage Bluewater to acquire the equipment to collect and compost kitchen waste. 

Consider a rain barrel promotion program with a possible subsidy to promote water recycling and conservation. 

Approach the golf courses to undertake the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for Golf Courses (ACSP). 

This is an international program administered by Audubon International designed to help landowners preserve 

and enhance the environmental quality of their property. This program works solely with golf courses helping 

them to create environmentally friendly areas while still having great places to play golf. It focuses on: 

Environmental Planning, Wildlife and Habitat Management, Chemical Use Reduction and Safety, Water 

Conservation, Water Quality Management and Outreach and Education. 

Great initiatives taken with LEED for the Thedford Legacy Center; consider adopting LEED as a guideline for the 

design of all new town buildings and encourage any new commercial buildings to do the same. 

Consider moving towards making all events on municipal lands “green events”. 

Consider the implementation of a green procurement policy for all municipal purchases. 

Continue to promote environmental initiatives: ex.: place environmental pamphlets in the local water bills 

distributed to all residents. 

Continue to work on expansion and connection of trails linking all regions together thus further strengthening 

the new municipality and providing recreation and alternative travel routes. 

82

HERITAGE CONSERVATION 

Heritage Conservation includes efforts made by the municipality, businesses and institutions, and residents to preserve 

heritage within their community. Priority in evaluation is given to natural heritage, as well as the integration of landscape 

and streetscapes as it pertains to the built heritage of a community. Also consists of preservation of cultural heritage 

which includes monuments, memorials, artefacts, museums and history, archives, traditions, customs, heritage foods and 

the arts and festivals and celebrations. The evaluation includes: 

-natural heritage management plans: sites, parks, cemeteries, heritage gardens and trees, native plants; 

- the relationship of the landscape to the built heritage; 

-overall preservation of traditions and customs through year-round festivals and celebrations, events and parades, 

heritage foods and the arts. 

As well, the participation of groups such as the Historical Society is considered. 

Municipal 

Max 

Actual 

Heritage policies, by-laws and their enforcement and effective programs 15 13.5 

Natural and cultural heritage management plan and preservation initiatives: including cultural 

landscapes, use of native plants, heritage gardens, heritage trees, cemeteries, museums, 

heritage sites 

Management and promotion of heritage (through communications, information and support 

programs, economic development / tourism) including natural and cultural heritage initiatives 

throughout the year, and preservation of traditions, and customs 

15 14 

15 13.5 

Interpretative and signage programs, walking tours, festivals/celebrations (year round) 15 13.5 

Activities and programs (year-round) for education and use of natural heritage sites for and by 

the public 

15 13.75 

New programs and initiatives to promote local heritage 10 8.5 


Conservation, restoration and reuse of heritage buildings and grounds 15 13.25 

Promotion of local heritage, including heritage gardens, native plants, and heritage trees 15 13.25 

Residential 

Conservation / restoration and reuse of sites / buildings 10 8.25 

Conservation of cultural and heritage elements pertaining to their own private lands and 

structures. 

5 4 


Public participation in community, neighbourhood or individual in cultural and natural 

heritage programs including heritage community events/activities, including year round 

cultural festivals & celebrations and preservation of traditions, customs, food, music, dance 

10 8.5 

and crafts (including promotion, organization etc.). 


Institutions (including Historical Societies) in community initiated, natural and cultural 

8.75 

10 

heritage activities and programs including cultural festivals & celebrations throughout the 

year and preservation of traditions, customs, food, music, dance and crafts. 

Heritage Conservation Total 150.00 132.75 

83


HERITAGE CONSERVATION 

Observations: 

Cultural and natural heritage conservation and promotion is a very strong component of the way of life in 

Lambton Shores. The draft Official Plan recognizes and promotes heritage conservation. The community has 

many heritage facilities and initiatives including: Forest Museum and travelling road show; several heritage 

walking tours; historic streetscape policies and design guidelines; inventory of heritage buildings; Lambton 

Heritage Museum, Century Farm program; Forest Kineto theatre (& museum) ; Forest train station and caboose; 

and Arkona Lions Museum and Information Centre. 

Congratulations on being a strong participant in Doors Open: this is an excellent way to showcase and educate 

the public and visitors about local heritage and significant buildings. 

All components of the community (businesses, community groups, clubs, service groups, individuals, the 

municipality) are greatly involved in many activities that highlight the culture and heritage of all aspects of the 

community including: Homemade Jam Festival (music not the kind you eat); Winter Carnivals, Thedford Funion 

Days; Aquafest; Canada Day; Arkona Funtastic Days; Blossom Tour; Forest Fair; and various charity events, etc. 


The draft Official Plan recognizes heritage conservation; the completion of a comprehensive Heritage Policy and 

Action Plan will help ensure the effective management and preservation of the cultural and natural heritage of 

the municipality. In the policy, consider initiating a grant scheme (dollar grant or funds matching, reduction in 

taxes, and interest free loans, etc.) to provide incentives to ensure the rehabilitation and preservation of 

heritage buildings. 

Kettle Point and the Kettle Rocks are a very important aspect of the natural heritage of the community. Erection 

of interpretive signage at these locations would contribute to sharing these treasures with visitors and locals. 

The Kettle Point Veterans Memorial is an important aspect of the cultural heritage of the local aboriginals and 

has very strong symbolism; interpretative signage at this location could facilitate telling this fascinating story to 

all visitors to the site. 

Complete the significant heritage building inventory and subsequent plaguing and expand and promote 

walking/driving tours of these treasures in order to share with all. Add heritage trees to the inventory and 

tours. 

Continue to explore the possibility of murals throughout the community – a wonderful way to depict and 

promote the history and culture of the municipality and to also add diversity to the streetscape and landscape. 

10 | P age 

84

URBAN FORESTRY 

Urban Forestry includes the efforts made by the municipality, businesses and institutions, and residents with regards to 

written policies, by-laws, standards for tree management (selection, planting, and maintenance), long and short-term 

management plans, tree replacement policies, tree inventory, Integrated Pest Management (IPM), heritage, memorial 

and commemorative trees. 

Municipal 

Max 

Actual 

Overall impact, benefit and first impression of the urban forest 10 8.5 

Policies, regulations and tree by-laws, tree protection and planting on public and private lands 10 8 

Urban forestry planning and design, including integration with overall landscape plan 10 8.25 

Measures to preserve, protect, manage and expand overall tree inventory, including woodlots 10 8 

Plan of action: procurement, species diversity (including native trees), selection of hardy species 10 8.5 

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) / Plant HealthCare (PHC): plan of action for invasive pest 

detection and control, information on current infestations and diseases 

10 8.25 

Public information program on good planting techniques and maintenance programs 10 8.5 

Qualified personnel and/or crew training 10 7.75 


Design, species diversity and planting of trees in landscapes 15 13 

Maintenance programs and best practices: watering, pruning, IPM 10 8 

Inclusion of diversified (including native), hardy species for planting on properties 10 8 

Residential 

Design, species diversity and planting of trees in landscapes 15 13 

Inclusion of diversified (including native), hardy species for planting on residential properties 10 8.5 

Maintenance best practices 10 8.25 


Public participation in tree planting and conservation programs such a Green Streets Canada, 

Arbour Day, Maple Leaf Day, and other tree planting and maintenance programs and activities 

on public lands (including promotion, organization etc.). 

Support – financial and/or in-kind or participation or promotion by the Municipality, Businesses 

and Institutions for community tree planting and conservation programs on public lands. 

15 13.25 

10 8.5 

Urban Forestry Total 175.00 146.25 

85


URBAN FORESTRY 

Observations: 

The Native Tree Project, a CiB partnership, was created to educate community volunteers on tree planting and 

maintenance and to plant native trees. In two short years much has been achieved: a “how to” brochure 

produced and distributed, 20% off tree coupons from local nurseries circulated, grandest tree contest 

established, TD Friends of the Environment grant received with matching funds from Community donations, and 

the planting, by volunteers, of dozens of specimen trees and hundreds of seedlings in various public areas. 

The Municipal tree nursery will help ensure a supply of tolerant climate adjusted trees for planting. 

The greatest tree contest is a great step in protecting and celebrating heritage and specimen trees. 

There is a tree inventory that is used for urban forest planning and community development planning. It will 

also provide a good planning tool for infill. 


Consider that visiting dignitaries be encouraged to purchase (including acquisition and two years of 

maintenance) a “tree” as a hospitality gift for the Municipality, instead of all the memorabilia that is usually 

presented and hung on walls or stored away. Conversely have the Municipality purchase a “tree” as a “gift” to 

visiting dignitaries. This will be a great asset for the Municipality, will contribute to environmental sustainability 

and will also contribute to reducing the tree planting and maintenance budget. 

Consider providing irrigation of the tree nursery to help ensure survival and a good quality product. 

Consider a by-law to protect individual specimen trees on private lands and help preserve the municipal tree 

cover. If trees must be removed, consider a requirement for a two for one replacement. 

Continue to upgrade and train staff in good tree management and maintenance practices through courses such 

as those offered by OPA or others. 

Considering the increase of tree and plant diseases, it might be prudent to train a permanent employee to 

identify plant problems (insect, diseases...) instead of relying entirely on a contractor. 

12 | P age 

86

LANDSCAPE (Parks & Grounds, Green Spaces, Streetscapes - including Turf & Groundcovers) 

This section of the evaluation supports all efforts to create an environment showcasing the overall surroundings. The overall plan and 

design must be suitable for the intended use and location on a year-round basis. Elements for evaluation include: native and 

introduced materials; balance of plants, materials and constructed elements; appropriate integration of hard surfaces and art 

elements, use of turf and groundcovers. Landscape design should harmonize the interests of municipal, commercial and residential 

sectors of the community. Standards of execution and maintenance should demonstrate best practices, including quality of 

naturalization, use of groundcovers and wildflowers, turf management and maintenance. The evaluation will consider how the spaces 

create a sense of place within the community, actively utilized year-round. 

Max Actual 

Municipal 

Landscape Plan: integrated and implemented throughout the municipality 10 8.25 

Turf management programs, Integrated Pest Management (IPM), Plant Health Care (PHC), 

alternative solutions to diseases and infestations when appropriate, increased naturalization, 

10 8.25 

alternate mowing frequency and water management 

First impressions of the community including gateway / entrance treatments 10 8.5 

Landscape maintenance policies, standards, best practices and programs 10 8.25 

Sustainable designs (seasonally adjusted year round): energy efficient, use of green materials, 

naturalization, xeriscaping, suitable plant varieties 

10 8.5 

Urban and civic design standards for streetscape and public places: flags, banners, public art, 

fountains, site furnishings, seasonal design and décor, walkways and paving materials 

10 8.75 

Landscape maintained to appropriate standards and specifications 10 8.5 

Demonstrated year-round opportunities and programs for education and use of parks and green 

spaces (parks and recreation programs, city festivals and events) 

10 8.25 

Qualified personnel (including seasonal staff) and/or training 5 3.5 


Sustainable designs (seasonally adjusted year round): energy efficient, use of green materials, 

naturalization, xeriscaping, alternate groundcovers 

Contribution to urban and civic design and public green spaces above requirements: such as public 

art, streetscape, site furniture, fountains & innovation in concept & design 

Adequate ongoing life cycle management (ongoing maintenance, ground & asset management, 

rehabilitation & replacement ) of all landscape elements 

Residential 

10 8.5 

10 8.25 

10 8.5 

Streetscape appeal of landscapes (year-round, seasonal, themed) 15 13.5 

Maintenance of properties: lawn care, tree and shrub maintenance 15 13.5 

Selection of plant material (native, local, innovative, including edible gardening) 15 13.5 


Public participation in community programs such as: "yard of the week", volunteer park 

maintenance, holiday illumination & decoration (including promotion, organization etc.). 

15 14 

Recognition (by municipality and/or by volunteer groups) of volunteer efforts in all aspects of the 

Communities in Bloom Program including tidiness, environmental action, urban forestry, landscape, 15 14 

floral and natural & Cultural Heritage activities . 

Support – financial and/or in-kind or participation by the Municipality, Businesses and Institutions 

9.5 

10 

for community landscape programs and activities 

Landscape Total 200.00 174.00 

87


LANDSCAPE 

Observations: 

Throughout the Municipality there is a good variety of landscape elements including trees, shrub beds, floral 

baskets, floral beds and planters, manicured turf and naturalized areas. There are also a variety of hardscapes 

elements including entrance signs, fountains, gazebos, benches, monuments, tributes and interpretation panels. 

All these elements are uniquely designed and arranged and are integrated throughout the community. All 

landscape elements are meticulously maintained by Municipal staff and dozens of enthusiastic volunteers. The 

landscaped turf areas are also well maintained with a thorough turf management program. The additional small 

signs in some of the gardens/floral beds indicating who sponsors &/or maintains the garden is an excellent 

means of recognition and feedback. Including the types of flowers in the bed also provides invaluable 

information to visitors/residents viewing the beds. Overall, this is a very impressive presentation. 

The various gateway signs are unique for each community and generally are well landscaped and provide an 

attractive entrance to the various communities. 

Downtown planters are decorated for the winter season. 

Forest is a beautiful landscaped center with the renovated train station (library) and park. Most floral elements 

are maintained by volunteers or businesses as an “adopt a bed”. 

There is a keen young staff that is eager to learn, adaptable to cross training and are producing excellent results. 

The community is to be congratulated for the exceptional community involvement in creating, upgrading and 

maintaining parks, such as Children’s Park in Grande Bend, Parkette in Forest, Ball Diamond, Kettle Point 

Veterans garden, many school grounds and businesses. Service and Business Clubs such as Lions Club , Kiwanis 

Club, Horticultural Society , BIA, Chamber of Commerce, Royal Canadian Legion and Community Grant 

Organizations also are very active either fundraising, planning, assisting and/or delivering a variety of 

community green projects and other activities. 


Where there is signage in floral beds, including the types of flowers in the bed also provides invaluable 

information to visitors/residents viewing the beds. 

Continue to expand and create community gardens where there is a demand. 

Continue the efforts made to train new staff and expand to include more technical training in horticulture and 

arboriculture (check OPA). 

Consider involving the children in gardening clubs; they will be tomorrow's "managers" and it is a good way to 

get them aware of the environment at a young age. 

14 | P age 

88

FLORAL DISPLAYS 

"Floral Displays" evaluates the efforts made by the municipality, businesses and institutions, and residential sectors of 

the community to design, plan, execute, and maintain floral displays of high quality standards. Evaluation includes the 

design and arrangements of flowers and plants (annuals, perennials, bulbs, ornamental grasses) in the context of 

originality, distribution, location, diversity and balance, colour, and harmony. This pertains to flowerbeds, carpet 

bedding, containers, baskets and window boxes. 

Municipal 

Integration into overall landscape plan and distribution through community. Concept and 

design including sustainable design 

Diversity of displays: flowerbeds, raised beds, planters, hanging baskets, window boxes, carpet 

bedding, mosaics 

Max 

Actual 

15 14 

15 14 

Diversity of plants: annuals, perennials, bulbs, grasses, woody plants, natural flora 10 9 

Quality, maintenance to appropriate specifications and standards, best practices: watering, 

19 

20 

weeding, edging, dead heading, etc. 

Qualified personnel (including seasonal staff) and/or training 10 8 


Concept and design (including arrangement, diversity, colour of display and plants) on grounds 15 13.75 

Quality of planting and maintenance: watering, weeding, edging, dead heading, etc. 10 8.5 

Contribution to, and integration with, overall community floral program 10 8.75 

Residential 

Concept and design (including arrangement, diversity, colour of display and plants) on 

residential properties 

15 13.75 

Quality of planting and maintenance 15 14 


Public participation in community projects, volunteer initiatives, outreach programs in floral 

displays (including promotion, organization, etc.). 

10 9.25 

Volunteer recognition (by municipality and/or by volunteer groups) of volunteer efforts in 

floral displays 

15 13.5 


Institutions in community floral displays activities. 

15 14 

Floral Displays Total 175.00 159.50 

89


FLORAL DISPLAYS 

Observations: 

The floral plan is well integrated with the overall landscape plan. The municipality has a good variety of floral 

displays and types of plants including an increasing amount of perennials. Floral elements include an attractive 

variety of hanging baskets, floral gardens, pocket gardens, planters and old tires (at Stony Point School). The 

theme color for the floral program is a great idea that helps bring the entire community together. 

The community participation in the floral program is exceptional; it is truly a community effort. The municipality 

manages the main display along the main street in Grand Bend and along the Grand Bend Beach. Essentially 

most of the rest of the extensive floral displays throughout the municipality are the initiative of various 

horticultural groups, the Communities in Bloom committee, institutions, clubs, schools and businesses. In most 

cases, the purchase and planting and maintenance is done by the above groups and municipal staff does the 

watering. These displays, so well spread throughout all areas of the municipality gives the place a very special 

feel - a sense of happiness and wellbeing. 

The Lambton Shores in Bloom contest is great and it involves all segments of the community – residential, 

business, rural, institutions. 


Where there is signage in floral beds, including the types of flowers in the bed also provides invaluable 

information to visitors/residents viewing the beds. 

Consider expanding the garden tours to include the general public – a great fundraiser and an opportunity to 

highlight some of the spectacular residential gardens throughout the community. 

Look for more ways to get the commercial sector actively involved in the floral program such as: expand adopta-bed 

and sponsor beds (with signage – small) and BIA & Chamber take lead role in commercial sector Bloom 

contest. 

16 | P age 

90

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INVOLVEMENT 

“Within the context of climate change and environmental 

concerns, communities involved in the Communities in Bloom 

program can be proud of their efforts, which provide real and 

meaningful environmental solutions and benefit all of society.” 

COMMUNITIES IN BLOOM IS MADE POSSIBLE BY 

The commitment of local, provincial and national volunteers 

The support of elected officials and of staff in municipalities 

The dedication of our Judges, staff and organizations 

The contribution of our sponsors and partners 

91


D.C.S. Report No. 04-2013 Friday, January 04, 2013 

TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



Former Military Camp Water Servicing Agreement 


That D.C.S. Report No. 04-2013 be approved; and further 

that the Municipality of Lambton Shores enter into an 

agreement with the Department of National Defence for the 

supply of water to the Former Military Camp on Army Camp 

Rd.; and further 

That By-law 04-2013 authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to sign 

the associated contract agreement be approved. 

REPORT 

The Department of National Defence (DND) has requested temporary water servicing 

for the Former Military Camp on Army Camp Rd. The site has an existing water 

treatment and distribution system, however the intake line for the water treatment plant 

is no longer functional and the system needs an alternative source of water. A formal 

request written by the project consultant is attached as Appendix A to this report. 

DND is currently going through the process of decomisioning the site with the intention 

of returning the lands to First Nations. As part of the decomisioning, all buildings, 

structure, roads, water mains, sanitary mains and storm mains will be removed from the 

site. It has been suggested that this will take approximately five years, so the supply 

would be temporary until such time when the water main infrastructure is removed from 

the site. 

The water system on the army camp site is currently under a permanent boil water 

advisory. This boil water advisory will remain in effect until the system is 

decommissioned. The need for water supply is due to the boilers currently used in the 

remaining buildings for heat. The water is not and will not be consumed by residents 

living on the site. There is a an existing 20mm (3/4”) service line that feeds the control 

building on the site where residents of the site can retreive potable water for 

consumption. 

The existing 200mm (8”) municipal water main will be live tapped so that service is not 

interrupted to residents in Ipperwash. OMI operators will be present for flushing and 

sampling of the new service line. The consultants for DND are proposing a 200mm 

service line in order to provide enough pressure to feed the existing on-site water tower. 

The service line will have an isolation valve installed at property line and will enter a 

meter chamber when it crosses onto the Former Military Camp property. This meter 

chamber will contain a 150mm (6”) water 

92 

meter, a pressure reducing valve and a

ackflow preventer. The agreement attached to this report as Appendix B requires the 

water meter and backflow preventer to be tested annually with results submitted to 

Lambton Shores municipal staff for review. 

The proposal from DND requested a maximum of 40m 3 /day. Staff have recently 

completed a capacity assessment on the water systems and confirmed that there is 

suitable water system capacity at this flow rate and should have no impact on existing 

residents. As this agreement has a defined time frame, there is no long term 

commitment required from the municipality that may impact future growth or 

development. The agreement also has cancellation clauses in the event that the 

municipality can no longer supply the site with water. 

Staff have reviewed this proposal with local MOE Drinking Water Inspectors and found 

that there are no regulatory impacts associated with supplying water to the site as the 

water will be considered “non-potable” once it enters the DND water system, which is 

federally regulated. From a regulatory aspect, the site would essentially be considered a 

water customer similar to any other water customer connected to the Lambton Shores 

system. Billing for water consumption will be consistent with other water users 

connected to the system. 

All costs associated with the project will be covered by DND and the road will be 

restored to municipal standards after the connection to the water main is complete. 

When the agreement expires, DND will be required to remove any infrastructure 

installed as part of this project back to the isolation valve at property line. This request is 

time sensitive as the sites current water supply will freeze in the near future with winter 

weather approaching. 

Staff recommends that Council enter into the agreement attached in order to supply 

water to the Former Military Camp on Army Camp Rd. 




Report Prepared by Jeff Wolfe, Project and Infrastructure Manager 

Attachments: 

1. Authorizing By-law #04-2013 

2. DND Agreement 

93


BY-LAW 04 OF 2013 

Being a By-law to authorize an Agreement between the 

Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores and 

The Department of National Defence, Canada 

WHEREAS: 

The Department of Nation Defence has requested a water 

service for the former Military Camp on Army Camp Road; 

AND WHEREAS: An agreement has been prepared outlining the terms and 

conditions under which the servicing would be provided, 

AND WHEREAS: It is deemed appropriate for the Mayor and Clerk to be 

authorized to sign the necessary agreement; 

NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton 

Shores enacts as follows: 

1. The Mayor and Clerk are authorized to execute an agreement on behalf of 

the Corporation between the Municipality of Lambton Shores and The 

Department of National Defence, a copy of which is annexed to this By-law, 

and to affix to the contract the Corporate Seal of the Corporation of the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores; 


Read a FIRST and SECOND time this 14th day of January, 2013. 


___________________________ 


___________________________ 


94


D.C.S. Report No. 05-2013 Monday, January 7, 2013 

TO: 

FROM 

RE: 



Harbour Depth Maintenance Program Review 


That the report be received for Council to provide direction to staff. 

REPORT 

This report presents information to Council respecting the current harbour depth 

maintenance program for the Grand Bend and Port Franks harbours; outlines the 

various challenges currently faced by the program; and suggests various changes that 

can be made to the program for Council’s consideration. 

Please note: presently Council is considering two distinct matters that are very much 

similar and at times get confused for one another. The first is the review of the annual 

dredging program completed for recreational boating purposes in each harbour. This 

report speaks to that matter, and the area of consideration is the municipal marina at 

each location, downstream to Lake Huron. 

The second matter presently under consideration is river maintenance work upstream of 

the municipal marina in Port Franks for the purposes of ice management. This matter is 

not presented in this report for discussion as a separate report will be forthcoming for 

consideration of the ice management program once AECOM has completed the ice 

management cost sharing work. 

Background 

At the October 15, 2012 Council meeting the following motion was passed: 



That staff be directed to prepare a report on the following: Solutions to better 

maintain harbour depths in both Port Franks and Grand Bend, be it through 

discussions with the appropriate government agencies to modify our existing 

harbours, or to examine erecting break-walls outside the harbours to reduce 

wave action and lateral drift of sand from northern areas of Grand Bend and Port 

Franks harbours. 

Carried 

The municipality of Lambton Shores completes 100 an annual harbour depth maintenance 

program for both the Grand Bend and Port Franks harbours. In both locations the

maintenance area of the river is Federally owned, and in Grand Bend the marina 

building and a portion of the riverfront are also Federally owned. The harbour depth 

maintenance program is a voluntary program that is completed by the municipality to 

ensure that the municipal marinas remain operable. There is no legislation that requires 

the municipality to complete this work, and if the municipality was to discontinue its 

dredging efforts the work would need to be picked up by another river based marina or it 

would not be completed. 

The extent of the maintenance areas that is currently maintain are noted below, and 

shown in Attachment 1 to this report. 

Grand Bend: 

Port Franks: 

From the west end of the small (south) pier, westward to 

sufficient lake water depth beyond the sand bars 

From the Ausable River/lake edge westward to and past the 

first sand bar. 

The current program is completed by a third-party contract service provider Mitoi Works 

using the prop washing method to blow out accumulated sand and silt from the 

navigable channels in both locations. The contract with Mitoi Works is a five-year 

obligation that ends October 31, 2014. 

The municipality pays a fee for service to Mitoi Works for propwashing, with the average 

annual cost of the contract $58,360 (including taxes). The cost of the forthcoming 2013 

and 2014 maintenance contract totals $59,890.00 and $61,020.00 (including taxes) 

respectively. The Grand Bend marina building is Federally owned and leased to the 

municipality, and 50% of the cost to maintain depths at the Grand Bend harbour are 

grant funded. For the remainder of the Mitoi Works Contract, the Federal rebate is 

forecasted to be $17,660 annually. In the case of Port Franks, although the Federal 

government owns the area of the river that is maintained, no grant dollars are available 

and the program costs are funded by the harbour business unit. 

In addition to the above, annually the municipality retains a separate excavating 

contractor to conduct spot dredging in the Ausable River in Port franks up stream of the 

propwashing area to the municipal marina to maintain channel depths. Staff complete 

soundings of the river bed and each year areas with a significant accumulation of sand 

and silt are excavated. The cost for this work in the past five years has been on average 

$39,518.90, with the cost breakdown per year shown below. These costs are wholly 

funded by the municipality. 

2008: $26,562.48 2009: $75,221.48 

2010: $2,651.25 2011: $42,058.60 

2012: $51,011.03 

In total, the harbour channel depth maintenance program has an average annual 

expenditure of $97,878.90. Once Federal granting is considered the cost to the 

municipality is an annual average of $80,219. Program costs are further discussed 

below. 

101

Throughout the 2012 boating season numerous complaints were received from users of 

both harbours regarding issues with the depth of the respective harbour channels. The 

most common complaint was related to the depth of the channel at the mouth of each 

harbour after storm events and heavy wave action (at the pier in Grand Bend, and at the 

river mouth in Port Franks). These complaints result from an expectation that the 

channel should be maintained immediately after these events, however this is an 

expectation that cannot be met. There will always be a lag time after an event to allow 

wave heights to subside to the point where it is safe for Mitoi Works to operate. This 

causes frustration for boaters as the weather may be sunny and warm, but conditions 

are not suitable for prop washing. Overall Mitoi Works has fulfilled the obligations of 

their contract, and has been readily available and willing to complete extra dredging 

work on an as requested basis as conditions permit. In 2012 the contractor funded 

additional work to complete soundings of the Ausable River at no cost to the 

municipality. 

The other main complaint that was received during the 2012 season relates to the fact 

that the municipality is no longer using the Northside to maintain the Port Franks 

harbour. In 2012 the Northside was removed from service until mid-June for its four year 

maintenance and certification. The Northside drafts 5 feet, and when it was returned to 

the water the river depth was below 5 feet which caused the vessel to be inoperable. At 

the end of the 2012 boating season water levels in the river were close to 3 feet, and 

they are forecasted to remain low for 2013 (discussed below). As a result, the Northside 

will not be able to navigate the channel until water levels rise. 

When conducting a root cause analysis of the challenges that were faced by both 

harbours during the 2012 season the cause of all complaints was harbour depth. When 

reviewing this issue from a root cause perspective the cause is well documented: the 

falling Lake Huron Water levels. 

Issues Facing the Harbour Depth Maintenance Program 

Currently there are two main issues that are affecting this program’s success: the low 

water levels in Lake Huron, and the program’s financing model. Each issue is discussed 

separately below. 

1. Lake Huron Water Levels 

The falling water level in the Lake Huron-Michigan system is well documented by the 

US Army Corps of Engineers and local media (several recent articles with pertinent 

information are attached to this report). The Corps of Engineers record monthly level 

readings, publish monthly reports regarding water levels in the Great Lakes, and create 

6-month forecasts of expected levels in the lakes. 

Attachment 2 to this report is the January 2013 water level summary published by the 

Corps of Engineers. It shows that the baseline (chart datum) water level is measured at 

176.0 m (577.5 feet) above sea level, and that December water levels were recorded at 

just slightly above 0.4 m below chart datum. This is the record low since lake level data 

began to be collected in 1918, and is below the prior record low set in 1964. 

The US Army Corps of Engineers is forecasting that water levels in the Lake Huron- 

Michigan system will remain near or below the record low for the next six months until 

June when the lake level is forecasted to 102be 

slightly higher. Regardless, 2013 lake

levels are forecasted to be well below average and below the 2012 high mark. This will 

have a serious impact on the municipality’s efforts to maintain harbour depths in 2013, 

and complaints from the boating community are expected to continue. 

Presently there are several thoughts to what is causing the low levels, but there is not 

full agreement on any one cause. The Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation 

explains that rising and lowering lake levels is a natural occurrence, but an extended 

low period has been in effect since about the year 2000 (see Attachment 3: 1918-2010 

lake levels). 

The International Joint Commission (ICJ) is another official body that reviews crossboundary 

water issues between Canada and the Unites States. The 1909 Boundary 

Waters Treaty established the Commission, which has six members. Three are 

appointed by the President of the United States, with the advice and approval of the 

Senate, and three are appointed by the Governor in Council of Canada, on the advice of 

the Prime Minister. The Commissioners must follow the Treaty as they try to prevent or 

resolve disputes. They must act impartially, in reviewing problems and deciding on 

issues, rather than representing the views of their respective governments. 

The ICJ is expected to release a report in the very near future reviewing the issue of low 

lake levels and provide recommendations for moving forward. Recently the ICJ has 

suggested that the primary cause of this prolonged period of low water levels is climate 

change and the resulting drop in precipitation that many academics attribute to climate 

change. In particular, the 2011-2012 winter season and 2012 summer seasons were 

very dry, and it is believed that higher than normal temperatures are causing 

evaporation rates in the Great Lakes to occur faster than precipitation recharge rates. 

Environmentalists suggest that the low water levels in the Lake Huron-Michigan system 

are a result of over-dredging in the St. Clair River which is now causing water to flow 

faster out of the lake system in a drawdown effect. These groups suggest that sills need 

to be installed in the St. Clair river bed to slow down the flow leaving the lake system. 

Lastly, the Coastal Centre suggests that a possible contributing factor to the low lake 

levels is the isostatic rebound of areas that were formerly covered and compressed by 

glaciers during the last ice age. This rebound effect causes these areas (including the 

lake bed) to rise, and water is displaced to downstream areas. 

Regardless of the cause, the low water level in the lake is the single most contributing 

factor to the success of the harbour depth maintenance program. Lambton Shores is 

not unique in this predicament as other harbours and marinas are facing the same 

challenge. When developing this report staff contacted 31 other publicly owned or 

operated marinas that have registered with the Ontario Marina Operators Association. 

In several cases marinas that have not had to dredge at any point in their existence are 

now considering a dredging program in 2013 due to the low water levels in the great 

lakes. 

When considering changes to this program Council will need to give consideration to 

the level of expenditure it is willing to absorb to combat the forces of nature. In a worst 

case scenario, should the trend of decreasing water levels in the lake continue into the 

future, there will be a point where neither harbour 103 is operable due to a lack of water.

2. Program Funding 

The second key issue facing this program is the funds available to make changes to the 

program. The current funding model for the harbour business unit is a mix of user fees 

and taxation allocation. Fees are collected to partially offset expenses, but funding 

shortfalls are made up by the tax levy and no separate reserve is established for the 

business unit. Between 2009 – 2011 the harbour business unit has operated at a loss 

when considering the average expenses and revenues. The breakdown is shown 

below: 

Port Franks 

Grand Bend 

2009-2011 Average Revenue $186,978 $366,914 

2009-2011 Average Expense $204,197 $356,329 

Net Position ($17,219) $10,585 

Overall business unit performance: ($6,634) 

As previously noted, the harbour depth maintenance program represents an average 

annual cost of $80,219 split between the two marinas. 

The current funding model for the business unit represents a constraint to implementing 

program changes as any costs associated with a change will be funded by the general 

tax base as a result of the current funding shortage in the business unit. As a result it is 

challenging to gather support in the form of public opinion for program changes as 

residents may view the program as being accessible only to the boating community or 

those who own boats, a number of whom are not taxpayers within the community. 

Few would argue that there is not an economic benefit to the communities where a 

municipal marina is located, but the direct benefactors of the day to day service 

provision of the maintenance program is limited to those who are able to participate in 

recreational boating. It is with this thought in mind that almost all publicly owned or 

operated marinas consider their marinas as a municipal service for which no tax dollars 

should be directed to capital or operating expenses, and operate under the fully selffunded 

philosophy. As a result, dredging costs are apportioned to the various program 

users and benefactors accordingly. 

Of the 31 publicly owned or operated marinas and harbours that were contacted 13 

provided responses respecting their program. Eleven (11) of the 13 indicated that their 

operations were fully self-funded, 1 other marina operated in the same fashion as 

Lambton Shores whereby operating expenses were funded by a mix of fees and the tax 

base, and 1 other marina was fully tax funded. 

In the fully self-funded type of funding model fees are collected to offset business unit 

expenses, and a distinct reserve is developed for the business unit. In year’s when 

there is an operating surplus a deposit is made to the reserve, and in years when these 

is an operating deficit a draw is made on the reserve to offset the funding shortfall. In 

this case, all capital works are financed from the specific reserve when funding levels 

allow. 

In the case of Lambton Shores’ harbour depth maintenance program the municipality is 

not the sole benefactor of the program, but 104 is the sole funding source for the program.

In both the Grand Bend and Port Franks locations privately operated marinas and clubs 

are located on the river and benefit from the municipality’s efforts to maintain the 

navigable channel in the harbour. None of these users are required to cost share the 

program expenditures related to their benefit, and without the municipality’s efforts 

these users would be required to maintain the harbour channel on their own. 

This type of situation is not unique, and 4 of the public marinas that responded to the 

request for information are in a similar situation. Their program and cost recovery 

approach are detailed below: 

Municipality 

Whitby 

Kingsville 

Kincardine 

Municipality of 

Bluewater 

Current Practice 

Municipality only dredges areas that directly benefit municipal operations. 

Private marinas and clubs are responsible to dredge and fund their areas as 

needed. 

Conducts annual propwashing similar to Lambton Shores. Costs of the program 

are split equally between the municipality, the local yacht club, and private 

marinas that benefit. 

Conducts periodic spot dredging similar to Lambton Shores. Cost of the 

program is split between the municipality and the local yacht club. 

Currently investigating a local benefit charge to further expand the cost 

recovery. 

Marina operations are leased to the local yacht club. 

Club pays all operating expenses, and year end profits are split 50/50 with the 

municipality thereby sharing program expenses. 

Marina operations are contracted to a third-party, but the municipality arranges 

the dredging program. 

Program expenses are split amongst other private marinas and clubs located in 

the harbour based on a local benefit charge. 

When considering improvements to the harbour depth maintenance program Council 

will need to determine if the funding model that is currently in place is still appropriate, 

or if a change in the funding philosophy is preferred. 

Considerations for Improving the Harbour Depth Maintenance Program 

Outlined below are several considerations for program changes that have been 

developed by staff. Please note, the various options are not necessarily mutually 

exclusive, and should a program change be desired a combination of the options is 

possible to implement. 

Not included below is the option of the status quo, or not implementing any program 

changes. This is considered the default situation that is available in all of Council’s 

consideration of program changes. 

1. Considerations to Improve Harbour Depths 

In the motion passed by Council, specific considerations are provided for review 

including modification of the existing harbours, and erecting break-walls outside the 

harbours to reduce wave action and lateral drift of sand from northern areas of Grand 

Bend and Port Franks harbours. 

105

In both locations the area serviced by the current program are under federal jurisdiction, 

and the options listed above are considered high capital expenditures that would require 

Federal approval. The project funding model in each location would vary. 

In Grand Bend federal capital funds are available for works that are considered to be 

critical structural work on the lands that are Federally owned. However, from past 

discussions with DFO these funds are typically only available for capital repairs to 

existing structures and not for new capital constructions like extending the existing pier 

and break wall. The DFO operates on a limited budget and does not actively fund 

improvements to their former port locations unless they are doing so for the purpose of 

divesting the property to the local operating municipality. At the time of this report a call 

to the DFO was not returned inquiring if the agency would consider divestiture to 


As a result, any work completed to extend the existing pier and break wall is expected 

to be wholly funded by the municipality unless other upper level government funding is 

available and received through an infrastructure program (other municipal marinas were 

successful recipients of funding under the BCF program). That said this option is not 

expected to produce the “cure all” benefit that justifies the high capital cost. What is 

expected to be accomplished if the pier is extended is to push the area of maintenance 

further westward into the lake, and channel prop washing would still be required as the 

littoral drift would continue to wrap sand around the new break wall. 

In Port Franks there is not any potential for funding available from the DFO, and the 

only expected upper level government funding would be if there is was an open 

infrastructure funding program available to be applied for. In addition, constructing a 

break wall extending out into the lake from the northern shore of the river mouth has 

been investigated in the past and was found not to be a favorable option. In this location 

constructing a break wall results in the littoral drift of sand being further directed to the 

south west, thus changing the current coast line to the point where property owners in 

areas like Windsor Park no longer have lake front access. 

For both locations there has been a suggestion that the harbour channel should be 

further excavated to increase the depth, and after review this option is not considered 

feasible. In each location the lake bed at the channel inlet presents the limit for the 

extent of the excavation otherwise a basin would be created in the harbour that would 

be subject to infilling and would require regular maintenance. In the case of the Grand 

Bend harbour the river wall structure is partially held in place by the hydraulic forces of 

the water in the river against the wall. The ABCA has noted that any further deepening 

of the harbour basin may result in the river wall caving in. In Port Franks the river 

continually deposits sediments from upstream in the downstream areas near the lake. If 

a basin was created it is reasonable to expect that it would be filled in short order, and 

the municipality would be required to continually excavate the basin to ensure it 

remained at the designed depth. 

After review, it does not appear that a large capital project is the best approach to 

improve the harbour depth maintenance program at this time, and a better approach 

may be to consider changes to how the program is managed. When reviewing possible 

changes to any municipal program it is important to keep in mind the environment the 

program operates within. The program environment 106 for the harbour depth maintenance

activities has changed over the years, and the current environment is such that the low 

water level in the lake is the single most contributing factor to the success of the 

program. 

When reviewing changes to this program Council will need to give consideration to the 

issue that the program is working against a natural process, and will need to determine 

the level of expenditure the municipality is willing to absorb to combat the forces of 

nature. 

Staff has reviewed the program, and has put forth possible program changes for 

consideration below. As noted previously, these options can be implemented 

individually or in combination with each other. 

a) Implement Seasonal Restrictions and an Advisory re: Vessel Sizes 

Applicable Harbour: 

Grand Bend, Port Franks 

Expected cost of program change: $0. 

The municipality could consider implementing a restriction at the start of each 

boating season at both of its marinas to only permit vessels that are able to safely 

navigate the channel based on the expected channel depth for the season. 

Following this an advisory system can be put in place to advise seasonal boaters 

and transient vessels regarding the water level that exists in each harbour channel 

throughout the season so that boaters are aware if it is safe to navigate the 

channel. 

For example, if channel depths are expected to be 4 feet for the season, only 

vessels that draft 4 feet or less would be permitted to berth at the marina. During 

the season regular soundings can be taken of the channel and depths can be 

posted at the respective marina buildings. This advisory system was trialled in Port 

Franks in the last month of the 2012 boating season and was successful. 

b) Increase Sounding Efforts to Guide Spot Dredging 


Expected cost of program change: 


$10,000-$20,000 annually 

Currently sounding is completed in the Part Franks harbour each spring by 

municipal staff to determine the areas required for spot dredging upstream of the 

river mouth to the marina. This method has been effective in the past, but 

municipal capabilities are limited by the type of equipment and software that we 

currently own. As a result harbour profiles have not been developed each year to 

compare problem areas year over year. The Grand Bend harbour is not subjected 

to sounding each year. 

This suggested change involves hiring a third party to professionally sound each 

harbour to develop a baseline profile in Auto CAD to be used in subsequent years. 

To limit the cost of the program change this can be completed as a one-off with 

staff completing the necessary soundings in subsequent years. Alternatively the 

third party could continue to be retained 107 at the annual cost identified above. The

enefit of this change is additional information to determine areas for spot 

dredging in Port Franks, and information to determine if there are sediment 

deposits in Grand Bend that should be dredged. 

As an alternative the baseline sounding can be wholly completed by municipal 

staff, however there is a significant time requirement to complete this work and 

develop an AutoCAD model of each river. Should Council decide to choose this 

alternative, staff recommends that a summer engineering co-op student be hired to 

assist with developing the baseline model. As a result, annual costs of the program 

change are expected to be within the range identified above. 

c) Increase Spot Dredging Efforts 



Port Franks 

Variable 

If alternative b) is implemented the municipality will have more information 

available to increase spot dredging efforts in Port Franks. At this point in time it is 

unknown if spot dredging would be required in Grand Bend. The annual cost of 

this change is variable as it is expected dredge volumes would change from year 

to year. 

If Council chooses to increase the amount of spot dredging that is completed each 

year, to limit the cost impact Council may wish to consider setting a fixed budget 

for the work. As noted previously, expenditures for spot dredging in Port Franks 

have averaged an annual total of $40,000 approximately, and costs associated 

with a change in the program would be over and above this amount. 

If Council decides against increasing the amount of spot dredging to be completed, 

the information collected if b) is implemented can be used to better direct the 

annual work program. 

d) Contract Amendment with Mitoi Works 




$60,000 annually through the end 

of the contract 

Mr. Charlie Miller representing Mitoi Works has attended the Council meeting to 

assist with any questions that relate to this contract proposal. 

In an effort to improve dredging activities for the contracts that they operate, Mitoi 

Works has procured a new vessel that dredges using a bottom mounted cutter 

head, pumps sediment to a discharge line, and is capable of depositing sediments 

that are dredged further out in the lake. This is an improvement compared to the 

propwashing method that simply displaces sediments to the side of the vessel and 

eventually fills back into the channel that has been created. A technical 

specification sheet for the vessel has been attached to this report as Attachment 7. 

The vessel drafts only 1.5 feet and is capable of working in very shallow water to 

open up the channel when it has filled 108 in.

A contract change has been offered to the municipality to change the maintenance 

program to this vessel, and Mitoi Works has requested direction from the 

municipality if Lambton Shores wishes to implement this service improvement to 

the current dredging contract. The annual contract price increase to implement this 

change is $60,000 and the service agreement will need to be amended. If this 

change is implemented the costs for the remaining two years of the contract will 

be: 

2013: $119,890.00 2014: $121,020.00 

Direction from Council is needed if this contract change is to be implemented. At 

this point in time the 2013 draft operating budget does not reflect the cost of this 

contract change. If Council decides that it does not want to implement this contract 

change then channel maintenance will continue to be completed via propwashing. 

e) Allow Mitoi Works to Operate the Northside in Port Franks 


Port Franks 

Expected cost of program change: $0 

Presently there are no municipal staff who are fully certified to operate the 

Northside, but we are working towards achieving certification. That said, a number 

of volunteers with the requisite certification have offered to work with staff so that 

the vessel can be used to maintain the harbour in Port Franks. However, because 

of our contractual requirements with Mitoi Works we are obligated to provide the 

work to the contractor. Staff have discussed the possibility of Mitoi Works using the 

Northside to maintain the harbour in Port Franks, and their representative has 

agreed subject to the necessary training. 

The challenge to this alternative is the water level in the river. As discussed 

previously, the Northside requires a minimum water depth of 5 feet in the river to 

be able to navigate its way to the river mouth. At the end of the 2013 boating 

season the water level in river was below 5 feet and the Northside was not 

operable. It is expected that the river level will remain below 5 feet for the 2013 

season meaning that the Northiside will not be able to navigate the river. However, 

should water levels allow it this alternative will be trailed in 2013. 

2. Considerations for Changes to the Program Funding Model 

Should any of the program changes outline above be implemented there will be 

increased program costs that will need to be funded. Under the current funding model 

these increased costs will be funded by the tax base because presently fees collected 

at the marinas to do not fully offset operating costs. 

When considering changes to the financing model the first question to be considered by 

Council is what the desired philosophy should be: 

a) Should the marina business units continue to be funded with a mix of user fees, 

and tax revenue to offset the funding shortfall? 

OR 109

) Should the marina business units be operated under the fully self-funded 

philosophy? 

If the answer to a) is yes, then any program changes that are implemented will be 

included in the annual operating budget for the business unit and will impact the tax 

levy. Accordingly, Council will need to review the budget each year to determine if the 

costs of the program can be balanced with the desire to maintain acceptable tax rates. 

Should Council wish to move towards the fully self-funded philosophy for the business 

unit then the costs of any program change considered will further increase the current 

operating deficit of the business unit. To achieve self-funded status revenue for the 

business unit will need to be increased to offset operating costs, and the options 

detailed below can be considered. As noted previously, these options can be 

implemented individually or in conjunction with one another. 

i. Increase Marina Fees 

This includes: 

Seasonal and transient dockage fees 

Fuel charges 

Launch ramp fees 

Pump out fees 

Laundry 

The challenge with this approach is that the cost of the program changes will still 

be fully borne by the municipality and its marina users. An increase in fees may 

result a loss of boaters as they may decide to relocate to a marina with lower 

fees. 

ii. 

Consider a Local Benefit Charge or Cost Sharing of Annual Dredging Costs 

As noted previously the municipality is not the sole benefactor of the program, 

but is the sole funding source for the current the harbour depth maintenance 

activities. In both the Grand Bend and Port Franks harbours privately operated 

marinas and clubs are located on the river and benefit from the municipality’s 

efforts to maintain the navigable channel. Presently, none of these users are 

required to, or have offered to, cost share the program expenditures related to 

their benefit. 

Examples have been provided of other publicly owned marinas that share the 

costs of their annual dredging program with private marinas and clubs that are 

located within the same harbour. The nearest municipal example is the 

Municipality of Bluewater where dredging costs are shared amongst all parties 

that occupy the harbour based on their proportionate share of the harbour 

(divided into 15 th s). 

To increase revenue for the harbour business unit in a self-funded philosophy 

Lambton Shores could consider implementing a local benefit charge to all users 

of the harbour based on the benefit that they receive from the municipality’s 

program. This approach is likely to 110 be met with opposition from those users that

have not historically paid for the service provided by the municipality, and as 

such staff recommends that a consultation plan be developed to implement this 

change should that be Council’s desire. 

A final consideration with respect to the funding model for the marina business unit is for 

the municipality to no longer fund the business unit, and consider sub-letting marina 

operations to a private and specialized marina contractor. In this consideration there is 

no financial risk for the municipality as all program financing would be borne by the 

third-party. Should Council wish to review this consideration further, staff can develop a 

separate report outlining the possible options and considerations for implementing this 

program change. 

Summary 

This report has presented a review of the annual harbour depth maintenance program 

completed for the Grand Bend and Port Franks marinas, and the challenges that the 

program currently faces. Various considerations for changing the program have been 

presented, and staff requires direction from Council if any of these options are to be 

implemented. 




Attachments: 

1. Extent of the Grand Bend and Port Franks Mitoi Works Maintenance Areas 

2. US Army Corps of Engineers January 2013 Water Level Report 

3. 1918-2010 Water Level Data 

4. January 4, 2013 London Free Press article “The Great (Shrinking)Lakes: Water 

levels still falling” 

5. November 8, 2012 London Free Press article “Water levels in the Great Lakes 

are down, way down” 

6. October 11, 2012 Sarnia Observer article “Lake Huron nears record low level” 

7. Technical specification sheet for the HP Versi-Dredge vessel proposed by Mitoi 

Works 

111

Attachment 1: 

Extent of the Grand Bend and Port Franks Mitoi Works 

Maintenance Areas 

Grand Bend 

Port Franks 

112

Attachment 2 

113

Attachment 3 

114

Attachment 4 

The Great (shrinking) Lakes: Water levels still falling 0 

By Debora Van Brenk, The London Free Press 

Friday, January 4, 2013 3:45:28 EST PM 

Lake Huron (QMI Agency file photo) 

Land around Lake Huron is higher and drier than ever as the water has hit its lowest level since public record-keeping 

began almost a century ago. 

And with further drops forecast for coming weeks, the International Joint Commission is expected to release a report 

and recommendations about what to do about the shrinking Great Lakes. 

Meanwhile, ever-expanding shorelines are matched by growing alarm from some observers calling for intervention to 

stem the outward flow. 

Lakes Huron and Michigan, which hydrologists consider one lake system, dropped to 175.61 metres above sea level 

in December — one centimetre lower than the previous record set in 1964, preliminary figures show. Systematic 

record-keeping began in 1918. 

A dry summer and a dry November led to lower-than-expected water levels in most of the Great Lakes, says a 

bulletin written by Chuck Southam, of Environment Canada’s boundary waters issues unit. 

He had forecast a low-water December and is calling for continued drops in coming weeks. 

115

That spells trouble for cottagers, marinas, commercial shippers and the environment, says Bob Duncanson, 

executive director of the Georgian Bay Association, which has been sounding the alarm about low Huron levels and 

resulting economic and ecological impacts. 

“People should be worried about it. If they haven’t connected the dots, they should take a close look at where their 

water comes from and why it’s threatened,” Duncanson said. 

While lake waters rise and fall seasonally — usually lowest in winter and highest in mid-summer — levels have been 

steadily dropping through the years and haven’t come close to the high-water marks of three decades ago. 

Lakes Huron and Michigan are 71 centimetres lower than the long-term average; all the other lakes are down as well, 

though less dramatically. 

The International Joint Commission is expected, within weeks, to release a report and recommendations on Great 

Lakes water levels. 

An IJC study group drew considerable fire from many Ontarians when it said the biggest factor was climate change, 

rather than a change in water flow, and that no remedial measures were necessary. 

Critics said the report discounted the impact of St. Clair River dredging in 1962 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 

Critics maintain the dredging let water flow more quickly out of Superior and Michigan-Huron, like pulling the plug on 

a giant bathtub. 

To combat this great leak from the Great Lakes, they say, “speed bumps” — flow-impeding sills — should be installed 

on the riverbed. 

“We have now gone from what was a crisis situation into what is being called a disaster,” said Mary Muter, who heads 

the Sierra Club’s Great Lakes section. 

She expects the IJC will recommend some action and, on both sides of the border, “there are fewer and fewer folks 

who think bigger and better beaches is a good idea.” 

Sarnia Mayor Mike Bradley doesn’t think meddling with the St. Clair River is a good answer. “Let nature be nature,” 

he said. “Every time man has fooled with nature, the result has not been positive.” 

He said low water levels have affected commercial shipping and recreational boating, but human intervention might 

have even worse consequences. “It’s playing Russian roulette with the Great Lakes and you don’t want to pull the 

trigger on that.” 

Duncanson said in Georgian Bay, many cottagers only have water access to their properties and their docks are high 

and dry. Marinas face the pricey prospect of dredging, blasting or relocating. 

In the bigger picture, some shippers are being forced to lighten their loads — fearing running aground because data 

charts don’t reflect lower water levels — wetlands are drying up, and water quality is deteriorating for species in and 

around the lake. 

Duncanson said the IJC study committee was flawed in part because “they didn’t do a full costing of the economic 

impact of doing nothing.” 

The Georgian Bay Association says it doesn’t have the expertise to recommend a solution that moderates some of 

the highest highs and lowest lows. “Our point is there’s a problem (and) it needs to be addressed,” Duncanson said. 

deb.vanbrenk@sunmedia.ca 

Twitter.com.DebatLFPress 

Lake levels 

December Great Lakes-area water levels, in metres above sea level (record low in brackets) 

116

- Superior 

183.06 (182.92 in 1925) 

- Michigan-Huron 

(175.61) (previous record 175.62 in 1964) 

- St. Clair 

174.54 (174.24 in 1934) 

- Erie 

173.82 (173.19 in 1934) 

- Ontario 

74.28 (73.74 in 1934) 

Sources: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Environment Canada 

117

Attachment 5 

Water levels in the Great Lakes are down, way down 15 

By Debora Van Brenk, The London Free Press 

Thursday, November 8, 2012 10:30:48 EST PM 

Water levels in the Great Lakes are down, way down — in some cases nearing record lows. And that’s not good 

news for marinas, cargo shippers and marine ecology. Deb Van Brenk reports 

- - - 

Water levels in Lakes Huron and Michigan are a finger’s length from trickling down to their lowest recorded levels. 

And while some cottagers are pleased to have more beachfront property than ever, the shrinking big pool is causing 

issues for marinas, cargo shippers and marine ecology. 

Huron-Michigan, which hydrologists consider one big lake system, is expected to drop to record low levels within 

weeks and remain there at least for the next four months, experts with the Canadian Hydrographic Service and the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers predicted this week. 

118

Levels are literally off the charts already, having sunk below levels identified on navigation maps used by commercial 

shippers and pleasure boaters. 

For cargo shippers, “Everything is rosy when you are above that (chart level) but when you go below (it), you have to 

decrease your load and make more frequent trips,” said Geoff Peach of the Goderich-based advocacy group Great 

Lakes Centre for Coastal Conservation. 

Water levels in Lake Huron are forecast this month to reach their lowest levels since 1964. 

Levels were at their highest in 1986, when docks were swamped, shorelines eroded and lakefront properties 

jeopardized. 

Closer to home, Lake Erie, blessed with more rainfall this year than some of its sister lakes, is not near record low 

levels but its volume is still lower than recorded averages. 

Officials began logging levels in 1918 and waterlines in all the Great Lakes are well below the average. 

Bringing levels back up is a slow process, though. Hydrologists say what could help turn the tide this winter would be 

a cold season with plenty of ice cover; that would stop evaporation and add to spring run-off. 

debora.vanbrenk@sunmedia.ca 

twitter.com/Debatlfpress 

- - - 

THE PROBLEM...AND ITS EFFECTS 

Why are lake levels lower? 

 

Rainfall and run-off can increase lake levels. Evaporation can lower levels. In recent years, evaporation 

rates have outpaced rainfall and runoff; seasons have become warmer and drier, and last winter was one of the 

driest on record. 

 

Many say the drop is cyclical and will rebound. 

 

Some environmentalists pin the decline partly on a faster-flowing St. Clair River and say dredging there has 

made the river a sort of plug-puller on the upper-lakes basin. “There is a very significant factor that humans 

have the ability to control,” says Mary Muter of the Ontario Great Lakes section of the Sierra Club. Her group 

advocates installing an underwater sail to adjust water flows in the St. Clair River. 

On recreation/beachfront 

 

 

Areas that once had thin beaches now have broad stretches of sand. 

Boat slips stand higher above water and docks are sometimes landlocked, far from the water’s edge 

On marinas and ports 

 

 

Marinas may find themselves dredging more often to accommodate their larger boat tenants. 

Ports are shallower, sometimes requiring shippers to place lighter loads on vessels. 

 

Depth is still fine in the channel and harbour at Goderich, the region’s biggest commercial port. Goderich 

Mayor Deb Shewfelt says everyone is keeping an eye on levels in the event ships need to lighten their loads. 

Even so, “It’s basically full speed ahead” on the new $48-milion port expansion, he said. 

On ecology 

119

While there may be less surface erosion than when lakes are high, wave action can erode the lake bed, 

which can lead to worse erosion later, says Geoff Peach. “That can be pernicious. It comes to bite us when the 

(lake) level returns.” 

Coastal wetlands turn into mud flats, reducing the area where fish live and where birds thrive. Water nutrient 

levels are more concentrated and algae blooms grow, causing die-offs of fish and birds. 

Loss of wetland ecologies also reduces the area where water is filtered through grasses and other 

vegetation. “There are five-foot trees there where there used to be wetland,” says Mary Muter of the Sierra Club. 

Along Georgian Bay alone, 2,000 hectares of wetlands have dried up in recent years, Muter says. 

On cargo shipping 

 

 

 

The International Joint Commission has lowered the ‘draft limit’ once and is contemplating a second 

reduction. 

Some large ships may be forced to decrease their speed and lighten their loads, float slightly higher in the 

water with less cargo. 

So far, the changes haven’t been a huge issue, said Robert Lewis-Manning, head of the Canadian 

Shipowners Association. “We’ll watch very closely to what the winter will bring.” Meanwhile, new technologies 

aid in both cargo-loading limits and navigation. “That’s their bread and butter.” 

- - - 

GREAT LAKES 

Ontario 

 

 

30 centimetres lower than a year ago 

Forecast to remain the same throughout the winter 

Superior 

 

74 cm lower than in 1985 (a record high year) 

15 cm higher than record low set in 1964 

Projected to drop 5 cm within weeks and remain at that level until at least March 2013 

St. Clair 

 

30 cm lower than a year ago 

Forecast to fall another 15 cm within weeks and remain at that level until at least March 2013 

Erie 

 

40 cm lower than a year ago 

Forecast to fall another 5 cm within weeks and remain at that level until at least March 2013 

Huron-Michigan 

120

40 cm lower than at this time in 2011 

Two metres lower than its high-water mark set in 1986 

Five cm above its low-water mark set in 1964 

Forecast to drop at least 5 cm within weeks and remain at that level until at least March 2013 

121

Attachment 6 

Lake Huron nears record low level 

By Paul Morden, Sarnia Observer 

Thursday, October 11, 2012 7:23:59 EDT PM 

Water levels in Lake Huron are nearing the historic low mark set in 1964 and are expected decline even further by 

spring. This breakwall at Canatara beach in Sarnia on Thursday reveals how far the lake level has fallen this season. 

TYLER KULA/ THE OBSERVER/ QMI AGENCY 

Lake Huron is approaching low water levels not seen in nearly half a century, say officials. 

Environment Canada reported this week water levels in the lake fell 15 cm in September. That’s two and a half times 

its average decline of six cm, leaving it 27 cm below where it was a year ago. 

The agency said Lake Huron began October just three cm above record low levels set in 1964. 

“I don’t know where the water’s going,” said John McClennan, owner of Seven Winds Marina in Port Franks. 

“Somebody’s gobbling it up somewhere.” 

122

September’s drop came at the end of the boating season, lessening the impact at the marina, McClennan said. 

“It disappointed a few people . . . not being able to get in and out of the channel, but other than that it hasn’t really 

affected too much.” 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is predicting November and December water levels in Lake Huron and Lake 

Michigan will match 1964’s record low, and set new record lows in early 2013. 

There has been a cycle of high and low water levels since record keeping began in 1918, said Karen Alexander, with 

the Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation. 

“Right now, we’re in a very extended low period,” she said. “The length of time the lake has remained low has never 

happened before.” 

Potential reasons include climate change leading to lower rainfall, as well as ongoing evaporation in winter because 

of less ice cover, Alexander said. 

Another factor - particularly for the Canadian side of the lake - is isostatic rebound from the retreat of glaciers several 

thousand years ago, she said. 

The land mass is rebounding from the impact of the weight of glaciers that covered the region during the last ice age. 

“That is happening at a faster rate on this side of the lake than on the other side,” Alexander said. 

The impact of low water levels includes extended lakeshore property as water recedes, the build up of sand dunes 

and migration of vegetation and coastal wetlands, she said. 

“It’s actually very healthy for the coast to go through these changes.” 

What’s not known, Alexander said, is the long-term impact climate change will have on the water level cycle. 

It’s possible the range of high and low water levels could change, she said, “but the cycle will continue.” 

Water levels also fell in each of the other Great Lakes, and Lake St. Clair, during September, according to 

Environment Canada. 

A message on the website of the Bluewater Ferry that runs between Sombra and Marine City, Michigan on the St. 

Clair River says that due to low water it’s not currently able to take vehicles weighing more than 80,000 pounds, 

including large coach buses. 

Low water levels can cause constraints on the size of cargos carried by ships on the lake, according to Robert Lewis- 

Manning, president of the Canadian Shipowners Association. 

He added many shipping companies are used to managing cargo loads through the year as water levels change. 

“What’s unusual is how early in the year we’ve seen it,” he said. 

“We were seeing water levels in July we might expect in October.” 

But, it’s not having “a drastic impact on the bottom line” of the shipping companies, he said. 

paul.morden@sunmedia.ca 

123

124

125


D.C.S. Report No. 07-2013 Wednesday, January 9, 2013 

TO: 

FROM 

RE: 



Project Update: Grand Bend Sewage Treatment Facility 

(Status of Part II Orders and BCF Scope Change Application) 


That the report be received for Council’s information. 

REPORT 

This report provides a brief update respecting the status Part II orders received as a 

result of the ESR addendum undertaken for the Grand Bend sewage treatment facility 

project, and the status of the BCF funding scope change application. 

Part II Orders 

The public consultation period for the ESR addendum ended on November 26, 2012. 

The MOE has confirmed that two letters were sent to the MOE in support of the 

proposed design and implementation changes recommended for the project, and 16 

Part II order requests were submitted. Fifteen of the Part II orders are applicable to 

Lambton Shores, and one has been withdrawn leaving 14 open. South Huron and 

Lambton Shores have decided to deal with the Part II orders that deal with each 

municipality separately so that resident’s personal information is protected. 

The Part II order process is administered by the MOE, and the municipality participates 

by providing information to defend itself against the submitted requests. The process for 

following up with these requests is typically that the MOE will ask that the proponents 

meet with the individual requestors to determine if their concerns can be satisfied before 

formal MOE intervention is required, and if not then provide additional information to the 

MOE technical staff so that they can formally evaluate the validity of the requests. 

Stantec and Municipal staff met with the Lambton Shores requestors on December 3 rd 

and 4 th in an attempt to provide additional information on the project, and have the Part 

II orders withdrawn. At this point in time none of the requests have been rescinded. 

As a result, the MOE has provided Lambton Shores the following direction: 

“At this point in time, if the requests are not rescinded then the formal review is 

undertaken by the ministry. The municipalities, as well as the requesters will be 

notified once the minister makes his decision. Having said that, the project 

cannot be undertaken until a decision 126 is rendered by the minister. It is 

encouraged that ongoing meetings/consultation between the municipalities and

the requesters continue to take place to resolve any outstanding issues while the 

minister’s review is taking place.” 

- Mr. David Naccarato, Ministry of the Environment (12/18/2012) 

As above, the Part II order process has moved to the formal review stage by the MOE. 

As a part of this process the Municipality is required to submit additional project 

information to the MOE for technical review using the MOE’s standardized reporting 

format for the process. Each of the partner municipality’s is responsible for submitting 

the information necessary as they apply to the Part II orders submitted by their 

residents. Lambton Shores’ staff is in the process of drafting the necessary 

documentation, and it is anticipated that a submission will be made by January 18, 

2013. The MOE has not provided a timeline for the completion of their review. At this 

point in time there is no further action required of municipal Council. 

BCF Funding Scope Change Application 

Lambton Shores submitted the BCF funding scope change application on October 4, 

2012 on behalf of the partner municipalities and the Joint Board of management. At this 

point in time there is very little to report regarding the status of the application. The BCF 

project analyst has followed up with staff to clarify questions related to our submission, 

but there has been no indication of when a decision will be made. 

Staff has inquired numerous times to agency staff regarding a timeline for a decision, 

and the following responses have been provided: 

“The scope change request is presently under review through the program 

committee structure. We will formally notify the Municipality once a final decision 

has been made. Thank you.” 

- Mr. Matthew Wilson, Federal Economic Development Agency 

(12/6/2012) 

“I just wanted to confirm for you that the Municipality’s scope change request is 

moving through our committee process.” 

- Mr. Garth Robinson, Federal Economic Development Agency 

(12/18/2012) 

At this point in time there is no further action required of municipal Council, and staff will 

continue to make regular inquiries to the status of the application until a decision is 

provided. 




127


TR Report No. 02-2013 Tuesday, January 8, 2013 

TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 


Janet Ferguson, Treasurer 

Signing Authority 


That the position of Clerk be added to our cheque signing 

authority as outlined in Treasurer’s Report No. 02-2013. 

REPORT 

When Lambton Shores was established we established banking policies for the 

Municipality which included signing authorities for the financial transactions. These 

authorities are identified by position and the pertinent person’s information provided to 

the financial institution as required. For example, when there is a change at election 

time, we must provide them with the Mayor and Deputy Mayor’s information if it 

changes from the previous term. 

Our by-law has the following for signing authority: 

-For cheques of $25,000.00 or more you must have one of the Mayor or Deputy Mayor 

and one of C.A.O., Treasurer or Deputy Treasurer 

-For cheques under $25,000.00 you must have any two of the C.A.O., Treasurer or 

Deputy Treasurer 

In light of the current staffing situation we have an overlap of positions as well as a 

proposed interim staff member in the near future. To allow for flexibility with staff 

vacations and locations, I would like to add the position of Clerk to the signing authority. 

By-law 3 of 2013 has been updated for Council’s consideration. If approved, this 

information and pertinent forms will be filed with the CIBC. The C.A.O. information is 

currently blank and will remain that way until the position has been filled on a permanent 

basis. 


Janet Ferguson, 

Treasurer 

128


BY-LAW 03 OF 2013 

Being a By-law to Appoint Signing Authorities for the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores 

WHEREAS: 

The Municipality of Lambton Shores’ assigns financial signing 

authority to signing officers as required, to balance the needs of 

operating efficiency and effective control; 

AND WHEREAS: Financial signing authority is assigned based on the monetary 

value of the cheque; 

AND WHEREAS: It is deemed appropriate for the Municipality to confirm this 

policy by by-law; 

NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton 


1. For cheques with a value in excess of $ 25,000.00, the signing 

authorities are: 

The Mayor or Deputy Mayor; 

AND 

The Chief Administrative Officer or Treasurer or Deputy Treasurer or 

Clerk 

2. For cheques with a value of less than $ 25,000.00, the signing 

authorities are: 

Any two of: The Chief Administrative Officer, Treasurer or Deputy 

Treasurer or Clerk 



READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 14 th DAY OF JANUARY, 2013. 

___________________________ 


129 

___________________________ 

CLERK – Carol McKenzie



TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



Annual By-laws 


That Council passes the pertinent by-laws for the Interim Tax 

Billing and the Annual Borrowing for Current Expenditures as 

outlined in Treasurers report TR-03-2013. 

REPORT 

At the beginning of every year we pass two pertinent by-laws, one that establishes our 

interim tax billing and one that establishes our operating line of credit for current 

expenditures. 

Each year the Municipality issues two property tax billings, the interim at the end of 

January and the final at the end of July. As per section 317 of the Municipal Act a bylaw 

is required to establish an interim billing amount, due dates and penalties. 

The interim billing is 50% of the previous year’s total taxes and split into two 

installments. The historical due dates for the Lambton Shores interim tax bill are the 

last business day of February and May which for 2013 the dates will be February 28 th 

and May 31 st . Sec 345 of the Municipal Act establishes the penalty for taxes in default 

at 1.25 percent per month. These items have been prepared in By-Law 1 of 2013 for 

your approval. 

We establish a borrowing by-law to meet current expenditures on an annual basis. This 

borrowing is basically a line of credit established with our financial institution, the CIBC, 

to cover any shortfall in funds for the day to day operations throughout the year that we 

may experience when the expenditures don’t coincide with the flow of taxation or other 

revenue dollars. The value established is $2,000,000.00 and has been consistent for 

the past several years. The rate as per our credit agreement is prime minus 0.15%. 

By-law 2 of 2013 has been prepared for your approval. 



Treasurer 

130


BY-LAW 01 of 2013 

Being a By-law to Provide for an Interim Tax Levy and to Provide for the Payment 

of Taxes and to Provide for Penalty and Interest Charges 

WHEREAS: 

AND WHEREAS: 

Section 317(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, provides that a local 

municipality, before the adoption of the estimates for the year, may 

pass a by-law levying amounts on the assessment of property in 

the local municipality rateable for local municipal purposes. 

Section 317(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, states that the amounts 

to be levied are subject to the following rules: 

1. The amount levied on a property shall not exceed the prescribed percentage, or 

50 per cent if no percentage is prescribed, of the total amount of taxes for 

municipal and school purposes levied on the property for the previous year. 

2. The percentage under paragraph 1 may be different for different property classes 

but shall be the same for all properties in a property class. 

3. For the purposes of calculating the total amount of taxes for the previous year 

under paragraph 1, if any taxes for municipal and school purposes were levied 

on a property for only part of the previous year because assessment was added 

to the tax roll during the year, an amount shall be added equal to the additional 

taxes that would have been levied on the property if the taxes for municipal and 

school purposes had been levied for the entire year. 

AND WHEREAS: 

THEREFORE: 

The Municipality deems it expedient to collect a portion of the local 

improvements and additional charges on the interim bill: 

THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICPALITY 

OF LAMBTON SHORES ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 

1. The said interim tax levy shall become due and payable in two (2) installments as 

follows: 

Fifty percent (50%) of the interim levy shall become due and payable on the 28 th 

day of February 2013 and the balance of the interim levy shall become due and 

payable on the 31 st day of May, 2013 and nonpayment of the amount on the 

dates stated in accordance with this section shall constitute default. 

2. On all taxes of the interim levy which are in default, a penalty of 1.25 percent 

shall be added and thereafter a penalty of 1.25 percent per month will be added 

131

on the first day of each and every month the default continues until December 

31 st , 2013. 

3. On all other taxes in default on January 1 st , 2013, interest shall be added at the 

rate of 1.25 percent per month or fraction thereof, and all by-laws and parts of bylaws 

inconsistent with this policy are hereby rescinded. 

4. Penalties and interest added on all taxes of the interim tax levy in default shall 

become due and payable and shall be collected forthwith as if the same had 

originally been imposed and formed part of such unpaid interim tax levy. 

5. The collector may mail or cause the same to be mailed to the residence or place 

of business of such person indicated on the last revised assessment roll, a 

written or printed notice specifying the amount of taxes payable. 

6. That taxes are payable at any of the Lambton Shores Municipal Offices, or by 

such other arrangements as approved by the Municipality of Lambton Shores. 

Read a FIRST and SECOND time this 14 th day of January, 2013 

READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 14 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2013 

_____________________________ 

MAYOR –Bill Weber 

_____________________________ 


132


BY-LAW 02 OF 2013 

A By-law authorizing the borrowing of money to meet current expenditures of the 

Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores 

A. In accordance with subsection 407(1) of the Municipal Act (the “Act”), the 

Municipality considers it necessary to borrow the amount of $2,000,000.00 to meet, 

until taxes are collected and other revenue received, the current expenditures of the 

Municipality for the year 2013. 

B. Pursuant to subsection 407(2) of the Act, the total amount borrowed pursuant to this 

by-law together with the total of any similar borrowing is not to exceed the limits set 

forth in that subsection, or other relevant sections of the Act and if so required under 

subsection 407(2) the Municipality shall have obtained the approval of the Ontario 

Municipal Board. 

THEREFORE, the Council of the Municipality enacts as follows: 

1. The Head and the Treasurer are authorized on behalf of the Municipality to borrow 

from time to time by way of promissory note or bankers’ acceptance from 

CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK OF COMMERCE (“CIBC”) a sum or sums not 

exceeding in the aggregate $2,000,000.00 to meet, until taxes are collected, the 

current expenditures of the Municipality for the year (including the amounts required 

for the purposes mentioned in subsection 407(1) of the Act) and to give to CIBC 

promissory notes or bankers’ acceptances, as the case may be, sealed with the 

corporate seal of the Municipality and signed by the Head and Treasurer for the 

sums borrowed plus interest at a rate to be agreed upon from time to time with 

CIBC. 

2. All sums borrowed pursuant to this by-law, as well as all other sums borrowed 

pursuant to the Act in this year and in previous years from CIBC for any purpose 

will, with interest thereon, be a charge upon the whole of the revenues of the 

Municipality for the current year and for all preceding years as and when this 

revenue is received. 

3. The Treasurer is authorized and directed to apply in payment of all sums borrowed 

plus interest, all of the moneys collected or received on account in respect of taxes 

levied for the current year and preceding years or from any other source which may 

lawfully be applied for this purpose. 

133

4. The Treasurer is authorized to furnish to CIBC a statement showing the nature and 

amount of the estimated revenues of the Municipality not yet collected and also 

showing the total of any amounts borrowed that have not been repaid. 

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME, AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 14 th DAY OF 

JANUARY, 2013 

______________________________ 


______________________________ 


I hereby certify that the forgoing is a true and complete copy of the By-law numbered 

above of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores in the Province of Ontario, 

duly passed at a meeting of the Council and that this By-law is in full force and effect. 

Dated this 

day of 

____________________________ 


134



TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



2012 Supplemental Tax Billings and Write Offs 


That Council approves the Supplemental Tax Billings and 

Write-off’s process in 2012 as outlined in Treasurer’s Report 

No. 04-2013. 

REPORT 

This report is to advise Council of the assessment changes received throughout the 

year and receive approval for the net taxation effect on Lambton Shores. 

Property Tax Supplemental Tax Billings 

Throughout the year, the Assessment Act allows a Municipality to issue a 

supplementary tax bill for properties that have additional assessment not included in the 

annual assessment roll. These supplemental tax billings deal with omissions and 

additions to the roll. 

Throughout the year Municipal Staff advise the Municipal Property Assessment 

Corporation (MPAC) of any changes affecting assessment through the Planning or 

Building Department such as zoning, building permits, final inspections/occupancy 

permits, and construction or expansion of existing premises. MPAC then prepares any 

assessment value changes and produces a Supplementary and Omitted Assessment 

roll, which translates into additional tax dollars for the Municipality. 

Depending on the situation for the change, Section 33 or Section 34 of the Assessment 

Act would apply. Section 33 of the Assessment Act allows for the taxation of real 

property that has been omitted from the roll. The provision allows for taxation in the 

current year, plus a maximum of the two (2) preceding years. For example, if a new 

residence was built and completed in the previous year and the Municipal Property 

Assessment did not have them entered on the returned roll for 2012, a supplemental tax 

billing would be issued as an “Omitted Assessment”. Section 34 of the Assessment Act 

allows for taxation of assessment that has increased in value or has been added after 

the return of the last revised roll. These taxes apply to the current year only. 

The following chart shows the dollar value of supplemental or omitted tax billings that 

the Municipality issued in 2012 along with the explanation for the change. 

135

SUPPLEMENTALS ISSUED IN 2012 

TAX DOLLARS DISTRIBUTED ACCORDINGLY 

MUNICIPAL COUNTY EDUCATION TOTAL REASONING 

17,427.39 15,488.57 11,224.75 44,140.71 Tax Class Change / Assessment Reallocation 

129.59 117.58 59.50 306.67 Gross Manifest Error / Factual 

14,114.95 12,553.09 6,247.38 32,915.42 Severances/Consolidations/Zoning Changes/Misc. 

46,510.82 41,578.15 22,794.64 110,883.61 Previously Omitted Assessments /ARB Decisions/Min of Settlement 

26,361.87 23,281.80 14,975.67 64,619.34 New Residential Bldgs/New Farm Bldgs/Improvements 

104,544.62 93,019.19 55,301.94 252,865.75 

Adjustment to Taxes (Writeoffs) 

Various sections of the Assessment Act and the Municipal Act allow adjustment to 

taxes, which result in a write-off to the taxes originally levied to a tax account. 

Section 39.1 of the Assessment Act allows the owner of a property to request the 

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation to reconsider the assessment of their 

property. Section 40 of the Assessment Act allows an appeal of the property 

assessment to the Assessment Review Board. 

Section 357 of the Municipal Act allows for the cancellation, reduction, refund of taxes 

for properties for various reasons. Several examples are: buildings were destroyed by 

fire; demolition of buildings; mobile unit removed from property, a tax class change, 

property owner was overcharged due to a gross or manifest error (assessment as 

assigned by MPAC was incorrect). 

Section 364.1 of the Municipal Act allows for a property tax rebate for vacant 

commercial and industrial buildings. The property owner or their authorized 

representative must make an application for the portion of property taxes for the vacant 

portion of property. If the property meets the eligibility criteria, an industrial property is 

entitled to receive a rebate equal to 35% of the taxes applicable; and a commercial 

property is entitled to receive a rebate equal to 30% of the taxes applicable. 

Section 361.1 of the Municipal Act allows for a tax rebate program for the purposes of 

providing relief from taxes on property owned and occupied by eligible charities. This 

program is legislated by the Municipal Act and requires the upper tier and single tier 

Municipalities to pass a by-law. This rebate program is administered by the lower tier. 

The County of Lambton passed the necessary bylaw and also chose to extend this 

program to include “similar organizations”, for property owners such as Health Services 

and Foundations. The amount of the rebate is 40% of the annualized taxes, plus 40% 

of any B.I.A. charges which are applicable to the property. 

136

Attached is a chart showing the dollar value of write-offs for the year 2012 along with 

the explanation for the change. 

WRITEOFFS ISSUED IN 2012 

TAX DOLLARS DISTRIBUTED ACCORDINGLY 

MUNICIPAL COUNTY EDUCATION TOTAL REASONING 

1,868.18 1,652.68 1,711.14 5,232.00 Demolition/Removal of Bldgs/Bldgs destroyed by Fire 

8,540.35 7,561.69 3,787.26 19,889.30 Assessment reduced-Request for Reconsideration/ARB 

18,845.32 16,830.90 18,869.26 54,545.48 Tax Class Change / Reallocation 

793.52 724.49 368.39 1,886.40 Gross Manifest Error / Factual Error 

41,126.37 12,553.95 6,247.79 59,928.11 Severances/Consolidations/Zoning Changes/Misc. 

18,613.62 20,027.84 32,521.18 71,162.64 Municipal Act rebates/40% Charitable Rebates/Legions 

5,041.08 4,597.04 9,383.02 19,021.14 Vacancy Rebates (Commercial & Industrial properties) 

94,828.44 63,948.59 72,888.04 231,665.07 

As advised, in TR Report 04-2012, properties owned by the Municipality, such as 

sewage treatment plants, parking lots, sewage lagoon properties, pumping stations, 

bulk water stations and easements are now being allocated within the pertinent 

business unit instead of being wrote-off as a general taxation decrease, as in previous 

years. 

The additional taxation amount is slightly higher than the 2012 budgeted amount of 

$102,000.00 while the write off amount is lower than the write off budgeted amount of 

$104,040.00. 

The net tax increase for 2012 was $9,716.18 and will be reflected in the 2012 year to 

date financial statements. 



Treasurer 

Report prepared by Wendy Jennison, Tax Collector 

137


TR Report No. 05-2013 Wednesday, January 9, 2013 

TO: 

FROM: 



RE: Water and Wastewater Rates 2013 and 2014 


That the 2013 and 2014 water and wastewater rates be 

adopted as outlined in Treasurer’s report TR-5-2013 and that 

by-law 6 of 2013 be passed. 

REPORT 

At the December 14 th , 2012 special Council meeting, Gary Scandlan of Watson and 

Associates presented the proposed water and wastewater rate projections for Lambton 

Shores. At that meeting the following resolution was passed: 



That the Water and Wastewater Rates report prepared by Watson 

and Associates, dated December 14, 2012 be received, and that 

Council supports the recommended increases to the water and 

wastewater rates as outlined in the Watson & Associates 

presentation and that staff prepare the necessary by-law and 

advertise that the rate will be further considered at the January 14, 

2013 Council meeting. 

By-law 6 of 2013 has been prepared to adopt the rates for 2013 and 2014; however, if 

there are any significant changes that would impact the rates, we can revisit them at 

any time. The following are the proposed rates for 2013 and 2014: 

Monthly Base Charge 

Water 

Sewer 

2013 2014 2013 2014 

3/4" $ 11.95 $ 12.19 $ 12.14 $ 12.58 

1" $ 22.59 $ 23.04 $ 39.36 $ 40.77 

1 1/2" $ 40.96 $ 41.78 $ 71.31 $ 73.87 

2" $ 66.97 $ 68.31 $ 116.59 $ 120.79 

2 1/2" $ 77.06 $ 78.60 $ 134.13 $ 138.96 

3" $ 128.71 $ 131.29 $ 224.09 $ 232.15 

4" $ 212.29 $ 216.54 $ 369.56 $ 382.87 

6" $ 408.00 $ 416.16 $ 725.20 $ 751.31 

Consumption Charge 

Per Cubic Meter $ 2.30 $ 1382.34 

$ 1.81 $ 1.99

As discussed at the Council workshop the impacts to an average home with both 

services are as follows: 

Year Water Wastewater Combined Combined Change 

Annual Change Annual Change Total Annual Quarterly 

2012 $511.89 $412.89 $924.78 

2013 $522.90 $11.01 $444.33 $31.44 $967.23 $42.45 $10.61 

2014 $532.38 $9.48 $479.31 $34.98 $1,011.69 $44.46 $11.12 

As you can see there is a small increase on the water component while the wastewater 

has increased more substantially. The increase is as a result of the infrastructure 

requirements and the changes to our operating and capital program since the last study 

in 2009. 

A full report has been provided by Watson and Associates and due to the size of the 

document it is available upon request. 

The rates will be implemented immediately for the first billing in 2013 and prorated for 

the period that the billing applies to. For example the next billing will be for 2 months of 

2012 and 1 for 2013; therefore, the rate will be prorated based on a 2/3 2012 rate and 

1/3 2013 rate. This ensures consistency and fairness for the billings. 



Treasurer 

139

CORPORATION OF THE MUNICPALITY OF LAMBTON SHORES 

BY-LAW 06 OF 2013 

Being a By-law to Establish Water and Wastewater 

Usage and Consumption Rates for 2013 and 2014 

WHEREAS: 

WHEREAS: 

WHEREAS: 

The Municipality of Lambton Shores operates municipal water and 

wastewater systems; and 

The Council of the Municipality of Lambton Shores is required to establish 

water and wastewater rates in order to provide a safe supply of water, and 

to finance full cost recovery as legislated by the Province of Ontario, and 

Council considered a report on the 14 th day of December, 2012 at which 

time, the proposed 2013 and 2014 water and wastewater usage and 

consumption rates were presented and discussed; 

NOW THEREFORE: 

The Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton 


1. The rates listed in Schedule “A” attached are approved as the rates for water 

and wastewater usage and consumption in Lambton Shores, and the said 

Schedule “A” is hereby declared to form part of this By-law 

2. This By-law shall come into force and effect on January 1, 2013. 

Read a FIRST and SECOND time this 14 th day of January 2013. 

READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 14 TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013. 

________________________________ 


________________________________ 


140

Schedule “A” to By-law 6 of 2013 

2013 and 2014 Water and Wastewater Usage and Consumption Rates 

Monthly Base Charge 

Water 

Sewer 

2013 2014 2013 2014 

3/4" $ 11.95 $ 12.19 $ 12.14 $ 12.58 

1" $ 22.59 $ 23.04 $ 39.36 $ 40.77 

1 1/2" $ 40.96 $ 41.78 $ 71.31 $ 73.87 

2" $ 66.97 $ 68.31 $ 116.59 $ 120.79 

2 1/2" $ 77.06 $ 78.60 $ 134.13 $ 138.96 

3" $ 128.71 $ 131.29 $ 224.09 $ 232.15 

4" $ 212.29 $ 216.54 $ 369.56 $ 382.87 

6" $ 408.00 $ 416.16 $ 725.20 $ 751.31 

Consumption Charge 

Per Cubic Meter $ 2.30 $ 2.34 $ 1.81 $ 1.99 

141



TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



Annual Audit Reporting Requirements 


That the Council acting as the Committee of the Whole 

provides the required responses to the Annual Audit 

Questionnaire. 

REPORT 

As Council is aware Municipalities are required to have a public audit conducted 

annually. 

We have already begun the process for the 2012 year end and are now in receipt of one 

of the annual reporting requirements. Attached to this report is a letter of request from 

our Auditors; BDO Canada LLP. 

As noted in previous years the letter is addressed to the Audit Committee. In Lambton 

Shores we have not adopted an Audit Committee approach; alternatively, Council has 

assigned the role to the Committee of the Whole. 

This letter is the same that Council has review and answered for the last several years. 

I have provided a copy of the responses provided for the 2011 review for your 

reference. 

Please provide direction or answers to the questions which in turn will be provided to 

the auditors in writing as required. 



Treasurer 

142

143

144

145



TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



2013 Wages for Non-Union Staff 


For Council review and direction. 

REPORT 

As the 2013 Budget process moves forward Council needs to provide direction on how 

to proceed with the non-union staff wages. 

There have been two reports provided to Council; however, no decision has been 

made. CAO report 69-2012 outlined the Market Review Study that was completed by 

McDowall Associates and CAO report 74-2012 which was seeking Council direction on 

the preparing the 2013 budget. 

CAO report 69-2012 is attached for your perusal. 

CAO report 74-2012 excerpt that pertains to wages: 

Staff Salaries & Wages: The past practice when it came to the cost of living 

adjustment to staff wages and salaries was to follow the adjustments 

negotiated in the Collective Agreement with our unionized staff, the Collective 

Agreement calls for a 1% adjustment effective January 1 st , 1.5% effective July 

1 st and 0.25% effective December 1 st . I am wondering as well as to whether 

or not there will be a “county wide” approach to this issue. 

The following resolutions were passed: 



That C.A.O. Report No. 69-2012 regarding a market review of 

salaries and pay equity and the impact of implementing any 

adjustments be referred to the 2013 budget discussion. 

Carried 



That the 2013 DRAFT budget be prepared with a 2% increase over 

the 2012 dollar amount. 

Carried 

146

Without clear direction, the first draft of the 2013 Operating Budget was prepared with 

an increase to non-union wages similar to that of union wages as well as factored in a 

merit or grid step increase. This was done to keep consistent with the 2012 process. 

Since this time I have received some information on what others are doing and it 

appears that there is a cost of living adjustment (COLA) of 1.75% to 2.75%. 

In addition to the practice of a COLA consideration we do annual performance reviews 

to determine if a merit or grid step increase is warranted. As mentioned above the 

current draft of the 2013 budget allows for this. 

Council direction on the next steps; if any, would be appreciated. 



Treasurer 

147


C.A.O. Report No. 69-2012 Wednesday, October 3, 2012 

TO: 

FROM : 

RE: 


John Byrne, Chief Administrative Officer 

Market Review of Salaries and Pay Equity – Impact of 

Implementation 


For Council review and direction. 

REPORT 

Council at its September 4 th meeting passed the following resolution relative to the 

recently completed Market Review of Salaries conducted by McDowall Associates: 

Moved by: Councillor Russell 

Seconded by: Councillor Illman 

That the Market Review of Salaries be received and that staff be 

directed to report back to Council on the implications of 

implementing the Market Review and in conducting a Pay Equity 

Review of Salaries and Wages in accordance with the Pay Equity Act. 

Carried 

This report provides an overview of the recently completed Market Review of Salaries 

carried out by McDowall Associates and the impact of implementing the 

recommendations of the Market Review of Salaries and Pay Equity. 

Market Review: 

The Market Review shows that in general salaries in Lambton Shores are in line with 

the market place. The consultant noted however that there were variances at both ends 

of the scale. The salaries at the bottom of the grid tended to be ranked a bit higher than 

comparators and the salaries at the “Management” level were a bit below the 

comparators. 

It should be noted that Council is under no obligation to make any adjustments to 

salaries of any staff, the Market Review was simply a vehicle to gauge the relative 

competitiveness of salaries in relation to the market. Acceptance of the proposed 

148

adjustments to the existing grid simply changes the grid it does not convey salary 

increases to staff. It simply provides a framework within which Council can make 

adjustments when it sees fit. So in essence this is a tool for Council. 

Cost of Living Adjustments 

It has been the practice in the industry to make adjustments to the salary grid to reflect 

changes in the cost of living year to year. This is done to keep the grid as current and 

relevant as possible to changing economic conditions. Again, cost of living adjustments 

are discretionary and given the current economic climate in Ontario and Canada, there 

has been a movement towards not permitting adjustments this year and possibly next. 

That said the past practice has been to take a comprehensive approach whereby all of 

the municipalities within Lambton County (including the County itself) adopt the same 

approach, whatever that might be. Cost of Living adjustments are usually brought 

forward to Council for consideration early in the new year when economic data for the 

prior year has been determined. 

Grid Adjustments 

Band B – Management Team 

The Consultant is proposing the creation of a “new” band between the current Band A 

and B to bring this Band more in line with the marketplace. Approving this adjustment 

does not translate into an automatic salary increase to anyone, it merely adjusts the grid 

to bring the Lambton Shores grid more in line with the marketplace. 

No adjustments are made to staff salaries in the grid until their annual performance 

reviews take place, which in our case will likely take place in early March of 2013. 

Usually provision is made in the budget to accommodate this change in the grid and the 

potential that there may be increases recommended. 

Band C – Chief Building Official 

One of the objectives of the Market Review of Salaries was to assess the compensation 

of the Chief Building Official. Some background history may be helpful here. At the time 

of amalgamation an effort was made to rationalize what services the Municipality would 

provide and what services would the County provide. Initially it was decided to allow the 

County of Lambton to provide building inspection services in Lambton Shores; however 

service delivery and the quality of that service delivery continued to be problematic. In 

simple terms the County was not able to deliver the service to our satisfaction. 

Consequently Council decided to hire our own Chief Building Official. 

At the time we established a salary range for the Building Inspector it fell within the 

existing grid, Band B (with the Department Head group) So the consultant was asked to 

pay some attention to this issue in the Market Review. As a result, the consultant is 

recommending that the Chief Building Official remain in Band C (formerly Band B) so 

149

the position is separate and apart from the Department Heads in the new Band B). The 

problem with the CBO being in the same Band as the Department Heads was that it 

meant that the Chief Building Official was in the same grid as his manager. 

Placing the Chief Building Official in Band C does not translate into actual payroll 

adjustments, like Bands A & B, the only thing taking place is that this position is placed 

in the appropriate place on the grid. 

Like other staff in Lambton Shores the performance of the Chief Building Official in 2012 

will be reviewed in early March and depending on that performance an adjustment may 

be recommended at that time. 

Summary: 

Adjusting the Municipality’s Salary Grid is done from time to time in order to keep it in 

pace with the marketplace. Adjusting the grid does not translate into salary adjustments 

for staff. Salary adjustments are as they always have been subject to annual 

performance reviews. 

If the adoption of the new grid is approved, staff would be repositioned on that new grid 

at their current salary levels – see schedule A attached. 

Pay Equity: 

The Municipality completed a “pay equity” review in 2002, and since that time 

periodically reviews compensation between men and women to try and identify gender 

related inequality. The 

Part I: Requirement for ALL employers to 

Maintain pay equity 

Once pay equity is achieved, all employers subject to the Act are required to 

maintain pay equity for the employees in female dominated job classes. However, the 

Act does not stipulate specific procedures or schedules to follow for maintaining pay 

equity. The purpose of maintaining pay equity is to ensure that pay equity gaps that 

were closed are not re-opened or widened as a result of changes to job values and job 

rates and that new gaps are not created. 

Maintaining pay equity is an ongoing process whereby employers must review job 

classes for changes in job rate, job value, duties and responsibilities as positions are 

added or eliminated. In a unionized environment, employers and unions are 

prohibited from agreeing to terms that, if implemented, would mean that the 

minimum requirements of the Act are not met. 

150

The legislation applies to all employees, unionized or not. 

The legislation only addresses systemic discrimination against 

women. It does not apply to complaints by men. 

The Act is enforced by spot checks, audits and complaints. 

As noted there is no time specific requirement to review pay equity and checks of pay 

equity compliance are rare and random, as noted above. Council has yet to deal with or 

implement the consultant’s recommendations relative to the Market Review of Salaries; 

it would not make sense to undertake a pay equity review at this time. 

The Market Review of Salaries carried out by McDowall Associates shows that the 

female component of the workforce is fairly compensated when compared to male 

counterparts. 


John Byrne 

Chief Administrative Officer 

151

Schedule A 

2012 Lambton Shores Salary Grid 

(Effective Jan. 1, 2012 with cost of living adjustments included) 

Position Band BASE 1 2 3 

JOB 

RATE 

Chief Administrative Officer A 108,926.95 111,457.93 113,988.92 116,519.90 119,050.89 150,215.11 

Treasurer, Director of Community Service, Clerk, 

Chief Building Official 

B 74,530.40 78,168.81 81,807.23 85,445.67 89,084.11 

Empty C 66,414.87 70,057.53 73,700.21 77,342.88 80,985.55 

Area Managers, Infrastructure Manager, 

Recreation & Leisure Services Facilitator 

D 55,490.10 58,489.56 61,489.03 64,488.50 67,487.96 

Drainage Systems & Development Inspector, 

Financial Assistants - Tax Collector, Utilities 

E 52,790.58 55,790.04 58,789.51 61,788.98 64,788.44 

Admin. Assistants - CAO, Communications, 

Coporate Services, Planning, Infrastructure 

Services, Community Services, Financial 

Assistants - AP/AR, Customer Services, Treasury 

F 41,992.51 44,991.96 47,991.43 50,990.91 53,990.36 55,610.07 

Financial Assistant - Customer Services (2) G 31,194.43 34,193.90 37,193.35 40,192.82 43,192.30 

Operators 42,707.81 46,823.71 47,714.78 

Modified 2012 Salary Grid for Lambton Shores (New Band for Sr. Leaders) 

New Band Added between current Band A and Current Band B 80% 100% 

Positions Band BASE 1 2 3 JOB RATE 

Chief Administrative Officer A 95,241.00 101,077.00 106,913.00 112,749.00 119,051.00 

Treasurer, Director of Community Services, Clerk B 76,133.00 80,798.00 85,463.00 90,128.00 95,166.00 

Chief Building Official C 71,267.00 75,634.00 80,001.00 84,368.00 89,084.00 

Empty D 64,789.00 68,759.00 72,729.00 76,699.00 80,986.00 

Infrastructure Manager, Recreation & Leisure Services 

Facilitator, Area Managers 

E 53,990.00 57,298.00 60,606.00 63,914.00 67,488.00 

Drainage Systems & Development Inspector, Finanaical 

Assistants - Tax Collector, Utilities 

F 51,830.00 55,006.00 58,182.00 61,358.00 64,788.00 

Admin Assistants - CAO, Communications, Corporate 

Services, Planning, Infrastructure Services, Community 

Services, Financial Assistants - AP/AR, Customer Service, 

Treasury 

G 43,192.00 45,839.00 48,486.00 51,133.00 53,990.00 

Financial Assisant - Customer Service (2) H 34,554.00 36,671.00 38,788.00 40,905.00 43,192.00 

152


TR Report No. 08-2013 Friday, January 11, 2013 

TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



Interim CAO 


For Council consideration and concise direction. 

REPORT 

At the Lambton Shores budget meeting held January 11, 2013, the issue of the Interim 

CAO was discussed. There appeared to be some confusion on how filling the interim 

position would be handled. 

Based on the resolution passed at the December 17 th meeting, I proceeded to contact 

the Municipal Administrators Professional Association to obtain names from their 

database of persons that may be interested in an interim CAO position. I issued an 

email to those persons requesting that they submit a proposal if they are interested in 

coming to Lambton Shores. From the email request I did receive a couple referrals and 

also provided them with the same information request. I did have one person contact 

me directly and similarly suggested they submit a proposal. Since the meeting on 

January 11 th , I have received one more direct submission. 

At the January 11 th meeting Council discussed their intent to broaden the search by 

having the interim position posted on various websites and advertising outside of the 

local area. Finally a resolution was passed directing staff to post the interim position on 

the AMO and Lambton Shores website and for staff to work out a schedule for 

implementation. 

I am submitting this report to Council to seek further clarification on the intent and 

process. Detailed direction would eliminate the misinterpretation of Council’s decision. 

After some careful consideration on the next steps for Lambton Shores, this report will 

include options for Council to consider. This has been a rushed process and I think 

Council needs to take some time to fully deliberate and communicate their intentions for 

moving this issue forward to a positive resolution. 

The first (1) option is an Interim CAO. 

a) Council could continue down the path that I started and review the 6 

submissions. If there were no qualified persons, then you could reach further for 

submissions. 

b) Council could widen the search with the posting as per the resolution of January 

11, 2013. 

153

If option a) is chosen the hiring committee could review the submissions the week of 

January 14 th and short list the candidates for Council review and interview the week of 

January 28 th . The position could possibly be filled as early as the first week of 

February. 

If option b) is chosen the position will be posted for two weeks with submissions being 

completed by January 25 th . The hiring committee could review the submissions the 

week of January 28 th and short list the candidates for Council review and interview the 

week of February 11 th . The position could possibly be filled as early as the week of 

February 25 th . 

The above options include very tight time frames and may need to be extended. 

Council should also consider the time commitment that they want from an interim 

person and communicate that up front during the interview process. 

The second (2) option is moving right to filling the CAO position on a permanent basis. 

a) Council could choose to move right to filling the CAO position on a 

permanent basis with the assistance of internal staff to post and collect the 

information then provide it to the hiring committee for review and short list a 

recommendation to Council for interviewing. 

b) Council could choose to move right to filling the CAO position on a permanent 

basis with the assistance of a consultant. 

c) Council could choose to move right to filling the CAO position on a permanent 

basis using both options a) and b). 

If any of option 2 is selected we would follow the Lambton Shores Hiring policy and best 

practices of posting the position internally before posting externally. 

If it is Council’s intent to maintain the current job description for the CAO position (2a), 

staff could do the posting internally for a week and if there are submissions the hiring 

committee would review and make a recommendation to council. If there were no 

candidates, the position would then be posted externally through several avenues: 

websites, professional associations, and print. This could be handled by staff as could 

the collection of the information to provide to the hiring committee for their review and 

short list and recommendation to council. 

If Council chose option 2b, the consultant would be brought in right away for 

discussions with Council and implementation of any changes you would like. 

Option 2c as a combination of 2 a and b would enlist the assistance of a consultant 

once the submissions have been received. 

The timing of option 2 would vary and be dependent upon the length of time the position 

was posted and the time required to review and shortlist the candidates. This could 

range between two and three months if everything moves along smoothly. Then 

consideration would have to be given to the person’s availability and when they would 

be able to start, thus extending the timeframe. 

There are pro’s and con’s to both approaches and Council has a difficult decision to 

make. A full discussion would assist Council 154 in determining the most suitable method 

for Lambton Shores to move forward. Again, clear direction to staff would also ensure

that we are not complicating or delaying the process any further. This can be 

accomplished by writing out a resolution ahead of time for consideration at the meeting. 

If Council feels there is not sufficient time to fully discuss this matter, I would 

recommend that a special meeting be called in the next two days. 

When this process began, I communicated verbally that I would commit to the Interim 

CAO position for a short period of time; however, long enough to have someone else fill 

the position. I made it clear that I was not interested in the position and will reaffirm my 

decision on that. 

As you are aware my appointment expires on January 15 th , 2013. Subject to Council’s 

wish, I am willing to extend my term to accommodate either the interim position or the 

permanent solution. That being said, Council must understand that I am not a Human 

Resource expert and am limited to my Department Head and Finance management 

skills. My commitment, in conjunction with the other Department Head’s support will 

keep the day to day activities moving along until the position has been filled on an 

interim or permanent basis. 



Treasurer 

155



TO: 

FROM: 



RE: Accountability and Transparency - Update on the 2012 

Freedom of Information Requests and Requests for 

Information from the Ombudsman 



REPORT 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND THE PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACT 

One of the pieces of Provincial legislation that municipalities are to comply with is the 

“Freedom of Information and the Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990”. The purposes 

of this Act are, 

(a) to provide a right of access to information under the control of 

institutions in accordance with the principles that, 

(i) information should be available to the public, 

(ii) necessary exemptions from the right of access should be 

limited and specific, and 

(iii) decisions on the disclosure of information should be reviewed 

independently of the institution controlling the information; and 

(b) to protect the privacy of individuals with respect to personal 

information about themselves held by institutions and to provide 

individuals with a right of access to that information. R.S.O. 1990, c. 

M.56, s. 

These are two diametrically opposed purposes – on one hand, information is to be 

made public, but on the other, the privacy of individuals and personal information is to 

be protected. 

There is a provincially mandated application form and fee that is to be submitted when 

information is requested under the Act. These requests are submitted to the Clerk, who 

has the responsibility of reviewing the request in accordance with the exceptions in the 

Act to determine if the information is “privileged” (ie: unable to be disclosed) or available 

to the requester. 

If the information is permitted to be released, the Clerk contacts the staff member that 

would have the information for an estimate 156 of the time required to collect the information

equested, and then calculates the cost to provide the information based on the fees in 

the MFIPPA O. Reg. ($ 7.50 per 15 minutes) The applicant is advised of the costs, and 

if he/she chooses to proceed, the information is collected and provided. 

Requests can take a significant amount of time to process, as it is important to review 

the legislation each time to ensure that if the requested information is provided, a 

person’s privacy or personal information is not affected. Also, usually the information is 

not readily available in the requested format, which takes staff time to compile. A 

response is required to be provided within the 30 day deadline mandated in the MFIPP 

Act, Section 19, which often changes staff priorities. 

In 2012 to date, 14 applications under the “Municipal Freedom of Information and 

Protection of Privacy Act” have been processed and the requests were for: 

1. List of all communication equipment (Phones, computers) purchased by 

Lambton Shores from Dec 2006 – Dec 2001, and corresponding list of users – 

Result: information provided. 

2. 236 Ontario Street Grand Bend – Building permit information – Result: available 

information provided. 

3. Municipal cellular telephone logs: Result: non privileged information offered as 

available. 

4. Municipal telephone logs: Result: non privileged information offered as available. 

5. PVB Settlement – municipal legal fees, and minute of settlement – Result: non 

privileged information provided. 

6. Water billed by Lambton Shores for Zone 4, Pinery Park, Zone 3 and area 

served by sanitary sewers – Result: Information provided. 

7. By-law enforcement issues 13 Woodward Ave – Result: available non privileged 


8. By-law enforcement issues 11 Woodward Ave - Result: available non privileged 


9. Agreement between the Pinery Park and Lambton Shores for assigned sewage 

capacity - Result: Information provided. 

10. Sewage Flow Rates for Pinery Park – Result: Available information provided. 

11. Contracts between Dillon and Lambton Shores/Sewage Board re STP Project 

Management since Dec 31, 2011 - Result: Information provided 

12. Lake Huron Water Quality (Swim) Monitor – Result: Available 

information/response provided. 

157

13. Information pertaining to OMI – Charge for work on Goosemarsh Line Aug 17, 

2012, Maintenance Contract, and Scope of Work – Result: Information provided on 

Maintenance Contract and Scope of Work – other information was deemed privileged 

as the charge was to the homeowner. 

14. 58 King Street, Forest – All site plans, building permits, plans, surveys etc. 

Result: Information provided. 

CLOSED MEETING INVESTIGATIONS: 

Municipalities are required to pass by-laws setting out the procedure for holding 

meetings, and the “Municipal Act” requires that all meetings be open to the public 

unless they meet the limited exceptions. The exceptions are stated in Section 239(2) of 

the Act. 

Any person may request an investigation into whether a municipality or local board has 

complied with the open meeting requirements or the procedural by-law relating to any 

meeting or part of a meeting that was closed to the public. 

All municipalities were required to appoint a “Closed Meeting Investigator” who would 

review inquiries pertaining to violations of the open meeting provisions, and the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores appointed the Ontario Ombudsman for this role. 

If a complaint is received by the Ombudsman, typically an “Early Resolution Officer” is 

appointed, who will contact the Clerk for the background information, which when 

provided, is reviewed to determine if a full investigation is necessary. If a formal 

investigation is undertaken, the Clerk provides all the requested information, and once a 

decision is rendered by the Ombudsman’s office, the municipality is required to report 

the decision in open Council. 

These requests take a significant amount of time to respond to, and in the past year, the 

Clerk has dealt with 8 issues that have been referred to the Ombudsman for 

investigation, which were: 

1. The July 6, 2011 preliminary discussion that was held with staff, consultants and 

several members of Council to ensure that the consultants were prepared to respond to 

the issues raised by residents regarding the GBSTP at the next Grand Bend Sewage 

Board Meeting. The Ombudsman’s office concluded that the open meeting 

requirements of the Municipal Act were not violated. 

2. Grand Bend Sewage Board Meeting November 8, 2011 and Lambton Shores’ 

Council meeting November 21, 2011. The issue with the November 21, 2011 meeting 

was that there was no detailed notice in advance regarding the “in camera” portion of 

the November 21 meeting. The response from the Ombudsman stated that it is not 

a statutory requirement for the details of the “in camera” discussion to be 

provided in advance to the public, although it is encouraged. Also, it was 

suggested that Section 239(2)(f) of the Municipal Act (advice that is subject to 

solicitor client privilege) be used as the rationale for closing meetings when 

possible litigious matters are discussed, as opposed to 239(2)e) – litigation or 

potential litigation 158

3. Notice for the January 30 th meeting, and February 2, 2012 meetings of Council. The 

information on the municipal procedures and those used to notify the public of these 

meetings were provided to the early resolution officer. The decision was that these 

were not closed meetings; therefore, it was not within the Ombudsman’s 

jurisdiction to investigate 

4. PVB Settlement discussion– the rationale for closing the meeting was 239(2)(e) of 

the Municipal Act – litigation or potential litigation. The Ombudsman’s office’s 

analysis was that this section accurately reflected the substance of the 

discussion on the matter. 

5. Oversight Committee – A complaint was received that the Oversight Committee may 

have held closed meetings. Information was requested on the mandate of the 

Committee, and details on the meetings. The ruling from the Closed Meeting 

investigation, dated December 21, 2012, is attached to this report, and notes that 

the Oversight Committee failed to follow the open meeting requirements of the 

Municipal Act and the consultant preparing the minutes from the July 6, 2012 

meeting was a breach of section 14 of the Procedural by-law and the Municipal 

Act. (NOTE: As a result of the comments in the letter from the Closed Meeting 

Investigator, staff will be preparing a report on recommended changes to the Committee 

procedures to ensure compliance with the Municipal Act and the Procedural By-law) 

6. Community Information Meeting - October 4, 2012 – Information was requested on 

the pre-consultation meeting held the 4 th of October with the area community groups to 

review the material that would be presented at the October 11 PIC meeting. The report 

from the closed meeting investigator (Ombudsman) on this matter is also part of 

the December 21, 2012 letter, and concludes that the October 4 meeting was not a 

“meeting of council” and therefore was not subject to the open meeting 

requirements. 

7. Fire Board Meetings –Information was requested on the Fire Board’s membership 

and mandate, and the by-law establishing the Board. The Ombudsman’s office has 

advised there will not be a review of this issue, as the meeting dates are posted 

on the annual calendar on the website, and there was no evidence of a closed 

meeting of the Fire Board. 

8. November 13, 2012 – CAO matter discussed in Closed Session. Copies of all 

minutes from closed and open sessions dealing with this matter were requested. The 

office is still working on this file and a response has not yet been received. 



Clerk 

Attachment 1 – Letter from the Office of the Ombudsman – December 21, 2012 

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166



TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



Good Neighbour Award – Wendy Hoy and Judy Watt 


For Council consideration. 

REPORT 

In August of 2011, Council established a “Good Neighbour Recognition Policy” (Copy 

attached) to honour outstanding Lambton Shores’ citizens for their efforts and actions 

that have enhanced and improved our community. 

The policy states that “Nominations can be submitted at any time, and require a 

completed application form, and details on how the nominee created, developed or 

implemented a program or project that improved or enhanced or benefitted the 

neighbourhood, without receiving compensation for these actions.” 

Attached is an application for Good Neighbour Awards submitted by the “Lakeshore 

Coalition” for Wendy Hoy, and Judy Watt for their efforts to raise awareness of the 

issues pertaining to the installation of cell towers and the possible impacts of electro 

magnetic radio emission on the citizens and the environmentally sensitive areas of 


If Council supports this nomination, a certificate will be prepared for presentation as 

requested. 



Clerk 

167

MUNICIPALITY OF LAMBTON SHORES 

GOOD NEIGHBOUR RECOGNITION PROGRAM 

Policy # 58 

Effective Date: August 8, 2011 

Lambton Shores, recognizing that great neighbours make for safe & vibrant 

communities and improve the quality of life for residents, has implemented a “Good 

Neighbour Recognition Program”. 

The purpose of the program is to honour outstanding Lambton Shores’ citizens for their 

efforts and actions that have enhanced and improved our community. 

Nomination for any development or project constructed on municipal property would 

need to have been approved by the Municipality prior to the commencement of work 

and be in compliance with all pertinent regulations and requirements. 

Nominations can be submitted by members of the public, and require details to be 

provided on how the nominee created, developed or implemented a program or project 

that improved or enhanced or benefitted the neighbourhood, without receiving 

compensation for these actions. 

Application forms are attached as Schedule “A” to this policy. 

Administered by: the Clerk’s Department 

168

Schedule “A” 

Lambton Shores, recognizing that great neighbours make for safe & vibrant 

communities and improve the quality of life for residents, has implemented a “Good 

Neighbour Recognition Program”. The purpose of the program is to honour outstanding 

Lambton Shores’ citizens for their efforts and actions that have enhanced and improved 

our community. 

Nominations can be submitted at any time, and require a completed application form, 

and details on how the nominee created, developed or implemented a program or 

project that improved or enhanced or benefitted the neighbourhood, without receiving 

compensation for these actions. Pictures of the project would be advantageous. 

At least two (2) written testimonials from persons who can attest to the value and impact 

of the program or project must accompany the application. 

NOTE: a nomination for any development or project that was constructed on municipal 

property would need to have been approved by the Municipality prior to the 

commencement of work and be in compliance with all pertinent regulations and 

requirements. 

Please send completed application and supporting document to: 

Mayor and Council 

Municipality of Lambton Shores 

7883 Amtelecom Parkway 

Forest, Ontario NON IJO 

169

Lambton Shores Good Neighbour Recognition Program 

Nomination Form 

Please note: The personal information provide is necessary for this award, and will only be used for that purpose. It is 

collected in compliance with section 38(2) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Personal Privacy Act, 

R.S.O. 1990 F.31. 

Please Type or print clearly and complete in full: 

Individual being nominated: 

First Name 

Last name 

Address 

City 

Postal 

Telephone number 

E-mail 

Nomination submitted by: 

First Name 

Last name 

Address 

City 

Postal 


E-mail 

170

Please provide details on the how the nominee created, developed or implemented a 

program or project that improved or enhanced or benefitted the neighbourhood: (include 

pictures when possible) 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________ 

o I have enclosed the two written testimonials 

171

Lambton Shores Good Neighbour Recognition Program 

Nomination Form 

Please note: The personal information provide is necessary for this award, and will only be used for that purpose. It is 

collected in compliance with section 38(2) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Personal Privacy Act, 

R.S.O. 1990 F.31. 

Please Type or print clearly and complete in full: 

IndividualS being nominated: 

WENDY 

First Name 

HOY 

Last name 

7503 DUNE DRIVE 

Address 

PORT FRANKS ON 

City 

Postal 

N0M 2L0 

519-243-1689 Wendyhoy@golden.net 


E-mail 

AND 

JUDY 

First Name 

WATT 

Last name 

10205 SHORELINE DR 

Address 

GRAND BEND ON 

City 

N0M 1T0 

Postal 

(519) 238-2832 jrwatt@hay.net 

Telephone 

Email 

Nomination submitted by: 

THE LAKESHORE 

First Name 

COALITION 

Last name 

c/o 7613 CHESTER TRAIL 

Address 

PORT FRANKS ON 

City 

Postal 

N0M 2L0 

519-243-2415 TOWERPF@YAHOO.CA 


E-mail 

172

Please provide details on the how the nominee created, developed or implemented a 

program or project that improved or enhanced or benefitted the neighbourhood: (include 

pictures when possible) 

Impending Cell Tower construction in Port Franks, Grand Bend and Ipperwash/Kettle and Stony Point 

brought together a group of concerned individuals who believed that the preservation of Lambton 

Shores residents, sensitive eco-structures and general way of life would be negatively impacted by 

such construction and their subsequent electro-magnetic radio frequency emissions. 

When public outcries, municipal intervention and peaceful demonstrations did not obtain the desired 

result - stoppage of communications tower plans - one citizen took it upon herself to implement the 

use of Drastic Measures to raise awareness of the cause. 

Wendy Hoy planned an 800 kms Walk to Ottawa to raise awareness. Wendy took with her a hand-out 

(attachment: ImWalkingtoOttawa) outlining the need to reduce involuntary everyday exposures to 

radiation; to advocate rights for children, individuals and communities; and to build awareness of 

hyper-electro-sensitivity and it’s symptoms. 

th 

Ms. Hoy and her canine companion, Dasher, left from Port Franks on September 20 , 2012, 

surrounded by friends and well-wishers from across the region. She was joined by Judy Watt, a Grand 

Bend resident, who drove alongside Wendy, keeping her safe and provided some much needed 

company along less travelled country roads. 

Along the walking route, Wendy Hoy was invited to speak at Public Information Sessions, Town Hall 

Meetings, Rallies and even a Flash-Mob Dance in Barrie, Oakville, Burlington and Peterborough. 

Supporters of the campaign to increase awareness of electro-sensitivities and cell tower issues were 

able to follow her progress on Facebook and sign a down-loadable petition (attached) calling for 

changes to Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 and the establishment of White Zones (safe haven’s) for 

persons wishing to control their voluntary exposure to EMRs. Ms. Hoy visited with Municipal 

representatives in most communities through which she travelled, increasing awareness of the 

Resolutions passed by Lambton Shores Municipal Council which called for Industry Canada to support 

Municipal Land Use decisions and calling for similar action where possible. Support was also gleaned 

from Mps and Mpps in several cities and towns visited over the eight week journey to Ottawa. 

Worth mentioning is the fact that this journey was initially self-funded! Once supporters along the 

way discovered this fact, donations began to offset the cost of fuel and motels when billets were 

unavailable. Sponsorship from the National Citizens for Safe Technology organization matched some 

of the larger donations. 

Throughout the entire journey, Wendy and Judy video documented the struggles of persons with 

electro-sensitivities and those against the construction of tele-communications towers within their own 

communities. Many of these were posted at https://www.facebook.com/WendyWalksforES . The local 

media coverage of her journey and activities along the way was phenomenal! It seems that large 

numbers of every community embraced the concept of building awareness of the risks associated with 

over-exposure to electromagnetic radio frequencies and in particular, telecommunications towers. And 

173

it has all been documented by the press! 

Wendy Hoy, her dog Dasher and driver Judy Watt arrived in Ottawa on November 22nd, met by a host 

of media and supporters from across the province. MPs Bev Shipley and Terrence Young hosted a 

meeting with several other MPs and Wendy's supporters immediately following the photo op and press 

conference. The day culminated in her recognition from the floor of the House of Commons during 

the Parliamentary Question Period that afternoon. 

This essential educational campaign could not have been so successful without the ongoing support of 

Lambton Shores Municipal Council and new Coalition partners forged along Wendy's route. That 

being said, Wendy's Walk for ES would not have been made possible without the selfless 

determination of two individuals who gave up their own lives for their communities, Wendy Hoy and 

Judy Watt, of Port Franks and Grand Bend respectively. 

The members of the Lakeshore Coalition have resolved that Wendy Hoy and Judy Watt be 

nominated for the Good Neighbour Award. It would be wonderful if this award could be presented 

at a dinner being held in their honour mid January. We appreciate that this nomination be kept 

“confidential” until such time as news of the award is made public. 

Respectfully Submitted 

Laureen Maurizio 

for 

The Lakeshore Coalition 

See Attachments: 

1. Photo Documentation 

2. Media Links 

3. I’m Walking to Ottawa 

4. Wendy Walks for ES Petition 

174

Approximate Walking Route 

Mayor Fontana took a moment to greet Wendy and wish 

her luck on her journey to Ottawa. — at London City 

Hall. 

Anne and Wendy. Anne made Wendy's handstitched vest. Thank 

you Anne for doing something so special to make Wendy more 

safe on the road. 

And yes Bell, we do want fibre optics instead of wireless!!!!!!!! 

(Photo taken at UWO Student Union) 

Barrie Town Centre Flash-Mob Dance 

Wendy with Frank Clegg, former Microsoft CEO and spokesperson for C4ST 

Yes that's Dr. Magda Havas in the back left corner. 

175

Protest in Uxbridge against the Region's proposed tower there. 

Again, the meeting will be held at the Community Hall, Uxbridge 

Arena, 291 Brock St. West on Tuesday October 30th, at 7:00 p.m 

Wendy meeting Mayor Bennett of Peterborough. 

A large group of residents from the Community came out to protest the Water 

Monitoring tower that their own Region is proposing near their 

neighbourhood. An updated system of what they are already using of sending 

the information through a wire could be used that doesn't risk one person's 

health in the community. 

176

http://metronews.ca/news/london/385794/wo 

man-walking-cell-concerns-to-parliament-hil 

l-stops-in-london 

October 17: 

http://www.mississ 

auga.com/news/art 

icle/1519648--com 

munity-turns-out-f 

or-lorne-park-cell-t 

ower-meeting 

October 18: 

http://www.insidehalton.com/news/article/1520807--wendy-w 

alks-through-oakville 

September 26, 2012 

Newspaper article 

October 19: 

http://www.lfpress.com/2012/10/19/victims-makewaves-in-wireless-world 

177

October 21: 

http://www.thebarrieexaminer.com/2012/10/21/barrie-teens-hold-flash 

-mob-for-a-cause 

Barrie teens hold flash mob for a cause 

A group of concerned teens held a flash mob Saturday morning at 

Barrie City Hall to promote healthy living and an awareness of 

electromagnetic sensitivity. 

The event was held to support Wendy Hoy, a grandmother who is 

walking from Port Franks, north of Windsor, to Parliament Hill in 

Ottawa in protest. For more information about the cause, visit 

www.barriecityhallflashmob.blogspot.ca 

Peterborough 

178

22Novemeber 2012: 

Sun News : Grandmother gets MPs' attention on wireless 

safety 

KRISTY KIRKUP | QMI AGENCY 

OTTAWA - An Ontario grandmother walked to Parliament Hill on Thursday to complete an 800- 

kilometre journey to raise awareness about the potential dangers of wireless devices. 

Wendy Hoy, 57, spent 62 days walking from London, Ont., to Ottawa to educate Ontarians about 

safety concerns linked to radiation emitted by wireless technologies including cell towers, Wi-Fi 

and cellphones. 

In 2011, the World Health Organization classified the radiation from all wireless devices as "possibly 

carcinogenic" but Hoy says many Canadians are still unaware of possible risks. 

Hoy's mission caught the attention of several elected officials including Conservative MP Terence 

Young, NDP MP Carole Hughes and independent MP Bruce Hyer. 

Her arrival in Ottawa was also timed to coincide with the national launch of Citizens for Safe 

Technology - a new organization led by former Microsoft Canada president Frank Clegg. 

Clegg, who is regarded as a pioneer in the emergence of Canada's technology sector, launched the 

organization to spread consumer tips and information. 

He said most people are unaware, for example, that BlackBerry and Apple device manuals feature fine 

print warnings advising users to keep all devices at least 15 mm away from the body during use. 

"It is no different than tobacco was 20 or 30 years ago," he said. "It is about education. It is about 

awareness." 

Clegg also wants the government to take a look at existing industry guidelines which haven't been 

updated despite emerging scientific information. 

A new Nanos Research poll, which surveyed 1,000 Canadians, found 70% of participants were aware 

of possible health effects linked to wireless technologies and 47% were most concerned about 

cellphones. 

179

I’M WALKING TO OTTAWA 

TO RAISE AWARENESS about 

involuntary everyday exposures to radiation 

that are endangering health, my grandchildren, and 

ecosystems. Three major sources of this exposure are 

telecommunication tower antennas, so-called ‘smart’ 

meters, and WiFi in schools. 

I’m walking to advocate rights for children, 

individuals, and communities. Much tighter 

radiation emission controls and acts of social 

responsibility from corporations and authorities are 

needed — immediately. 

More and more Canadians suffer symptoms of 

electro-sensitivity from everyday sources. With the 

increasing presence of technology, and therefore 

electromagnetic radiation in our communities, 

electrosensitive people find it difficult to visit the 

everyday places - workplaces, coffee shops and even 

hospitals - which many of us take for granted. 

WE WANT IS THE FREEDOM TO CHOOSE A 

HEALTHY LIVING ENVIRONMENT 

Visit 

‘Wendy Walks for ES’ and 

‘Lakeshore Coalition’ on Facebook 

The Lakeshore Coalition is a grass-roots organization building 

awareness of the potential risks of involuntary exposure to the kinds 

of EMR emissions coming from cell towers and lobbying for 

necessary change. 

Common Symptoms of Electro-sensitivity 

•Concentration problems 

•Memory lapses, anxiety, 

fatigue 

•Aches or pressure in head, 

throat and chest 

•Unsteady balance, dizziness 

•Altered heart rate, low or 

high blood pressure 

•Ringing in the ears 

•Excessive fatigue 

•Numbness or pain in affected 

areas (fibromyalgia) 

•Sleep disturbances 

•Eye irritation, deteriorating 

vision, floaters 

•Red skin blotches, eczema, 

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity 

•Nausea 

•Adrenal Fatigue, thyroid 

problems 

•Altered sugar metabolism 

•Immune abnormalities and 

asthma 

Long Term Symptoms can include: 

Cancer, tumours, childhood leukemia, breast cancer, DNA strand 

breakage, abnormal cell division, nerve damage, MS, ALS, 

Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, melatonin reduction, seizures 

PLEASE!!! 

1.Get informed about EMR and microwave radiation as it pertains to 

cell towers, ‘smart’ meters, Wi-fi and other wireless devices. 

2.Write letters, call or email your Municipal Council; MPP and MP 

to tell them your concerns about this topic. 

3.Join the Lakeshore Coalition and Wendy Walks for ES to help 

share the available information so we can all MAKE INFORMED 

CHOICES ABOUT THE LEVEL OF INVOLUNTARY 

EXPOSURE YOU ARE WILLING TO PERMIT. 

180

WENDY WALKS FOR ES (ELECTRO-SENSITIVITY)September 2012 

In light of the proliferation of Electro-magnetic Radiation (EMR) in our environment (such as those emitted from cell towers, ‘smartmetres’ and wi-fi) which have 

not been proven safe, we, the undersigned, do hereby Petition Mr. Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, the Members of Parliament; the Federal and 

Provincial Minister and Ministry of Health, the Minister and Ministry of Industry and the Minister and Ministry of Natural Resources to: 

1) Prevent Involuntary Exposure to electro-magnetic radio frequency. IE: smart meters on homes, wi-fi in schools and hospitals, etc 

2) Provide White Zones for Persons with ES and Those Not Wishing to be Exposed - Develop a template for the identification of White Zones (low RF areas) and 

implement the designation of such residential areas to the Canadian Land Use Code. IE: Port Franks Ontario and its adjoining lakeside communities’ natural shielding 

geography comprised of eco-sensitive Carolinian forests makes it a great location for a White Zone. A history making motion brought forward by Councilor John Russell 

was passed by the Municipality of Lambton shores, requesting staff research and report in consideration of creating a 'white zone' in the hamlet of Port Franks. 

3) Reduce Emission Levels - Adopt, Establish and Enforce regulations limiting the amount of electromagnetic radiation emissions from electronic devices and 

infrastructure in developed and natural environments. 

4) Allow Municipalities to have the Final Say - Legislate Industry Canada to adhere to Municipal protocols and Provincial laws for land use regarding all antenna 

siting; no exclusion, no exceptions. Where there are no pre-existing Municipal protocols, the default process shall be based on the most stringent Municipal protocols 

registered at the time. Additional protections for natural areas, endangered species/ species at risk and children must be given. 

5) Require Transparency and Escape Clauses for Telecommunications Contracts - Contracts must be made open for public scrutiny and protection. Escape clauses 

must be built into Telecom/Land Owner Contracts which is concurrent with the same time period as the public consultation response process to protect land owners. 

PRINT NAME ADDRESS EMAIL/PHONE# SIGNATURE Permission for 

C4ST to keep you 

updated 

 

 

Mail to: The Lakeshore Coalition, c/o 7613 Chester Trail, Port Franks ON N0M 2L0 OR EMAIL: pftower@yahoo.ca 

Citizens for Safe Technology www.C4ST.org 

C4ST is a not-for-profit, volunteer-based coalition of parents, citizens and experts whose mission is to educate and inform Canadians and their policy makers about the dangers of exposure to unsafe 

levels of radiation from technology, and to work with all levels of government to create healthier communities for children and families from coast to coast. 

181



TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 



Short Term Rental Issue – Grand Bend 



REPORT 

Representatives from the Lambton Shores Community Association have requested a 

delegation to discuss issues that arose in Grand Bend in 2012 related to Short Term 

Rental accommodations. Information received from the Association is included in the 

agenda, and also included is the information provided to the Associate that pertains to 

this issue. 



Clerk 

182

January 3, 2013 


c/o Sharon Weitzel 

2950 Line 29, R. R. # 2 

Tavistock, Ontario N0B 2R0 

Dear Mrs. Weitzel: 

I am in receipt of the delegation request to attend the Council meeting to discuss by-law 

issues in Grand Bend, more particularly, the fences at the corner of Woodward and 

Centre Streets in Grand Bend. 

As you are aware, these fences were the subject of Committee of Adjustment 

deliberation last year, and a decision was rendered that the fences were to conform to 

the requirement of the Lambton Shores Fence By-Law 80 of 2008. 

During the course of the enforcement of the ruling by the Committee of Adjustment, the 

matter was forwarded to and reviewed by the Municipal solicitor, and it was determined 

that there had been a misunderstanding in the interpretation of the “yard definitions” in 

the Fence By-law 80 of 2008 (copy attached) 

The Definitions in the by-law state: 

“Yard” means that part of a lot not covered or occupied by any building; 

“Yard, exterior side” means a side yard immediately adjoining a street, extending from a 

front yard to the rear lot line; 

“Yard, front” means a yard that extends across the full width of the lot from the front lot 

line to the nearest wall of the main building on the lot; 

“Yard, rear” means a yard that extends across the full width of the lot from the rear lot 


“Yard, side” means a yard that extends from the front yard to the rear yard and from the 

side line of a lot to the nearest wall of the main building on the lot. 

The drawing on the last page of the by-law provides a visual representation of the 

definitions. 

183

A “yard” is only the area from the structure to the property line. The fences at the 

properties at the corner of Centre and Woodward Street are parallel to and in line with 

the buildings and do not extend beyond the structure into the front or exterior side 

yards, and therefore are not subject to the additional requirements of section 2 (c) of the 

by-law. 

While this may not be visibly pleasing, it is in compliance with the Fence By-Law 

regulations. Situations such as this were not likely envisioned when the Fence By-law 

was drafted, and even if the by-law was to be modified to address this issue, these 

fences would be deemed to be “legal non conforming” as they were in existence prior to 

the passing of the by-law. ( Section 2 (b) explains this further. ) 

The Building Inspector did review the fences and required several modifications to the 

gates to ensure proper and safe egress from the property. These modifications were 

completed, and the lattice panels were removed from the interior side fence. At the 

conclusion of the inspection, the fence was deemed to be in compliance with the Fence 

By-law requirements. 

I apologize that, while this information was shared with several residents, it was not 

conveyed to the Association. 

With respect to the other By-law enforcement issues noted in the delegation request, 

would it be possible to outline the specific concerns, as based on the feedback we 

received during 2012, the enhanced patrols in the problem areas resulted in fewer 

infractions, and the residents were pleased with the results. 

A brief report on By-law Enforcement Issues was considered by Council earlier (copy 

attached) and it does note that there will be a more detailed report on the 2012 season 

in the near future. Our goal is to stay focused on the issues that impact our residents 

and continue with a program of additional patrols. In order to ensure all the issues are 

covered in the report, and any additional needs considered, would it be possible to meet 

with the Association and discuss any outstanding issues? 

If the Association still wishes to be a delegation at Council at the January 14 meeting, 

please let me know. 

Thank you 


Clerk 

184


BY-LAW 80-2008 

A By-law to Prescribe the Height and Type of Fences 

WHEREAS pursuant to the Municipal Act, S.O., 2001, C. 25, S. 11 a Council may pass a 

by-law respecting matters within the spheres of jurisdiction regulating structures, including 

fences and signs; 

AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient and desirable to pass a by-law to regulated the 

erection and maintenance of fences: 

NOW THEREFORE the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of 

Lambton Shores enacts as follows: 

1. DEFINITIONS 

For the purposes of this by-law, the following definitions shall apply: 

“Building Inspector” means a Building Inspector of the Corporation of the Municipality of 

Lambton Shores; 

“By-law Enforcement Officer” shall mean a By-law Enforcement Officer appointed by the 

Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores; 

“Council” means the Council of the Municipality of Lambton Shores; 

“Corner Visibility Triangle” means the portion of a corner lot within the triangular area 

formed by measuring 7.5 metres (25 feet) in each direction from the point where two 

property lines intersect at the street lot line corner; (See “ Diagram 1”) 

“Driveway” means a vehicle access provided between a street and a parking area/space 

or a loading space; 

“Driveway Visibility Triangle” means the triangular area formed by measuring 4.5 metres 

(15 feet) down the driveway and 4.5 metres (15 feet) down the side lot line abutting a 

street, regardless of whether or not the DVT is on the subject lot or the adjacent 

neighbour’s property. (See “Diagram 1”) 

“Electrical Fence” means a fence through which electricity passes; 

“Erect” includes alter, construct, plant, grow, place and relocate; 

“Fence” includes a railing, wall, line of posts, wire, masonry, gate, boards or pickets or 

other similar substances, used to enclose or divide in whole or in part a yard or other land, 

or to establish a property boundary, and includes a continual hedge, but does not include 

a retaining wall; 

185

By-Law 80-2008 – Fence By-law Page 2 

“Fence – open type construction” means a fence constructed so that its vertical surface 

area is unobstructed, enabling motorists and pedestrians to have a clear view through 

such fence (e.g. a fence of chain link construction, wrought iron, etc); 

“Fence – solid type construction” means a fence constructed so that its vertical surface is 

obstructed, preventing motorists and pedestrians from having a clear view through such 

fence; 

“Height” is measured from the ground where the fence posts are embedded to the top of 

the fence. 

“Hydro Massage Pool” includes pools commonly referred to as hot tubs, whirlpools, a 

Jacuzzi or a spa; 

“Lot” means any parcel of land which can be occupied or used or otherwise disposed of 

separately and apart from any abutting lands, whether or not such parcel is described in a 

registered deed or shown on a registered plan of subdivision; 

“Owner” means the person who holds legal title to a piece of property or has an equitable 

interest in the same; 

“Pond” means a confined body of water (which may contain fish and/or plants) which is 

located in an area zoned to permit residential development but does not include farming 

areas or ponds located more than 150 metres (500 feet) from an area zoned to permit 

residential development. 

“Street” shall mean a public highway which provides the principal means of vehicular 

access to abutting lots and includes its sidewalks and boulevards; 

“Street Line” means the boundary between a street and a lot separating the lot from the 

abutting street; 

“Swimming Pool” means a privately-owned outdoor swimming pool, constructed or 

fabricated and located for swimming, wading, diving, and bathing and which when filled is 

capable of containing a depth of 75 cm (29.5”) or more of water, has a surface area of 

more than 1 square metre ( 10.8 sq. feet), but does not include a wading pool which is not 

capable of containing a depth of more than 75 cm (29.5”) of water and which may be 

emptied on a daily or frequent basis, not does it include a pond or reservoir utilized solely 

for farming purposes; 

“Swimming Pool Area” means the swimming pool plus any area which lie within the 

swimming pool enclosure; 

“Swimming pool enclosure” means the fence and gate or gates around a privately-owned 

outdoor swimming pool/pond restricting access, and includes the wall of a building or 

structure; 

“Yard” means that part of a lot not covered or occupied by any building; 

186


“Yard, exterior side” means a side yard immediately adjoining a street, extending from a 

front yard to the rear lot line; 

“Yard, front” means a yard that extends across the full width of the lot from the front lot 


“Yard, rear” means a yard that extends across the full width of the lot from the rear lot line 

to the nearest wall of the main building on the lot; 

“Yard, side” means a yard that extends from the front yard to the rear yard and from the 

side line of a lot to the nearest wall of the main building on the lot. 

2. GENERAL PROVISIONS 

The requirements of this by-law apply to all properties within the geographic limits of the 

Municipality of Lambton Shores, except where specified otherwise. No permit is required 

for a fence that complies with the requirements of this by-law. 

a) Visibility - Obstruction – prohibited 

Notwithstanding any of the regulations set out in this by-law, no person shall erect, 

construct or permit to be erected or constructed a fence that, in the opinion of the 

By-Law Enforcement Officer: 

(i) obstructs pedestrian or vehicular traffic; or 

(ii) obscures clear visibility of normal approaching pedestrian or 

vehicular traffic 

b) Erection – Fence- Non-compliance – Prohibited 

No person shall construct, erect, or permit to be erected or constructed any fence 

within the Municipality of Lambton Shores that does not comply with the provisions 

of this by-law. A fence that was erected prior to the passing of this by-law and was 

erected in compliance with the predecessor of this by-law and is not moved, 

replaced, altered or enlarged in any way shall be considered a “legal fence”. 

c) Maximum Height – Front Yards and Exterior Yards (See Diagram 1) 

No person shall erect, construct or permit to be erected or constructed, a fence in a 

front yard or an exterior side yard unless such fence: 

(ii) does not exceed a maximum height of 0.91metres (3 feet) measured from the 

ground level if a solid type construction or a maximum height of 2 metres (6.5 feet) 

measured from the ground level if of open type construction 

d) Maximum Height – All Other Yards (See Diagram 1) 

No person shall erect, construct, or permit to be erected or constructed a fence in 

an interior side yard or rear yard unless such fence: 

187


(i) does not exceed a height of 2 metres (6.5 feet) measured from the ground level; 

e) Fence – Condition of Development or Redevelopment 

Notwithstanding any other provision in this By-law, a fence, which is required and 

approved as a condition of a site plan agreement for the development or 

redevelopment of land, shall be deemed to be in conformity with the provisions of 

this by-law 

f) Variances 

Any person may apply to the Committee of Adjustment for a minor variance from 

the requirements of this by-law. 

i) The Committee may grant a minor variance if, in its opinion, the general intent 

and purpose of the Fence By-law are maintained or if the Committee is satisfied, 

after allowing input from the applicant and property owners within 60 metres (200 

feet), that the variance is appropriate. 

ii) The Committee may attach terms and conditions to the minor variance. 

iii) A minor variance shall be invalid if the terms and conditions are contravened. 

3. FENCES AND VEGETATION WITHIN A CORNER VISIBILITY TRIANGLE 

AND/OR A DRIVEWAY VISIBILITY TRIANGLE 

a) No person shall erect or cause to be erected a fence, hedge or shrubs within 

a Corner Visibility Triangle or a Driveway Visibility Triangle as shown on 

Diagram 1, unless: 

i) it is of open-type construction and does not obstruct the visibility of 

motorists and pedestrians; or 

ii) 

it is of solid-type construction and does not exceed 0.9 m (30 inches) 

in height above effective ground level. 

4. FENCES WITH BARBED WIRE OR OTHER BARBED MATERIAL 

a) No person shall erect or cause to be erected on any land used for residential 

or commercial purposes, a fence which either contains, or is constructed of, 

barbed wire or other barbed or sharp material. 

b) Barbed wire or other barbed or sharp material may be used on the top and 

to the outside of fences that are erected on a lot, which meet all the 

following criteria: 

i) the lot is zoned Industrial in the Zoning By-law; 

188


ii) the barbed wire is located not less than 1.52 metres (5 feet) above 

ground level; 

iii) the outward projection of the barbed wire does not project onto a 

neighboring property; 

c) Barbed wire may be used on fences lawfully used for agricultural purposes 

on land zoned Agricultural, as long as such fence does not abut a residential 

zone. 

5. ELECTRICAL FENCES 

a) Except as provided in section (b), no person shall erect or cause to be 

erected an electrical fence on any land; 

b) An electrical fence using direct current only may be erected on land while it 

is being lawfully used for agricultural purposes, provided such fence: 

i) is designed and erected solely to contain animals; 

ii) does not abut a residential zone. 

6. FENCES AROUND A HYRDO MASSAGE POOL AND SWIMMING POOLS 

a) A “Hydro Massage Pools” must be adequately secured by a cover with a 

locking device and locked when not in use. 

b) The owner and/or occupant of any lands on which a pool is located shall 

erect and maintain a “swimming pool enclosure” that complies with the 

provisions of this by-law, either around the entire yard containing the 

pool or the “swimming pool area”. 

c) A swimming pool enclosure shall extend from a maximum of no more than 5 

cm (2 inches) vertically above ground level to a height that is at least 150 cm 

(5 feet), above ground level; 

d) Fences forming part of the prescribed swimming pool enclosure shall not 

contain barbed wire, electrical wiring, sharp projections or any other 

dangerous characteristics either on the outside or the inside; 

e) If an above-ground swimming pool has as an integral part of its 

construction, a deck that is level with the top of the pool and a Fence around 

the deck which has an effective combined height of 150 cm (5 feet) above 

grade, the fence may be considered as being part of the required swimming 

pool enclosure; 

f) The walls of an above-ground swimming pool may be used as part of the 

fence. 

GATES AND ENTRANCES TO THE POOL AREA 

g) Gates which form part of the swimming pool enclosure shall be: 

189


i) of such construction as will provide a degree of safety and 

rigidity equivalent to or greater than that of a required fence; 

ii) 

iii) 

supported on substantial hinges; and 

self-closing and self-latching with the latching device a minimum of 

1.2 metres (4 feet) from grade and on the inside of the Gate; 

h) Any gate which forms part of the swimming pool enclosure shall be kept 

closed and locked at all times when not attended by a responsible, adult 

person. 

7. LINE FENCES IN AN AGRICULTURAL AREA 

The requirements of the Line Fences Act are to be used for fences on lands 

designated “Agricultural” in the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. 

8. GENERAL 

a) In this by-law, unless the context otherwise requires, words imparting the 

singular number shall include the plural, and words imparting the feminine 

gender shall include the masculine and, further, the converse of the 

foregoing also applies where the context so requires. 

b 

Conflicts – other by-laws 

In the event of any conflict between provisions of this by-law and any 

provisions of any other Municipality of Lambton Shores By-laws, relating to 

fencing, the provisions of this by-law shall prevail. 

9. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 

a) In the event that the Municipality receives complaints regarding a fence, the Bylaw 

Enforcement Officer shall inspect such fence. If, in the opinion of the Bylaw 

Enforcement Officer, the fence does not meet provisions of the by-law, the 

By-law Enforcement Officer shall require, in writing, the owner, agent or person 

responsible for the fence to comply with the provisions of this by-law. Failure to 

comply shall be considered a contravention of the by-law which is subject to the 

penalty set out in Section 10 of this by-law. 

Notice in writing is deemed delivered when it has been: 

i) personally served; 

ii) sent by regular mail to the address of the owner, as shown on the last 

revised assessment roll, on the seventh day after mailing; and/or 

iii) when posted on the offending fence. 

190


10. PENALTY 

Every person who contravenes any provisions of this by-law is guilty of an offence 

and subject to the provisions of The Provincial Offences Act. 

11. SEVERABILITY 

If a court of competent jurisdiction declares any Section or Subsection of this bylaw 

invalid, the remainder of this by-law shall continue in force unless the court 

makes an order to the contrary. 

12. TITLE 

The short title of this by-law is the “Lambton Shores Fence By-law”. 

13. REPEAL OF PREVIOUS BY-LAWS 

By-laws passed by the Municipality of Lambton Shores and the former 

municipalities including the Village of Arkona, the Town of Bosanquet, the Village 

of Grand Bend, the Town of Forest and the Village of Thedford that are 

inconsistent with the provisions of this by-law are hereby repealed. 

14. DATE BY-LAW COMES INTO FORCE 

This by-law comes into force and effect when finally passed. 

Read a FIRST and SECOND time this 17 th day of November, 2008. 

READ A THIRD TIME AND FINALLY PASSED THIS 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2008. 

“Gord Minielly” 

MAYOR 

“Carol McKenzie” 

CLERK 

191

By-Law 80-2008 

Diagram 1. 

192


CL Report No. 134-2012 Wednesday, November 7,2012 

TO: 

FROM: 



RE: By-law Enforcement Update - 2012 



REPORT 

The Municipal by-law officers enforce a variety of by-laws that deal with property 

matters – standards of maintenance, parking restrictions, fencing, animal control, site 

alteration, zoning etc, or the health and safety of residents, such as open air burning, 

streets by-laws and sewage discharge by-laws. 

For By-law Enforcement purposes, Lambton Shores is divided into two service areas: 

The North Area includes Grand Bend, and all the subdivisions north of Klondyke Road. 

Keith Crawford, along with several part time staff, has been looking after Grand Bend 

and area for the past 35 years. 

The South area consists of the area south of Klondyke Road, including Port Franks, 

Ipperwash, Arkona, Forest, Thedford and all the areas in between. Glenn Bell has been 

with Lambton Shores since 2001, and prior to that, served the community with the 

O.P.P. for 30 years. Glen’s duties are the south area of the municipality, and he is also 

responsible for the canine control, grease trap inspections, weed inspection and 

livestock evaluation for the entire municipality. 

The following is a brief summary of the most common by-laws/issues enforced: 

Parking Enforcement 

Parking regulations are enforced to ensure that area streets remain clear and 

unobstructed for safety reasons and to facilitate winter snow clearing. While the By-law 

Enforcement staff patrol the municipal roads and the parking lots (in the summer 

months) to ensure compliance with municipal by-laws and regulations. 

Property Standards and Tidy Yard By-Laws 

193

The Property Standards and Tidy Yard by-laws prescribe the minimum standards for 

maintenance and physical condition of properties to ensure properties are kept in good 

repair, and are safe for inhabitants. 

It is important to note that at all stages of the enforcement process, the By-Law Officers 

works with the property owner to try to resolve the issues, which results in the majority 

of the properties being brought into compliance without legal action. When dealing with 

a person’s home or property, it is important to exhaust all opportunities for compliance 

prior to initiating legal action to ensure the person’s rights are protected. This process 

tends to take a significant amount of time before results are achieved, which can be 

frustrating for whoever lodged the complaint. 

On occasion, there are owners that refuse to comply with the by-law and legal action is 

required. 

Animal Control 

The most common complaints received pertain to animal control – either barking dogs, 

or dogs running at large. The South Area By-Law Enforcement Officer, Glenn Bell, 

undertakes animal control for the entire municipality, and to date, has responded to 42 

animal complaints, ranging from barking dogs to animals running at large. 9 dogs found 

running at large have been collected and taken to the Sarnia Humane Society, which is 

the organization that serves as the municipal “pound”. 

The number of animal control issues has been reducing each year, and may be 

attributed to the increase in fine amounts for repeat offences. 

SHORT TERM RENTAL ISSUES: 

In 2011, the issues and problems resulting from some properties offering “Short Term 

Rental Accommodation” in Plan 24 Grand Bend were studied in depth, with discussions 

on the appropriateness of municipal by-laws that have been enacted to regulate 

community issues such as the Parking, Noise, Streets and Beach usage. The 

enforcement officers provided information on the situations they are encountering, the 

current enforcement practices, and any impediments they have experienced when 

enforcing the regulations. 

Ways of protecting the rights of the residents, and ensuring a reasonable measured 

response to issues were debated, as well as some of the limitations that the By-law 

Officers face, such as the fact they cannot compel a person to provide the identification 

necessary to issue a ticket, or that peace officers (including Police Officers) do not have 

the right to enter a “Residence” without a warrant, unless there is a criminal activity in 

the works or a criminal activity in plain view. Additional funds were allocated in the 2012 

budget for enhanced patrols in the problem area, and the result was fewer infractions, 

and happier residents. A brief overview is included in the report from the North Area Bylaw 

Officer, and a full report on “Short Term Rental 2012” is pending. 

Report from the By-law Officers: 

194

Lambton Shores North- 2012 Bylaw Enforcement Report: 

Bylaw enforcement for Lambton Shores’ North during the summer of 2012 consisted of 

4 full time officers and 4 part time officers. As in the past, officers handled the needs of 

a tourist area with flexible judgment and common sense. The co-operation of the OPP 

officers, Lambton Shores’ staff and Council allowed officers to apply municipal bylaws in 

a fair but firm manner. Heightened enforcement in Plan 24 during peak periods 

achieved the desired result of fewer complaints and better behavior by tenants. 

Bylaw officers issued 2032 parking infractions, 447 of which were issued on Main Street 

Grand Bend. 

Bylaw officers issued 39 charges under the Provincial Offenses Act: 

Breakdown of P.O.A. charges: 

Public Nuisance 10 

Glass on Beach 10 

Safety on Beach 03 

Nuisance on Beach 02 

Noise 14 

Total 39 

This compares with 40 P.O.A. charges laid in 2011. Noise charges were down from 17 

last year with the biggest change occurring at the corner of Woodward and Centre 

Streets, which dropped from 09 charges in 2011 to only 02 charges in 2012. 5 charges 

were laid in the “Shady Lane” area, and the other 8 were spread throughout the 

community. 

P.O.A. charges on the beach were up from 09 in 2011 to 15 in 2012. Extra hours used 

for Plan 24 in 2012 totaled 146 at a cost of $3,212.00 out of the $5,000.00 budgeted. 

Breakdown of extra hours by month were: 

May 30 

June 49 

July 42 

August 15 

September 10 

May and June are Prom months and July is the busiest tourist/rental month. Extra staff 

was utilized on a perceived need basis with more frequently weekend day patrols, extra 

bodies at night and earlier start times. This created more enforcement visibility and in 

most cases nipped potential problems in the bud. The knowledge of the property lines 

and the controlled parking at Centre and Woodward were also factors in reducing 

problems at that location. Co-operation from the landlords at 11 and 13 Woodward was 

appreciated. 

195

There continues to be a need for more visible signage on Main Street, and a list of sign 

replacements and additions/alteration will be provided to the Community Services 

Department. This list will encompass parking lots, back and side streets in Plan 24 and 

entrance points to Grand Bend from all major links. 

We have 3 trials scheduled for November 2012, all related to noise charges. (Note: all 

charges were upheld) 

People sleeping in their vehicles especially during the long weekend in May increased 

this year. It is suggested that the fine for 2am – 6am overnight parking be increased 

from the current $40 or a separate category created on the ticket which levies a stiff fine 

for occupying a parked vehicle during restricted hours. Minor revisions are also needed 

to the “Streets Bylaw” to allow tickets to be issued anyone relieving themselves in our 

parking lots or on municipal property. 

Overall, I consider bylaw enforcement during the summer of 2012 successful. We were 

frequently at saturation with the excellent weather. In spite of the “over enforcement” 

comments received, crowds and full parking lots indicate that our community offers 

more than enough to compensate people for 1-3 hour drives and $20 parking fees. 

Most people love our safe, clean beach and beautiful Main Street and even comment 

positively on the helpfulness and visibility of OPP and bylaw patrols as well as the 

presence of lifeguards. We do our best, and to most visitors and residents that is good 

enough. 

(Report prepared by Keith Crawford, North Area By-Law Enforcement Officer) 

Lambton Shores South- 2012 Bylaw Enforcement Report: 

The summer of 2012 started in early April due to the warm weather and was busy until 

the Labour Day weekend. Most weekends had good weather resulting in numerous 

visitors to the beach especially on Holiday weekends. 

The revised boat launch area at Ipperwash worked very well with only two incidents of 

boaters parking and leaving their vehicles in the prohibited area. The usual parking 

problems in Windsor Park subdivision continue and meetings are being planned for 

early in the new year with the Windsor Park residents. 

The following complaints were investigated or infractions issued: 

Property Standards Investigations (major) 9 

Property Standards Investigations (minor) 13 

Property Standards Investigation follow-up 27 

Grass and Weed complaints (Tidy Yard) 10 

Fence By-law investigations 4 

Sign By-law investigations 7 

Giant Hog Weed investigations 4 

196

Parking exemption request re Council meetings 8 

Parking complaints 8 

Dog complaints (barking, strays etc.) 42 

Dogs taken to Sarnia Humane Society 9 

Zoning By-law investigations 7 

Zoning By-law investigations follow-up 3 

Burning Complaints 16 

Garbage dumping complaints 1 

Street Alteration investigations 2 

Noise By-law complaint investigations 3 

Chip wagon inspections 2 

Livestock Evaluations 1 

Weed Control Act investigations 1 

Training seminars 2 

Seminars attended 3 

Meetings attended 5 

General Occurrences 21 

Grease Trap inspections 5 

Dumpster By-law investigation 1 

(Report prepared by G.C. Bell, South Area By-Law Enforcement Officer) 

BY-LAW ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY 

Lambton Shores is extremely fortunate to employ By-Law Enforcement Officers who 

understand the issues, and the need to resolve situations to the benefit of all parties 

involved. This is especially challenging in Lambton Shores, as it is an area that serves 

both permanent residents and visitors to our area, groups that often have different goals 

and desires. 



Clerk 

197


BY-LAW NUMBER 09 of 2013 

A By-law of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores 

to confirm the proceedings of Council which were adopted 

up to and including January 14, 2013 

WHEREAS: 

It has been expedient that from time to time, the Council of the 

Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores should act by 

resolution of Council; 

AND WHEREAS: 

It is deemed advisable that all such actions that have been adopted 

by a resolution of the Council be authorized by By-law; 

THEREFORE: 

The Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Lambton Shores 

enacts as follows; 

THAT all actions of Council which have been authorized by a resolution of the Council and 

adopted in open Council and accepted by Council up to and including January 14, 2013 

be hereby confirmed; and 

THAT the Mayor and the proper officials of the Municipality of Lambton Shores are hereby 

authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to the approved actions or 

to obtain approvals where required, and to execute all documents as may be necessary in 

that behalf and the Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to affix the Corporate Seal to all 

such documents. 

THAT any pecuniary interest declared during any Council meeting or Committee meeting is 

deemed to be in force and the same as though repeated in this by-law; 

THAT THIS BY-LAW is read a FIRST, SECOND and THIRD time and finally passed 

January 14, 2013 

_________________________ 


_________________________ 


198

Notice of Motion: January 4, 2013 

Moved by: 

Councillor Bonesteel 

Seconded by: 

That staff be directed to prepare a strategy/protocol to regulate/manage the location of 

charitable donation boxes throughout the municipality. 

199

View - The Municipality of Lambton Shores

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?