Tyler, These are the same…

Tyler, These are the same comments I submitted to Grey County, for your records. AMF Correspondence (instead of a Notice of Motion on the Clerk’s direction) From: Councillor Fosbrooke October 11, 2018 Some Comments & Proposed Amendments to Grey County Official Plan Sept 27, 2018 version 5.6.4 Policies for the Establishment of New Mineral Resource Extraction Land Use Types Amendment Delete 5.6.4 1) and 2) 1)The following proposed mineral aggregate extraction operations will require an amendment to the County Official Plan except for those proposed within the Niagara Escarpment Plan Area as shown on Schedule A-Maps 1, 2 and 3: a) All new or expanding quarry operations proposed within the County of Grey; b) All new sand and/or gravel operations proposed outside of the areas identified as an Aggregate Resource Area shown on Schedule B, or within Core Areas shown on Schedule C; and, c) All proposed expansions beyond the areas identified as an Aggregate Resource Area on Schedule B For new or expanding sand and/or gravel operations proposed within the Aggregate Resource Area identified on Schedule B, a County Official Plan Amendment and a local municipal official plan amendment will not be required. Should the proposed operation receive a license under the Aggregate Resources Act, the Mineral Resource Extraction area will be identified on Scheduled B at the time of the next update to this Plan. A zoning by-law amendment will be required. 2) Where a new or expanded pit operation is proposed partially within an Aggregate Resource Area and partially outside of an Aggregate Resource Area, an amendment to this Plan is required for those areas outside of the Aggregate Resource Area. If the proposed extraction area is within the Aggregate Resource Area, an amendment to this Plan is not required. Replace with 1) Proposed PA Applications to permit mineral aggregate extraction operations will require an amendment to the County Official Plan for: a) All new or expanding quarry operations proposed within the County of Grey; b) All new and expansion sand and/or gravel operations proposed outside and/ or partially inside or partially outside of the areas identified as an Aggregate Resource Area shown on Schedule B, or within Core Areas shown on Schedule C; and, c) With exceptions to Lands within the Niagara Escarpment Plan Area shown on Schedule A Maps, 1, 2, 3 In the event of a conflict between the policies of this Plan and the policies of the Niagara Escarpment Plan, those of the Escarpment Plan will prevail 2. PA Applications to permit mineral aggregate extractions will not require an amendment to the County Official Plan for: a) new or expanding sand and/or gravel operations proposed within the Aggregate Resource Area identified on Schedule B, a County Official Plan Amendment and b) if a local municipality has adopted Aggregate Resource Area identified on Schedule B in the Municipal Official Plan, an amendment to the Official Plan will not be required Amendment Delete 5.6.4. 3) 3)Where pit or quarry operations are being proposed in close proximity to one another, in a similar timeframe, cumulative impacts need to be addressed. Background and technical reports will be reviewed simultaneously and a joint third party peer reviewer may be requested to review the studies. If a pit or quarry operation is being proposed in an area where there are already existing pit and quarry operations within close proximity, cumulative impacts such as traffic and noise may be considered in the technical reports. These requirements will be outlined further at the time of pre-submission consultation. Replace with PA Application Mineral Aggregate Operations shall take into consideration cumulative impacts from other existing or proposed aggregate extraction operations in the vicinity as per the PPS. Amendment Delete 5.6.4 4) The following studies/reports, prepared by qualified individuals, shall be provided to support applications for new or expanded pits or quarries. These 104 studies/reports shall meet the requirements of the Planning Act, Provincial Policy Statement, Niagara Escarpment Plan (if within the Niagara Escarpment Plan area), County Official Plan, and municipal Official Plans (where applicable): Replace with (As Paragraph 4 lead) The following technical studies and documents, prepared by qualified individuals, shall be provided to support PA applications for new or expanded pits or quarries pursuant to PPS and integrated legislation within the PPS: Explanation: Remove 5.6.4 4) a) Official Plan and include it 5.6.4 10) Official Plan Conformity Amendment Delete a) with no replacement Submission of copies of all documentation provided to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry as required for licensing, pursuant to the Aggregate Resources Act; Keep b) as is A planning report prepared by a Registered Professional Planner, addressing the requirements of the Planning Act, Provincial Policy Statement, Niagara Escarpment Plan (if within the Niagara Escarpment Plan area), County Official Plan, and municipal Official Plans (where applicable); Amendment Delete c) A noise impact study in accordance with the Aggregate Resources of Ontario: Provincial Standards; Replace with A Noise Impact Study which satisfactorily demonstrates that theproposal will not have any unacceptable impacts as per PPS; Amendment Delete d) A Traffic Impact Study and/or road assessment, unless otherwise waived at the discretion of municipal, County, or Provincial road authorities, based on the amount of traffic involved, or the existing construction of the haul route roads; Replace with A Traffic Impact Study and/or road assessment as per PPS. Explanation: County cannot predict that an expansion pit which requires PA Planning Application will not be in close proximity to new existing pits which cumulative effect must be taken into consideration. Amendment Delete e) and f) e) For mineral aggregate operations proposing to remain above the established water table level as identified in the Aggregate Resources of Ontario: Provincial Standards, a letter of opinion shall be provided by a qualified individual estimating the current water table level, determining whether the proposed operation will have any impacts to the quality or quantity of the surface or groundwater resources, as well as how any impacts relate to natural areas, features and systems; f) A hydrogeological study for proposed aggregate operations looking to proceed below the established water table level identified in the Aggregate Resources of Ontario: Provincial Standards; Replace with Hydrogeology Study as per PPS See Policy 7 in Natural Grey DELETE g) An environmental impact study, however a Level 2 – Natural Environment Report required under the Aggregate Resources Act can act as a substitute for an environmental impact study. Where there are discrepancies between the terms of reference for a Natural Environment Report or an environmental impact study, as defined by this Plan, the more protective study requirements shall be considered applicable; Replace with An Environmental Impact Study or equivalent study as per PPS. See Policy 7 in Natural Grey. Explanation: 1.Environmental Impact Study per the PPS and the NHRM (triggered by EIS) is cross referenced with PPS ..EIS has a stronger test required PA Planning Applications. County cannot assume Level 2 NER is equivalent to EIS. 2. MNRF AR Provincial Standards state “Each category has a template of six major topics and all categories are developed to be proponent driven; AR Provincial Standards does not provide Proponent with decisive language with regard to County Official Plan or PPS requirements 7.0 Natural Heritage Constraints; MNRF does not have jurisdictional authority with regard to PA Planning Applications. Comment: The above technical studies are for the most part examples and do not represent all technical studies required for PA Planning Applications. Leave h) as is An archaeological assessment prepared by a qualified individual; Leave i) as is An Agricultural Impact Assessment, if the proposed new or expanding extraction operation is within the Agricultural or Special Agricultural land use types, that evaluates the potential impacts on agriculture, including agricultural operations, agricultural uses, and prime agricultural areas and recommends ways to avoid or, if avoidance is not possible, minimize and mitigate adverse impacts, as well as inform future rehabilitation of a proposed mineral aggregate operation; Comment: Could specify soil/agricultural classification. Leave j) as is A progressive rehabilitation plan, including the use of maximum disturbed area provisions where feasible. Amendment Delete this section below from Draft Grey County Official Plan The requirements of this section do not prejudice a municipality from asking for additional studies/reports in support of a pit or quarry application, where official plan policies require such studies/reports. Where there is a discrepancy between a defined study/report in this Plan, the Planning Act, or the Provincial Policy Statement, and the Aggregate Resources of Ontario: Provincial Standards under the Aggregate Resources Act (or any successor thereto), the more protective standard shall be applied, unless deemed by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry to be in conflict with Provincial legislation or regulation. The County requires that the proponent consult with the County and the local municipality prior to submitting any pit or quarry application to determine the scope of the studies that are required. Amendment INSERT The PA Application requirements of this section do not prejudice a municipality from asking for additional studies/reports in support of a Mineral Aggregate Operation. Explanation: Clarification is required with regard the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry judicial role under PA Planning Applications to assume that the Ministry has the authority to determine discrepancy between PA applications and ARA Licence Separate Peer Reviews would be required: PA Planning Applications technical studies as per PA and PPS ARA Licence Application technical studies pursuant to ARA and AR Provincial Standards. Where in the ARA and AR Provincial is there a requirement that the Applicant must consider the PPS? 1. Council’s PA application decisions must consistent with PPS with PA. Planning Act 17(24) OPA, 34(19) ZBA” 2. Should the Tribunal Board determine that Council’s decision was not consistent with the PPS and PA the Tribunal will enforce Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Local Rules of Practice and Procedure Rule 26 which would send the PA Planning Application back to the Municipality to make a new decision following the Order of the Tribunal. Leave section below as is The County requires that the proponent consult with the County and the local municipality prior to submitting any pit or quarry application to determine the scope of the studies that are required. Question - Can the County restrict the Applicant from submitting an ARA Licence – I have found no Provincial Legislation that supports this. Question – How is the Pre-Consultation By-law 4463-07 enforced? Comment - The Financial Impact of Rule 26 could be extensive and Council must ensure PA Planning Applications decision are consistent with PPS and PA. 5.6.4 9) Amendment Delete 9) Independent peer reviews, at the expense of the proponent, of these technical studies/reports may be required at the discretion of County and/or municipal staff; where staff or agency technical review is insufficient to determine the adequacy of the conclusions of these reports/studies. Where simultaneous County and municipal applications are being processed, individual County/municipal peer reviews will be discouraged, in favour of a joint peer review serving both parties. Replace with Third Party peer reviews of PA application technical studies and documents pursuant to the PA and PPS, at the expense of the proponent, shall be required at the discretion of County and/or municipal staff; regardless of County/Municipal Staff professional qualifications. Where simultaneous County and municipal applications are being processed, individual County/municipal peer reviews will be discouraged, in favour of a joint peer review serving both parties. Explanation: County, Municipality, Applicant, Public may considered “Parties” under the Tribunual Appeal Process and avoid Rule 26 “new decision” which sends an PA Application back to the Municipality would have a financial impact on the County and Municipality Amendment New Addition 5.6.4. 10) INSERT Official Plan Conformity: A Planning Act application for license to open, establish or operate a pit or quarry r to expand an existing pit or quarry shall be considered to be in conformity with this Official Plan only when: a) an application for license has been filed with the Ministry of Natural Resources and a copy of such application has been filed with the municipality. b) Submission of copies of all documentation provided to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry as required for licensing, pursuant to the Aggregate Resources Act; 11) No application for license to open, establish or operate a pit or quarry or to expand an existing pit or quarry shall be considered to be in conformity with this Official Plan where the Council of the County and Municipality has adopted a resolution to the effect that the operation of the pit or quarry would be against the interests of the public, taking into account: a) the preservation of the features and functions of the environment; b) the need, if any, for restricting excessively large total pit or quarry output in the locality; c) the traffic density of local roads; d) any possible effect on the water table or surface drainage pattern; e) the nature and location of other land uses that could be affected by the pit or quarry operation; and f) the character, location and size of nearby communities Explanation: County/Municipalities must submit a Placeholder statement as a Government Agency under the ARA Licence Process until the PA Application process has been completed e.g. Under the AR Provincial Standards when the County/Municipality do not respond their non-response deemed an approval to an ARA Licence. Once the County/Municipalities’ decision for a PA Planning Application is consistent with the PPS the Placeholder statement will be removed. 5.6.5 Mineral Resource Extraction Development Criteria Policies Amendment Delete may, replace with shall 1)Where an applicant wishes to undertake a sand and/or gravel or quarry operation other than a wayside pit and quarry, the local municipality or the County of Grey, may require the applicant to enter into a development agreement with the municipality or the County. The agreement shall be entered into prior to local Council's enactment of the implementing zoning by-law amendment, or as a condition of a holding ‘h’ symbol in the by-law. Amendment Add ‘but not limited to’ Such an agreement may include: but not limited to: a)Capital arrangements regarding improvements beyond the, proposed zoning-bylaw amendment “boundary” of the applicant's land, as they may be required by reason of the operation of that .Mineral Aggregate Operation, e.g. widening and improving roads; and Routes to be used by trucks carrying aggregate. Information should be provided by the applicant identifying the proposed haul route, estimating the average number of trucks per day, the potential impacts to traffic and road conditions on the proposed haul route, as well as a cost estimate for any necessary upgrades required to the proposed haul route. Where the haul route has existing deficiencies and has existing traffic, cost-sharing will be considered between the applicant and the road authority. Costs to upgrade the haul road that are directly attributable to the proposed extractive operation, (for example, but not limited to, turning lanes into or out of the extractive operation, or climbing lanes on steep hills) shall be the responsibility of the applicant and will be based on use of the haul route. Comment There are concerns that County roads require improvements to handle gravel truck property. See 2004 Mineral Aggregate Resources Master Plan OPA 80 – which indicated the haul routes, County/Municipal/Provincial need improvements. Other Questions and Amendments (not aggregate related) See 7.11.2 Scoped Environmental Impact Study Each professional contributing to an EIS must demonstrate qualifications relevant to the scope of the assessment by submitting his or her resume with the final EIS report. Question – how and who decides the scope of an EIS and with what qualifications? How is protection of Endangered Species enforced if we are not aware of consultations with MNR and this is left to the proponent? Who is accountable? What health risks have been considered with telecommunications towers and infrastructure? What impact does this OP have on landowner rights? How is the quality and quantity of Peer reviews expected to change with this OP? 7.7 Significant Valleylands – reference and LINK to Green in Grey? How is our protection of water, land, and air expected to change with this OP? What source data was used to establish our anticipated growth and how frequently will growth projections be updated over the 20 year span of this OP? How does the OP address drainage management, impacts relating to extreme weather, and wetland conservation? Where the province ‘approves’ the OP, who is accountable for ensuring it meets all applicable legislation? Additional proposed Definitions; Approval authority - See 7.2 11) Clearance letter vs commenting agency Commenting agency – what legislation addresses which agencies comment on what proposals, ie. Public Health? Small scale Secondary use Value added Qualified Individual Other Wetlands Provincially Significant Wetlands see 7.3.1 link to province mapping? Other Amendments 8.9.2 Replace may with shall 2) Applicants may be required to submit studies or information relating to: 8.2 j. Replace encouraged with shall adopt these thresholds Local municipalities shall adopt these thresholds or develop alternate thresholds to ensure the safe access for vehicles and emergency vehicles. 7.2 11) Replace ‘after consultation with’ with ‘with approval of’ the conservation authority 1)Precise delineation of Hazard Lands will be shown in the local zoning by-laws. An amendment to the Official Plan will not be required to permit redefining of a Hazard Land boundary. Modifications to the Hazard Lands may occur through a zoning bylaw amendment after consultation with the conservation authority and the approval authority. 7.12 5) Replace should with shall The development of parkland and recreational facilities, and services should be done in consultation with local residents and in cooperation with other providers such as school boards. 7.11.3 a) Replace similar with equivalent a)A development is subject to a duplicate or similar environmental assessment process; 7.11.3 (second paragraph) Replace independent advice with qualified independent advice The County may seek outside independent advice as to whether the proposed development is minor in nature; an environmental impact study would serve any useful purpose; and/or the adequacy of a duplicate environmental assessment process. 7.11.1 First paragraph Replace may with shall The County in cooperation with member municipalities, and conservation authorities may develop an environmental impact study guideline which includes a terms of reference for both environmental impact studies and scoped environmental impact studies. 7.11.1 Add 6) Scope and limitations of the study Motion to amend the main resolution; Direct staff to bring back a report to Council with final One Window comments from the province for discussion and review