Council to Consider Environmental Protection Bylaw

At our Policies and Priorities meeting last week, Councillors reviewed an Environmental Protection Bylaw. The bylaw’s goal is to help protect important environmental and heritage features in the Town, to encourage the long-term conservation of productive agricultural lands, and to prevent the importation of waste and hazardous materials.

You may recall that in the spring of 2011 a rural resident made a presentation to Council about construction fill being dumped on a neighbouring property.  The material not only covered rich agricultural soil, the neighbour built a berm right up against the property line. The resident asked Council to consider developing a Site Alteration Bylaw to regulate this type of activity.

Many other municipalities have enacted this type of bylaw because it allows Towns to regulate activities with the potential for environmental degradation (dumping, erosion, sedimentation), and drainage problems (blockages, impact on neighbouring properties).

The Town convened a public information session in August 2011 to give people an opportunity to ask questions and provide written comment. Then Council convened a public meeting to receive feedback in September, 2011. Farmers, nursery operators, and sod growers asked to be exempt for "normal farm practices"; landscapers asked for exemptions for their business activities.  Some neighbours of existing “berms” implored Council to act and to stop the dumping of construction material on good farm land. Others asked Council to halt consideration of any "infringement of property rights".

Based on that feedback, staff presented a draft bylaw to Council in January 2012. At that time, Council discussed whether the bylaw should deal exclusively with berms or include additional elements raised during the public meeting. Council sent the bylaw back to staff to make further refinements.

At our August 2012 Committee meeting, Councillors received a new draft Site Alteration Bylaw and directed staff to make it available to residents for feedback.

Council reviewed the feedback at a November meeting, and used a creative problem solving process to focus the discussion and clarify issues. Then, during a December meeting, we directed staff to draft a bylaw that protects the environment and natural watercourses, exempts normal farm practices, and bans the importation of construction waste.

We received that draft last Tuesday, where it was noted that any enforcement would follow our recently approved courteous Enforcement Services Protocols. While pleased with the draft, Councillors directed staff to seek legal advice to clarify some wording in the definitions, and with one of the provisions.

A final draft, with any clarifications, will be included on our March 4 Council agenda for consideration and (hopefully) adoption.

UPDATE on 4 March 2013:
As stated above, Council asked for some clarifications at our February 19th Committee meeting regarding the draft Environmental Protection Bylaw.
And, given some feedback we also received from farmers and others (including from the Niagara South Federation of Agriculture), the bylaw was further changed to better meet the community’s and Council’s wish that it exempt “Normal Farm Practices.”
A new version was presented to Council on March 4th, and following Council's discussion and debate, the Bylaw was approved.

Please click here to review the final and signed version of the the new Environmental Protection Bylaw.

Pelham's 2013 Operating Budget

We officially approved our 2013 Operating Budget during our Town Council meeting last Monday.

While Council gave direction to ensure minimal impact on you and other property tax-payers last fall, we also approved ways to increase the Town’s level of service. For instance, Council asked staff to become more customer-friendly, to start clearing snow from all Town sidewalks (for next winter), to emphasis recreation, culture, and wellness, and to continue to improve the image of the Town. At the same time, we also directed staff to ensure we continued to improve the Town’s infrastructure and facilities.

These decisions mean budget changes. For example, continuing to improve infrastructure added $161,000 to the budget. Significant organization changes – 5 job reclassifications including establishing a Director of Recreation, Culture & Wellness, turning 2 contract positions to permanent, removing a number of part-time positions, and adding a Marketing & Communications Officer – added $3,000 to the budget. Creatively revamping snow-clearing and beginning to clear all Town sidewalks (effective November 1, 2013) added only $7,000 to the budget. Uncontrollable, wage-related increases – benefits, CPP, EI – added $56,000 to the budget.

As a result of these and other initiatives, the Treasurer recommended a net budget increase of $399,542 (on a $9.5 million net budget) or 4.39% BEFORE adjusting for real assessment growth.

Real assessment growth in 2012 – from new businesses, new homes, or improvements to existing properties – was $133,587 or 1.47%. (This growth has nothing to do with MPAC’s changes in market value assessment of existing properties.)

Once growth is removed, the net effect on the tax levy will be $265,955 or an increase of 2.92% on the Town of Pelham portion of your 2013 property tax bill.

What does that mean for your pocket book, you ask?

Well, the average residential property value for 2013 is expected to be $291,556. If your home and property were assessed at that value, you would be paying an additional $45.91 or a total of $1,335 for the Pelham portion of the municipal services on your property tax bill.

To put the 2013 Operating Budget into perspective – from what we are hearing and reading in the media from across Niagara – Pelham will likely be the lowest or among the lowest increases again this year.

I will write more about your total property tax impact after Regional Council approves the 2013 rates and ratios later this spring.

For more information about our 2013 Operating Budget, please check out “Budget & Financial Reports” under “Information for Residents” on the Town’s website at www.pelham.ca.

Thank You Aviva, Canada AM, and Pelham!

 What an amazing celebration on Tuesday, January 29! By hosting a community event and welcoming Canada AM viewers from across the nation we showcased Pelham’s vibrant, creative, and caring community.

Thank you to Mariah Bunz for applying to the Aviva Community Fund for a skatepark in memory of Isaac Riehl. I appreciate Mariah initiating the application, encouraging others to participate, and accepting the cheque on behalf of the community!

Thanks to those who helped make the Riehl Skatepark a finalist, and, eventually, the winner of the Aviva competition! So many helped along the way – voting and encouraging others to vote – including EL Crossley students, teachers and staff; members from churches, sports teams, and associations; the Glynn A. Green community and so many from all of Pelham’s schools; the media spreading the word; and Town staff and Council.

I also appreciate Bonita, Ted, and Jacob Riehl for consenting to allow your son’s and brother’s tragic death to unite the community behind this common cause. Thank you for your strength.

Thank you so much to those that made the Aviva announcement such a huge success!

Thanks to Ed Goerzen, principal, and the teachers and the students of the EL Crossley community! Thanks to the Student Union, to Marching Band, to Crossley Rowing, and to the members of the various student bands for showcasing your “Cyclone Spirit.”

Thanks to Lazy Loon for cooking breakfast; to White Meadows for the maple syrup; to Tim Horton’s for the hot beverages; to representatives from our local service clubs – Lions & Lioness, Rotary, Kinsmen – for serving; and to Chartwell, Fonthill Sobey’s, Giant Tiger, Fonthill Shoppers for donating all the breakfast food and supplies. Thanks to Young Sod Farms for your cash donation. Thanks to Vickie and numerous Town staff for organizing the event and to the many dedicated volunteers – from across the community – who helped to make that day a success!

Thanks to the Fonthill Firefighters Association for displaying the Canadian Flag and to members of the Niagara Regional Police for helping with traffic logistics. I appreciate Pen Lakes for organizing the putting contest and Scorpion Cheerleaders for motivating the crowd. Thanks to Pelham’s “Walk through History” volunteers for highlighting our heritage. Special thanks to Pegasus for framing the large portrait of Isaac.

I offer deep appreciation to Maurice Tolluck, CEO, and everyone from the Aviva Community Fund for the generous donation to the Riehl Skatepark!

Thank you so much to Jeff Hutcheson (Pelham native!) and the crew from Canada AM for broadcasting Pelham’s community spirit. (Please click here to go to the Canada AM website and see the video.)

And, finally, thank you so much to the hundreds and hundreds from the community that supported the event that welcomed Canada!

Region Waives Industrial Development Charges

Under something called the Development Charges Act, the Province allows Municipalities to collect fees to help offset the “costs of growth.”

New growth – residential, commercial, or industrial– applies additional pressures on municipal infrastructure and services. For example, new residential development areas often require additional water and waste water services. Or, if hundreds of new homes are built, new residents place pressures on roads and other municipal services – everything from recreational services, to library usage, to fire protection. This “pressure” means additional costs to add trunk water lines, to widen collector roads, or to build new facilities.

Many years ago, existing property tax-payers would have paid for these additional municipal infrastructure and services. Many felt that that lacked fairness, and that “new growth should pay for new growth.” Those on the other side of the argument felt that new growth should pay no more than its fair share.

Thus, a balance is sought where new growth should not create a financial burden on existing residents of the community while the existing residents should not enjoy a financial benefit at the expense of new residents.

Both the Region and the Town of Pelham have been collecting Development Charges (DCs) for some time. Development Charges, also previously known as Impost Fees or Capital Levies, must be enacted by a special bylaw and be renewed no less than every five years.

After a year-and-a-half of study and consultation, the Region adopted a new DC bylaw in July 2012, and the new charges came into effect on September 1. Based on the calculated and forecasted infrastructure costs, the charge for non-exempted industrial development increased from $2.22 per square foot to $5.16.

In mid-November, representatives from the Niagara Industrial Association (NIA) approached the Region and appealed for a reduction or waiving of the fees. Despite the Region’s industrial incentives – like exemptions for the redevelopment of former industrial sites, exemptions for expansions up to 50% of a plant’s size, and the recently approved Niagara Gateway Zone incentives – the NIA said they needed a total exemption in order to compete with other jurisdictions and to create jobs.

In early-December the Development Charges Task Force agreed with the NIA and recommended a two-year exemption of Regional DCs; it was further recommended that during the exemption period, staff must track the results and report on the “return on investment” before a further exemption will be granted.

On January 17, 2013 Regional Council approved the two-year waiver for Industrial Development Charges. I hope that the move will encourage the creation and continuation of much-needed manufacturing jobs across Niagara.

Help Secure Funding for Pelham Street

In November I wrote here about possible ways to increase pedestrian safety on Pelham Street. I want to give you an update and ask you to help lobby the Provincial government to secure funds.

You will recall that a couple of years ago, parents from Glynn A. Green School implored Council to increase the safety of children walking to and from school along Pelham Street. They underscored the 10,000 vehicles that drive past the school every day and reminded Council about a woman who was tragically killed while jogging on the road’s gravel shoulder.

Council reacted swiftly by approving a new traffic signal at Port Robinson and a new sidewalk from Elizabeth to Brock Street. We also approved an engineering study for the reconstruction of Pelham Street from Port Robinson to Quaker and earmarked $2.5 million in future budgets for the road’s total reconstruction – including sidewalks, curbs, new storm sewers, and new water lines.

When the engineering design and construction estimate came back last fall at $6.5 million, all were surprised and disheartened. This work would consume triple what we normally invest each year in major road projects.

Given the funding challenge, staff worked with the school to develop an interim measure: install a sidewalk on the west side of Pelham Street from Port Robinson to Pancake. This interim sidewalk would be removed when we eventually reconstruct the entire road.

Then, in early December, the Province announced new funding through the Municipal Infrastructure Investment Initiative (MIII). The Province earmarked $51 million to “...support the most critical roads, bridges, water and wastewater projects.”

Considering the urgency, the health and safety concerns expressed by local residents, and the lack of available funds, Council endorsed an application to reconstruct Pelham Street from Port Robinson to Pancake. We applied for the $2.0 million maximum allowance for the $2.78 million estimated project.

Undoubtedly, there will be fierce competition for the $51 million and the Province is using a “pre-screening process” before Towns and Cities fill in a final application.

It would be very helpful if you and other Pelham residents write letters of support for the project and request allocation of these funds!

Please address support letters to:   miii@ontario.ca or via snail-mail at:
Municipal Infrastructure Investment Secretariat
c/o Rural Programs Branch
Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs
1 Stone Rd West, 4th Floor
Guelph ON   N1G 4Y2

(Please each name for sample support letters from the Pelham Active Transportation Committee, the Pelham / Welland Chamber of Commerce, and the Pelham Business Association.)

Thank you for helping make Pelham safer!

Continued Improvements for 2013

A new year brings continued improvements to Pelham.

Downtown Fenwick:
Council budgeted $2.1 million to revitalize Downtown Fenwick in 2013. The improvements will help make the area more pedestrian friendly, bury the hydro lines, and enhance the historic flagpole (thanks to funds raised during Fenwick’s 150th celebration). Members of the Downtown Beautification committee will help finalize the design so that the enhancements can be completed for Fenwick’s 160th Anniversary this fall.

Skateboard Park:
Following the tragic death of Issac Riehl in October, a group of committed EL Crossley students began a movement to build a skateboard park in Pelham with funds from the Aviva Community Fund (a National insurance industry fund). The movement flourished and the project is among 30 finalists for a donation of up to $150,000! Because of this work and many previous requests, Council committed to matching any Aviva Funds, to building a skate park in 2013, and directed staff to assist the students with their final proposal.

New Fire Station #3 – North Pelham:
When Pelham’s Shorthill’s Fire & Rescue service began 12+ years ago (following Thorold’s cancellation of the St. John’s Fire Service partnership), the current, rented facility was intended to be a temporary solution. Now those committed fire fighters and residents in North Pelham and Effingham need a more permanent Fire Station. Council budgeted $1.3 million to purchase property and to construct a new station in 2013.

More Walkable & Active:
During the last six years, the Town has added more than 9 KM of sidewalks; in 2013 we will add a couple more. New sidewalks will be constructed on the west-side of Pelham Street from Port Robinson Road to Pancake and on both sides of Port Robinson Road from Pelham to Station Street. Council also budgeted to begin the first phase of converting the abandoned Toronto, Hamilton & Buffalo Railway right-of-way into a recreational trail – from Centennial Park to Balfour Street.

Peace Park:
Council earmarked funds to landscape and enhance Peace Park so that the overwhelming success of the Fonthill Bandshell, the Farmer's Market, and Summerfest can continue and grow.

Recreation, Culture, and Wellness:
In December, Council directed staff to finalize the years of work so that we can finally decide on the future recreational, cultural, and wellness needs for the Town in 2013. We also set aside funds for predevelopment studies so that we can proceed should Council decide to move forward with new and / or revamped facilities.

I look forward to working together with you on these and many other improvements in 2013.

Potential Development Coming to Pelham

As I have written about before, Pelham has a few tracts of land set aside for new growth.

The largest is in the “East Fonthill” area – between Rice Road and Station Street / Steve Bauer Trail and from Regional Road 20 to the Town’s southern boundary (south of Merritt Street).

While much of the nearly 450 acres of East Fonthill lands are currently farmed – the corn was harvested last week – the entire area was added to the Urban Boundary by an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) in 2000.

Recent questions in local media about whether property owners should be allowed to develop on those lands would have had to have been asked and answered during the OMB’s consideration more than a decade ago.

The OMB decision disallowed the inclusion of any lands to the East of Rice Road in the Urban Boundary and required the Town to undertake a “Secondary Plan” before allowing development to proceed.

All Towns and Cities must have “Official Plans.”  Essentially, an Official Plan contains policies and guidelines and outlines where commercial, agricultural, industrial, and residential developments can occur. It uses a series of maps to demonstrate those areas.

Like an Official Plan covering the entire Town, a Secondary Plan contains detailed policies and guidelines for growth and development for a specific area – in this case, this East Fonthill area.

Since the Province began changing their governing policies in the mid-2000s – adding the Greenbelt Plan, “Places to Grow”, and the Provincial Policy Statement – the Town needed to adapt our own policies and guidelines.  That’s one of the major reasons why it took until this Fall to finally approve this Secondary Plan.

Some of the goals of the East Fonthill Secondary Plan include ensuring a well-designed, attractive, pedestrian-friendly community with a mixture of housing types; encouraging significant retail / commercial development while at the same time protecting the existing Fonthill Downtown; providing a “Greenlands System” that protects existing environmental features and integrates with the Steve Bauer Trail system; and developing a pedestrian / cyclist-friendly and transit-ready road network.

It is estimated that 5,000 people could be living in this area within 20 years.  That’s why the Region (with a little assistance from the Town) undertook multi-million dollar improvements – installing water and sewer trunk lines along Rice Road, and widening Regional Road 20 between Station Street and the 406.

Some property owners in the East Fonthill area are now working on their next steps toward development and have suggested that the first-phases of construction could begin in 2014.

Assessment Only Half the Picture

Have you received your new property assessment notice from MPAC – the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation?

Updated for the first time since 2008, your notice will outline MPAC’s determination of the market value of your property as of January 1, 2012.

MPAC considers many factors when assessing property values, such as the sale prices of comparable properties in your neighbourhood, and the age, location, characteristics, and size of your property and home. In essence, MPAC strives to base their value on the amount your property could have sold for on the open market.

Just like in 2008, our assessment will remain the same for the next four years. However, if the value of your property increases, that increase will be phased in over the four years; if the value goes down, you will immediately see a reduction.

For example, if the value of your home increased by $20,000 over its current assessment, the value for determining your property tax will increase by $5,000 per year over the next four years.

If the value of your home goes up, does that mean that your property taxes will also go up?

No, not necessarily. Market Value Assessment is only one half of the property tax equation. The amount you pay to the Town of Pelham, to the Region, and for Education is based on the Market Value Assessment of your home multiplied by the three tax rates and added together.

Say the Town budgeted for revenues of $10 million from property taxes in 2013. If all assessments double, the Town would cut the tax rate in half to collect that $10 million. If everyone’s assessments went down, we would increase the rate to collect the same $10 million.

But, what if your assessed value increases more than the average?

The property tax system is a bit of a blunt instrument. Municipalities set the tax rate based on the average assessment for each of the tax classes – residential, multi-residential, commercial, industrial, farm/managed forest, pipelines.

If your property’s assessed value increases more than the average you will likely pay more than the average tax. By the same token, if your assessed value increases less than the average, you will likely pay less tax.

What if you don’t think the MPAC assessment on your property is correct? You can issue a “request for reconsideration” before April 1, 2013 so that MPAC will review your assessment.

Please check out their website (www.mpac.on.ca) and your notice for more information.

Increasing Pedestrian Safety on Pelham Street

What should we do to help increase pedestrian safety on Pelham Street?

A couple of years ago, parents from Glynn A. Green School implored Council to increase the safety of children walking to and from school along Pelham Street. They highlighted traffic counts that estimated that 10,000 vehicles drove past the school every weekday. They also reminded Council about a woman who was tragically killed +12 years ago while she jogged on the road’s gravel shoulder.

Council reacted swiftly. We approved a new traffic signal at Port Robinson to calm traffic and to help pedestrians cross; we approved a new sidewalk from Elizabeth to Brock Street (on the west side of Pelham); we approved an engineering study for the reconstruction of Pelham Street from Port Robinson to Quaker; and we earmarked $2.5 million in future budgets (starting at $1.5 million in 2013) for the road’s reconstruction – including sidewalks, curbs, new storm sewers, and new water lines.

After completing the first two items, staff asked Council whether Pelham Street from College to Port Robinson should also be reconstructed; if so, staff suggested that new bikelanes be installed in that section (to fulfill the Region’s bikeways Master Plan) and that the hydro lines be buried. The estimated cost was an additional $400,000 and Council agreed.

When the engineering design and construction estimate came back this fall at $6.5 million – two-and-a-half times more than the estimate – all were surprised and disheartened. This work would consume all of the $2 million (on average) that we invest each year in major road projects.

Given that staff believes the road surface remains in great shape, staff began looking at alternatives.

What about following the new design but install only the sidewalk now? The new sidewalk would have been installed at a different level than the current land’s contours, impeded storm water flow, and obstructed future storm sewers and waterlines.

On November 6, staff suggested a couple of solutions for an estimated $150,000:

• install a traffic signal at Pancake to help ease traffic flow and make it easier for pedestrians to cross;
• install rumble strips along the both sides of the existing road surface (like on the edge of the QEW) to warn drivers to stay off the shoulder.
• install a 1.5 metre asphalt strip on both sides of the road for pedestrians and cyclists.

Council will review these suggestions during our Capital Budget meeting on Monday, November 26; I hope you will provide your suggestions and feedback to Council and me before that discussion.

"How Might We...?"

As you may have read in the local media last week, Council used a somewhat different method to focus discussion and help solve issues surrounding the potential Site Alteration Bylaw.

You see, during the Committee of the Whole on November 5, staff reported on the feedback received about a proposed Site Alteration Bylaw. The report also contained an alternative bylaw.

Instead of the normal method of engaging in debate (and counter-debate) about what is needed and what may not be needed, we used a process to focus the discussion and focus on the problem.

To do that, I used a flip-chart (and several pages) and asked Councillors to offer the “key facts” about the “ambiguous situation” of fill being dumped on agricultural lands. After recording 28 facts, Councillors placed three dots each on the flip chart paper to identify the most important facts. Each Councillor explained the reason for picking that key element.

From those most important facts, Councillors then outlined eight distinct issues that needed to be solved. Finally, the Committee directed staff to take the information, and present staff’s best ideas and recommendations for solving those distinct issues. On November 19, Councillors will evaluate the ideas and likely direct staff to develop and present action plans. (I want to emphasize that the process does not prejudge solution(s); the solution(s) to these issues may or may not require a bylaw(s).)

Council used part of an eight-step creative problem solving process developed by Dr. Min Basadur, Professor Emeritus of Innovation in the Michael G. DeGroote School of Business at McMaster University (www.basadur.com). Over the last couple of months, Town staff has also used the process to help solve various challenges, like developing ways to increase and improve communication with residents

The three-stage, eight-step process includes:
Stage 1:  Problem Formulation: including problem finding; fact finding; and problem definition. (Council completed this stage regarding “Site Alteration” above.)
Stage 2:  Solution Formulation: including idea finding; and idea evaluation and selection. (Councillors will undertake this portion at our November 19 meeting, regarding “Site Alteration.”)
Stage 3:  Solution Implementation: including action plan; gaining acceptance; and action. This stage recognizes that “Unless the solution is skillfully prepared for implementation, and its implementation skillfully executed, the problem solving will not have been successful.”

Council will continue to use this creative problem solving process to not only deal with this particular issue but to also take steps toward solving several other key challenges and opportunities that face our community.