191028 Regular Council Meeting AgendaThe Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
Monday, October 28, 2019
4:30 PM
Council Chambers
200 Broadway, 2nd Floor
1.Call to Order
2.Closed Session
Proposed Resolution #1
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council move into Closed Session to consider personal matters about an identifiable
individual, including Town employees (CAO Performance).
3.Adoption of Agenda
Proposed Resolution #2
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Council meeting of Monday, October 28, 2019, be
adopted.
4.Moment of Silence
5.Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
6.Adoption of Council Minutes of Previous Meeting
Proposed Resolution #3
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT the Minutes of the Council meeting of October 15, 2019, be approved.
7.Presentations
7.1 Oxford Ontario Health Team
Presented by: Sandy Jansen, President & CEO, Tillsonburg District Memorial
Hospital & Alexandra Hospital
Proposed Resolution #4
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive the presentation by the Oxford Ontario Health Team, as
information.
7.2 Airport Feasibility Analysis Results
Presented By: R. Adam Martin, President, Senior Project Director and Dr. David Bell,
Senior Advisor, Airport Governance, HM Aero Aviation Consultants
Proposed Resolution #5
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive the Tillsonburg Airport Analysis presentation by HM Aero
Aviation Consulting;
AND THAT the information be referred to item 13.6.2 OPS 19-47 Airport Feasibility
Analysis Results.
8.Public Meetings
Proposed Resolution #6
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council move into the Committee of Adjustment to hear applications for Minor
Variance at _________ p.m.
8.1 Application for Minor Variance A14-19 (Dung)
Proposed Resolution #7
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT the Committee of Adjustment approve Application File A14-19, submitted by
Peter Unger (Dung) for lands described as Lot 1251, Plan 500 in the Town of
Tillsonburg, Town of Tillsonburg, as it relates to;
Relief from Table 15.2, Lot Coverage, to increase the maximum permitted lot
Page 2 of 564
coverage from 30% of lot area to 41%, and;
Relief from Table 15.2, Interior Side Yard Width, to reduce the required interior side
yard width from 2.4 m (7.8 ft) to 1 m (3.28 ft) to facilitate an addition of a covered
porch at the rear of the existing building which will be in keeping with the width of the
existing building on the subject lands.
Subject to a building permit for the proposed covered porch shall be issued within
one year of the date of the Committee’s decision.
8.2 Application for Minor Variance A16-19 (Performance Communities Realty Inc.)
Proposed Resolution #8
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT the Committee of Adjustment approve Application File A16-19, submitted by
Performance Communities Realty Inc. for lands described as Lots 64 & 65, Plan
41M-349 and Parts 4-7 & 14-17, Plan 41R-9873 in the Town of Tillsonburg as it
relates to;
Relief from Section 8.6.13.2.4, Maximum Lot Coverage Provisions (R3-13), to
increase the maximum permitted lot coverage from 50% to 55% to facilitate the
creation of 4 townhouse lots.
Proposed Resolution #9
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council move out of the Committee of Adjustment and move back into regular
Council session at ____________ p.m.
8.3 Application for Draft Plan of Sub-division and Zone Change SB 19-06-7 & ZN 7-19-10
(Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc.)
Proposed Resolution #10
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council approve in principle the zone change application (File No. ZN 7-19-10)
submitted by Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc., for lands legally described as Part Lot
72, Lot 72A, Plan 500, in the Town of Tillsonburg, to rezone the lands Special Low
Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone, Special Low Density Residential Type 3
Holding Zone, Future Development Zone, Passive Open Space Zone, Active Use
Open Space Zone to facilitate the proposed draft plan of subdivision;
AND THAT, Council advise County Council that the Town supports the application for
draft plan of subdivision, File No. SB 19-06-7, submitted by Mike Hutchinson
Properties Inc., for lands legally described as Part Lot 72, Lot 72A, Plan 500, in the
Page 3 of 564
Town of Tillsonburg, consisting of 78 lots for single-detached dwellings, 20 blocks for
townhouse dwellings, 4 new local streets, two park blocks and a block for stormwater
management purposes, subject to the conditions as contained in Report CP 2019-
314.
9.Planning Applications
10.Delegations
11.Deputation(s) on Committee Reports
11.1 DCS 19-33 Economic Development Advisory Committee Resolution Regarding
Proposed Water/Wastewater Billing Changes
Presented by: Jesse Goossens, Chair, Economic Development Advisory Committee
Proposed Resolution #11
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive report DCS 19-33 Economic Development Advisory
Committee Resolution Regarding Proposed Water/Wastewater Billing Changes;
AND THAT Council supports the Economic Development Advisory Committee
recommendation;
AND THAT the Economic Development Advisory Committee be authorized to
present their concerns to the County of Oxford.
12.Information Items
12.1 Correspondence - LPRCA Strategic Plan 2019-2023
Proposed Resolution #12
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive the correspondence from the Long Point Region
Conservation Authority regarding their 2019-2023 Strategic Plan, as information.
12.2 Oxford County Correspondence - Bill 108
Proposed Resolution #13
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
Page 4 of 564
THAT Council receive the Oxford County staff report entitled “Municipal Implications
of Bill 108, the ‘More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019,’” as information.
12.3 Oxford County Correspondence - Proposed Norwich to Tillsonburg Trail
Proposed Resolution #14
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive the correspondence regarding a proposed Norwich to
Tillsonburg trail, as information.
13.Staff Reports
13.1 Chief Administrative Officer
13.2 Clerk's Office
13.3 Development and Communication Services
13.3.1 DCS 19-32 High Tech Manufacturing Action Plan
Presentation by Development Commissioner
Proposed Resolution #15
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive Report DCS 19-32 High Tech Manufacturing Action
Plan;
AND THAT the High Tech Manufacturing Action Plan be approved in
principle to guide future initiatives with respect to strengthening the local
manufacturing base and attracting investment to the Town of Tillsonburg.
13.4 Finance
13.5 Fire and Emergency Services
13.5.1 FIR 19-08 Traffic Pre-emption Release from Liability Agreement
Proposed Resolution #16
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Report Fire 19-08 Traffic Pre-Emption Release from Liability
Agreement be received;
AND THAT a By-Law to authorize the agreement of Release of the Liability
Page 5 of 564
Indemnification Waiver of Claims Assumption of Risks between the Town
of Tillsonburg and the County of Oxford be brought forward for Council’s
consideration.
13.6 Operations
13.6.1 OPS 19-44 Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Enhanced OSIM Inspection
Proposed Resolution #17
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-44 Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge
Enhanced Inspection;
AND THAT G. Douglas Vallee Limited continued to be retained to complete
the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment;
AND FURTHER THAT the associated engineering costs in the amount of
$12,100 be funded by the remaining project budget.
13.6.2 OPS 19-47 Airport Feasibility Analysis Results
Proposed Resolution #18
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-47 Airport Feasibility Analysis
Results;
AND THAT the Airport Feasibility Analysis Study be provided to the Oxford
County Service Delivery Review as information;
AND FURTHER THAT the Next Steps identified within this Report including
an Airport Master Plan be brought forward as part of the 2020 budget
deliberations.
13.6.3 OPS - 19-45 Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge Shoreline Protection Project
Proposed Resolution #19
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-45 Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge
Shoreline Protection Project;
AND THAT the 2019 Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge Shoreline Protection
Project be cancelled;
Page 6 of 564
AND FURTHER THAT the shoreline protection of the Hawkins Pedestrian
Bridge be incorporated with other associated rehabilitation work as part of
future budget deliberations.
13.6.4 OPS 19-46 Results for RFP 2019-012 Transit Operations
Proposed Resolution #20
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-46 Results for RFP 2019-012
Transit Operations;
AND THAT Council direct staff to negotiate with the highest scoring
proponent to reduce operating costs;
AND FURTHER THAT Council direct staff to negotiate with the Ministry of
Transportation to amend the scope of the Inter-Community Transportation
Project.
13.7 Recreation, Culture & Park Services
13.7.1 RCP 19-52 Awarding RFT 2019-018 Station Arts Shingle Roof
Replacement
Proposed Resolution #21
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receives Report RCP 19-52 Awarding RFT 2019-018 Station
Arts Shingle Roof Replacement;
AND THAT Council award RFT 2019-018 to 818185 Ontario Inc. for
$58,480 before taxes.
13.7.2 RCP 19-53 ICIP Grant Submission Options
Proposed Resolution #22
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receives Report RCP 19-53 – ICIP Grant Submission
Options;
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP:
Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Multi-purpose Intake to secure
funding to modernize the Tillsonburg Community Centre and reimagine the
Lake Lisgar Waterpark. (Option 1)
Page 7 of 564
OR
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP:
Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation
Intake to secure funding to rehabilitate Tillsonburg’s outdoor aquatic
infrastructure. (Option 2)
OR
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP:
Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation
Intake to secure funding to rehabilitate Tillsonburg’s indoor aquatic
infrastructure and other parts of the Tillsonburg Community Centre; (Option
3)
OR
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP:
Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation
Intake to secure funding to renovate Tillsonburg’s aquatic infrastructure;
(Option 4)
OR
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP:
Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation
Intake to secure funding to improve Tillsonburg’s aquatic infrastructure.
(Option 5)
14.New Business
15.Consideration of Committee Minutes
15.1 Committee Minutes
Proposed Resolution #23
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive the Museum Advisory Committee Minutes dated September
26, 2019, the Economic Development Advisory Committee Minutes dated, October
8, 2019 and the Transit Advisory Committee Minutes dated October 15, 2019, as
information.
15.2 Business Improvement Area Board of Director Minutes
Proposed Resolution #24
Moved By: ________________
Page 8 of 564
Seconded By: ________________
THAT Council receive the Business Improvement Area Board of Director Minutes
dated September 19, 2019, as information.
16.Motions/Notice of Motions
17.Resolutions/Resolutions Resulting from Closed Session
18.By-Laws
18.1 By-Law 4351, To appoint an Alternate Member of the Upper-Tier Council for the
Town of Tillsonburg
18.2 By-Law 4352, To Appoint Amelia Jaggard as Deputy Clerk for the Town of
Tillsonburg
18.3 By-Law 4353 To Authorize an Indemnification Agreement with The County of Oxford
Proposed Resolution #25
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT By-Law 4351, To appoint an Alternate Member of the Upper-Tier Council for
the Town of Tillsonburg; and
By-Law 4352, To Appoint Amelia Jaggard as Deputy Clerk for the Town of
Tillsonburg; and
By-Law 4353 To Authorize an Indemnification Agreement with The County of
Oxford, be read for a first, second, third and final reading and that the Mayor and the
Clerk be and are hereby authorized to sign the same, and place the corporate seal
thereunto.
19.Confirm Proceedings By-law
Proposed Resolution #26
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT By-Law 4354, to Confirm the Proceedings of the Council Meeting held on October 28,
2019, be read for a first, second, third and final reading and that the Mayor and the Clerk be
and are hereby authorized to sign the same, and place the corporate seal thereunto.
20.Items of Public Interest
21.Adjournment
Page 9 of 564
Proposed Resolution #27
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT the Council Meeting of Monday, October 28, 2019 be adjourned at ______ p.m.
Page 10 of 564
1
MINUTES
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
4:00 PM
Council Chambers
200 Broadway, 2nd Floor
ATTENDANCE: Mayor Molnar
Deputy Mayor Beres
Councillor Esseltine
Councillor Gilvesy
Councillor Luciani
Councillor Parker
Councillor Rosehart
Staff: Ron Shaw, Chief Administrative Officer
Donna Wilson, Town Clerk
Kevin De Leebeeck, Director of Operations
Dave Rushton, Director of Finance
Rick Cox, Director of Recreation, Culture and Parks
Terry Saelens, Acting Fire Chief
Amelia Jaggard, Legislative Services Coordinator
_____________________________________________________________________
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m.
2. Closed Session
Resolution # 1
Moved By: Councillor Parker
Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine
THAT Council move into Closed Session to consider:
advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications
necessary for that purpose (Town Hall Project); and
Page 11 of 564
2
a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the Town
(Clearview Drive South).
Carried
3. Adoption of Agenda
Resolution # 2
Moved By: Deputy Mayor Beres
Seconded By: Councillor Luciani
THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Council meeting of Tuesday, October 15,
2019, be adopted.
Carried
4. Moment of Silence
5. Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
No disclosures of pecuniary interest were declared.
6. Adoption of Council Minutes of Previous Meeting
Resolution # 3
Moved By: Deputy Mayor Beres
Seconded By: Councillor Luciani
THAT the Minutes of the Council meeting of September 23, 2019, be approved.
Carried
7. Presentations
7.1 Tillsonburg Legion Poppy Campaign
Don Burton appeared before Council to provide information on the 2019
Poppy Campaign which is set to run from October 25, 2019 to November
11, 2019.
Resolution # 4
Moved By: Councillor Rosehart
Seconded By: Councillor Gilvesy
Page 12 of 564
3
THAT Council receive the presentation by Don Burton regarding the
Tillsonburg Legion Poppy Campaign, as information.
Carried
8. Public Meetings
Resolution # 5
Moved By: Councillor Rosehart
Seconded By: Councillor Gilvesy
THAT Council move into the Committee of Adjustment to hear applications for
Minor Variance at 6:07 p.m.
Carried
8.1 Application for Minor Variance A12-19 (Broadway Estates Inc.)
Eric Gilbert, Senior Planner, County of Oxford, appeared before Council to
provide an overview of the application.
Opportunity was provided for comments and questions from Council.
The agent, Henry Dalm, appeared before Council in support of the
application.
No members of the public appeared before Council either in support of or
opposition to the application.
Council passed the following resolution.
Resolution # 6
Moved By: Councillor Gilvesy
Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT the Committee of Adjustment approve Application File A12-19,
submitted by Broadway Estates Inc., for lands described as Lot 63, Plan
41M-218, Town of Tillsonburg, as it relates to:
1. Relief from Section 6.2 – R1 Zone Provisions, to reduce the
minimum required rear yard depth from 12 m (39.4 ft) to 9.3 m (30.5
ft), to facilitate the construction of a single detached dwelling with a
covered porch on the subject lands.
Subject to the following condition:
Page 13 of 564
4
1. A building permit for the proposed dwelling shall be issued within one
year of the date of the Committee's decision.
Carried
8.2 Application for Minor Variance A 13-19 (Green)
Eric Gilbert, Senior Planner, County of Oxford, appeared before Council to
provide an overview of the application.
Opportunity was provided for comments and questions from Council.
The applicant, Gary Green, appeared before Council in support of the
application.
No members of the public appeared before Council either in support of or
opposition to the application.
Council passed the following resolution.
Resolution # 7
Moved By: Councillor Gilvesy
Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT the Committee of Adjustment approve Application File A13-19,
submitted by Broadway Estates Inc. (Gary and Sharon Green), for lands
described as Lot 9, Plan 41M-218, Town of Tillsonburg, as it relates to:
1. Relief from Section 6.2, – Zone Provisions (R1) - Rear Yard
Minimum Depth, to reduce the required rear yard depth from 12 m
(39.3 ft) to 9.57 (31.3 ft), and;
2. Relief from Section 6.2, – Zone Provisions (R1) - Maximum
Permitted Lot Coverage, to increase the maximum permitted lot
coverage from 33% to 43% of lot area, to facilitate the construction of a
single detached dwelling and residential accessory building.
Subject to the following condition:
1. A building permit for the proposed dwelling and residential accessory
building shall be issued within one year of the date of the Committee's
decision;
Carried
Page 14 of 564
5
Resolution # 8
Moved By: Councillor Parker
Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine
THAT Council move out of the Committee of Adjustment and move back
into regular Council session at 6:17 p.m.
Carried
9. Planning Applications
10. Delegations
10.1 Dereham Forge Playground Revitalization Project
The delegate was not in attendance.
11. Deputation(s) on Committee Reports
12. Information Items
12.1 Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry - Proposed Changes to
the Aggregate Resources Act
Resolution # 10
Moved By: Councillor Esseltine
Seconded By: Councillor Parker
THAT Council receive the letter from the Ministry of Natural Resources
and Forestry regarding proposed changes to the Aggregate Resources
Act, as information.
Carried
12.2 153 Varnavair RC(Air)CS - Annual Tag Day
Resolution # 11
Moved By: Councillor Esseltine
Seconded By: Councillor Parker
THAT Council receives the letter from the 153 Varnavair RC(Air)CS
regarding their Annual Tag Days, October 18 and 19, 2019, as
information.
Carried
Page 15 of 564
6
12.3 Letter of Thanks - Special Olympics Tillsonburg
Resolution # 12
Moved By: Councillor Luciani
Seconded By: Deputy Mayor Beres
THAT Council receive the letter of thanks from the Special Olympics
Tillsonburg, as information.
Carried
12.4 Request for Funds - Royal Canadian Legion Branch 153
Resolution # 13
Moved By: Councillor Luciani
Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine
THAT Council receive the letter from the Royal Canadian Legion Branch
153 regarding a request for funds to support a restoration project, as
information;
AND THAT the matter be referred to the Community Trust Trustees for
consideration.
Carried
13. Staff Reports
13.1 Chief Administrative Officer
13.1.1 HR 19-12 Full Time Health and Safety Coordinator
Ashley Andrews, Human Resources Manager, appeared before
Council to answer questions.
Resolution # 14
Moved By: Deputy Mayor Beres
Seconded By: Councillor Luciani
THAT Council receive Report HR 19-12 Full Time Health and
Safety Coordinator as information;
AND THAT Council approve the additional funding to hire a Full
Time Health and Safety Coordinator.
Page 16 of 564
7
Defeated
13.2 Clerk's Office
13.2.1 CLK 19-25 Alternate County Council Position
Resolution # 15
Moved By: Deputy Mayor Beres
Seconded By: Councillor Luciani
THAT Council receives report CLK 19-25, Alternate County Council
Position as information;
AND THAT Council appoint Dave Beres as an Alternate Member of
County Council for the remainder of the Council term;
AND THAT a By-Law be brought forward for Council consideration.
Carried
13.2.2 CLK 19-26 Amend Smoking By-Law
Resolution # 16
Moved By: Councillor Gilvesy
Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT Council receives Report CL 19-26, Amend Smoking By-Law
– Outdoor Patio Space;
AND THAT an Amending By-law be brought forward for Council’s
consideration.
Defeated
Moved By: Councillor Gilvesy
Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT Council receives Report CL 19-26, Amend Smoking By-Law
– Outdoor Patio Space.
Carried
13.2.3 CLK 19-24 Community Safety and Well-Being Plan
Page 17 of 564
8
Resolution # 17
Moved By: Councillor Gilvesy
Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT Council receives Report CLK 19-24 Community Safety and
Well-Being Plan: A Collaborative Approach;
AND THAT Council declares its commitment to community safety
and well-being within the Town of Tillsonburg and all of Oxford
County;
AND FURTHER THAT Council support a collaborative approach to
Community Safety and Well-being planning within Oxford County
and the development of a joint Community Safety and Well-being
Plan with the lower tier municipalities within Oxford County;
AND FURTHER THAT Council approve the Terms of Reference for
the Community Safety and Well-being Planning Coordinating
Committee attached as Appendix B to this report and the Terms of
Reference for the Community Safety and Well-Being Planning
Advisory Committee attached as Appendix C to this report;
AND FURTHER THAT Council authorizes the allocation of
$10,000, from the 2019 one time funding from the Province, to hire
a consultant to act as the Community Safety and Well-being
Planning Coordinator for the development of the Oxford County
Community Safety and Well-being Plan.
Carried
13.2.4 CLK 19-27 Oxford County Cycling Advisory Committee
Appointment
Resolution # 18
Moved By: Councillor Rosehart
Seconded By: Councillor Gilvesy
THAT Council receives Report CLK 19-27 Oxford County Cycling
Advisory Committee Appointment;
AND That Mark Salt be appointed as the Tillsonburg representative
on the Oxford Cycling Advisory Committee.
Carried
Page 18 of 564
9
13.2.5 CLK 19-29 Appointments to Dog Park Advisory Committee
Resolution # 19
Moved By: Councillor Rosehart
Seconded By: Councillor Gilvesy
THAT Council receives Report CLK 19-29 Appointments to the Dog
Park Advisory Committee;
AND THAT Council appoint Pete Luciani as the Council
representative on the Tillsonburg Dog Park Advisory Committee;
AND THAT By-Law 4350 to amend Schedule A of By-Law 4247, be
brought forward for Council consideration.
Carried
13.3 Development and Communication Services
13.4 Finance
13.4.1 FIN 19-23 2019 OILC Debentures
Resolution # 20
Moved By: Councillor Parker
Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine
THAT Council receives Report FIN 19-23, 2019 OILC Debentures;
AND THAT Council By-Law 4348 authorizing the Mayor and
Treasurer to enter into a financing agreement with the Ontario
Infrastructure and Lands Corporation for $997,600 be brought
forward for Council consideration.
Carried
13.4.2 FIN 19-24 Investment Policy
Resolution # 21
Moved By: Councillor Parker
Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine
THAT Council receives report FIN 19-24 Investment Policy;
AND THAT By-Law 4349 to adopt the Investment Policy be brought
forward for Council consideration.
Page 19 of 564
10
Carried
13.4.3 FIN 19-25 2018 Summary of Reserves and Trusts
Resolution # 22
Moved By: Councillor Esseltine
Seconded By: Councillor Parker
THAT Council receives report FIN 19-25 2018 Summary of
Reserves and Trusts for information.
Carried
13.5 Fire and Emergency Services
13.6 Operations
13.6.1 OPS 19-42 Sidewalk Connectivity Program Outcomes
Resolution # 23
Moved By: Councillor Esseltine
Seconded By: Councillor Luciani
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-42 Sidewalk Connectivity
Program Outcomes;
AND THAT Council continue its support of the Sidewalk
Connectivity Program through the budget deliberation process.
Carried
13.6.2 OPS 19-43 2019 OSIM Inspection Summary
Resolution # 24
Moved By: Councillor Luciani
Seconded By: Deputy Mayor Beres
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-43 2019 OSIM Inspection
Summary;
AND THAT the engineering design work for the retaining wall
replacement along Quarter Town Line at Beech Boulevard in the
amount of $85,000 be brought forward as part of the 2020 budget
deliberations;
Page 20 of 564
11
AND FURTHER THAT the engineering design work for the
rehabilitation of the culvert along Quarter Town Line at Stoney
Creek in the amount of $30,000 also be brought forward as part of
the 2020 budget deliberations.
Carried
13.7 Recreation, Culture & Park Services
13.7.1 RCP 19-49 July - September 2019 RCP Activity Reports
Resolution # 25
Moved By: Councillor Luciani
Seconded By: Councillor Parker
THAT Council receives Report RCP 19-49 – July - September 2019
RCP Departmental Activity Reports for information.
Carried
13.7.2 RCP 19-50 Town Merchandise Sales History - Supplemental
Resolution # 26
Moved By: Deputy Mayor Beres
Seconded By: Councillor Luciani
THAT Council receives Report RCP 19-50 – Town Merchandise
Sales History – Supplemental for information.
Carried
14. New Business
15. Consideration of Committee Minutes
15.1 Committee Minutes
It was noted that staff continue to solicit feedback from residents regarding
the T:GO transit system which is provided to the Transit Advisory
Committee for review and comment.
It was noted that individuals or user groups interested in booking the
outdoor recreation pad should submit their request to facility booking staff
at the Community Centre.
Page 21 of 564
12
Resolution # 27
Moved By: Deputy Mayor Beres
Seconded By: Councillor Luciani
THAT Council receive the Museum Advisory Committee Minutes dated
June 27, 2019, the Transit Advisory Committee Minutes dated September
17, 2019, the Memorial Park Revitalization Advisory Committee Minutes
dated September 18, 2019, the Airport Advisory Committee Minutes
dated September 19, 2019, and the Cultural, Heritage and Special Awards
Advisory Committee Minutes dated October 2, 2019, as information.
Carried
15.2 Police Services Board Minutes
Resolution # 28
Moved By: Councillor Rosehart
Seconded By: Councillor Gilvesy
THAT Council receive the Police Services Board Minutes dated June 20,
2019, and August 21, 2019, as information.
Carried
15.3 LPRCA Minutes of September 4, 2019
Resolution # 29
Moved By: Councillor Rosehart
Seconded By: Councillor Gilvesy
THAT Council receive the Long Point Region Conservation Authority
Board of Directors Minutes dated September 4, 2019, as information.
Carried
16. Motions/Notice of Motions
Motion
Moved by: Councillor Gilvesy
Seconded by: Councillor Parker
THAT Council reconsider the motion for Staff to provide a report which includes
other Town Hall options including a build our own option and modifying the
Page 22 of 564
13
current space which was passed at the September 23, 2019, Council meeting
under item 11.1.
Carried.
Motion
Moved by: Councillor Gilvesy
Seconded by: Councillor Parker
THAT Staff provide a report which includes other Town Hall options including a
build our own option and modifying the current space.
Defeated.
17. Resolutions/Resolutions Resulting from Closed Session
18. By-Laws
18.1 By-Law 4346, To amend By-Law 3596, being a by-law to prohibit
smoking in certain public places within the Town of Tillsonburg
18.2 By-Law 4348, 2019 OILC Borrowing By-Law
18.3 By-Law 4349, To Adopt a Municipal Investment Policy for the Town
of Tillsonburg
18.4 By-Law 4350, To Amend Schedule A of By-Law 4247 (Committee
Appointments)
Resolution # 30
Moved By: Councillor Gilvesy
Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT By-Law 4348, 2019 OILC Borrowing By-Law; and
By-Law 4349, To Adopt a Municipal Investment Policy for the Town of
Tillsonburg; and
By-Law 4350, To Amend Schedule A of By-Law 4247 (Committee
Appointments), be read for a first, second, third and final reading and that
the Mayor and the Clerk be and are hereby authorized to sign the same,
and place the corporate seal thereunto.
Carried
19. Confirm Proceedings By-law
Page 23 of 564
14
Resolution # 31
Moved By: Councillor Gilvesy
Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT By-Law 4347, to Confirm the Proceedings of the Council Meeting held on
October 15, 2019, be read for a first, second, third and final reading and that the
Mayor and the Clerk be and are hereby authorized to sign the same, and place
the corporate seal thereunto.
Carried
20. Items of Public Interest
The annual street side collection of loose leaves is scheduled to begin
on Monday, November 4, 2019. Loose leaves will only be collected once in each
area, visit tillsonburg.ca for more information.
21. Adjournment
Resolution # 32
Moved By: Councillor Parker
Seconded By: Councillor Esseltine
THAT the Council Meeting of Tuesday, October 15, 2019 be adjourned at 7:59
p.m.
Carried
Page 24 of 564
Oxford Ontario Health Team
Together in Coordinated Care
Update, Summer 2019
Page 25 of 564
Focus for
Today
1.What is Ontario Health (the “Superagency”)?
2.What is an Ontario Health Teams (OHT)?
3.Which patients will be in which OHT?
4.Why an Oxford OHT?
5.What is next?
Page 26 of 564
Page 27 of 564
Ontario Health
Page 28 of 564
Ontario Health
Responsibilities
System management and performance
planning and delivering health care – provincial & local;
ensuring financial and clinical targets are met;
improving quality
Population-based programs and clinical quality standards
overseeing highly specialized care like organ donation and critical care;
managing provincial population health programs like cancer screening;
developing evidence-based guidelines for health service delivery and patient
care.
Back office support
managing supply chains
System oversight
Accountable for Ontario Health Teams
Mental Health and Addictions Centre of Excellence
Page 29 of 564
What is an
Ontario Health
Team?
.
Ontario Health Teams…. Page 30 of 564
What Are
Ontario Health
Teams?
A new model of care that will enable patients,
families, communities, providers and system
leaders to work together, innovate, and build
on what is best in Ontario’s health care system.
As a team, health care providers will work as
one coordinated team no matter where they
provide care.
The members of the OHT will work to achieve
common goals related to improved health
outcomes, patient and provider experience,
and value for money (quadruple aim).
Page 31 of 564
At Maturity,
OHT’s will:
Provide a full and coordinated continuum of care for
an attributed population within a geographic region
Offer patients 24/7 access to coordination of care and
system navigation services
Be measured, report on and improve performance
across a standardized framework linked to the
“Quadruple Aim”
Operate within a single accountability framework
Be funded through an integrated funding envelope
Reinvest into front line care
Improve access to secure digital tools,
Page 32 of 564
Hospitals
NPLC
CHC
GP LTC
Home Care
FHT
FHO
Meals
on
Wheels
FHO
Current State:
X Separate organizations
X Separate Funding
X Separate Health Records
X Separate Intake, History
X Separate Admits and
Discharges
Patients need to navigate
through this
Page 33 of 564
Ontario Health Teams
Patients receive all their services,
including primary care, hospital
services, mental health and
addictions, long-term-care and
home and community care from
ONE TEAM
Future State:
One organization
Single Funding Envelope enabling
funds to follow the patient, focus
on reducing hallway medicine
Integrated Health Records, single
patient record- so patients don’t
have to tell their story over and
over
Enhanced 24/7 Care Coordination
and system navigation to support
patients regardless of where they
are
Page 34 of 564
Which Patients
will be in which
OHT?
Page 35 of 564
Attributed
Populations:
Which patients
belong to
which OHT?
• Ontario residents are not attributed based on
where they live, but rather on how they access
care
Attribution determines the population that the
Ontario Health Team is responsible for
There are no restrictions on where residents
can receive care
Page 36 of 564
Oxford OHT
Submission
Strengths:
Identifying existing mechanisms available to propose a clear vision and
plan for patient/community engagement within the region
Demonstrating a strong history of trusting relationships among
partners, and commitment towards integration and shared financial
management
Opportunities
Exploring the existing digital health landscape / committing to enhance
digital health
Working to more clearly identify immediate implementation priorities /
plans for Year 1 priority
The Oxford OHT self assessment has been designated as
“In Development” meaning the Self Assessment submission
demonstrated a commitment to the OHT model, and showed a
degree of readiness to implement.
Page 37 of 564
Going from
current to
future state in
Oxford
Hospitals
NPLC
CHC
GP
LTC
Home Care
FHT
FHO
Meals
on
Wheels
FHO
Oxford Ontario
Health Team
- Year 1
population
Page 38 of 564
Proposed
Year 1
Population for
Oxford OHT
The early work of the Oxford OHT will be to focus on caring for
people in the community rather than hospital
Rate of hospitalization and morbidity due to CARDIOVASCULAR
DISEASE higher in Oxford than Ontario
Mortality rate due to ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE higher than
provincial average
Higher rate of hospitalization due to COPD in Oxford
5.4% of residents have 4 or more chronic diseases
YEAR 1 Target Population:
People who have a readmission to hospital within 30
days of discharge due to a chronic disease
Page 39 of 564
Oxford OHT
Submission-
NEXT STEPS
Over the next several months we will:
1.Work together to achieve readiness with the support of provincial resources
2.Establish action teams (Digital Health, Patient/ Family engagement, etc.)
3.Enhance governance structure
4.Further engage our partners (Home Care, Primary Care, Long Term Care, Community Supports) through “Sector Engagement” meetings over the fall to enhance model development
5.Meaningfully engage patients, families and community members as we build our model together with them.
6.Utilize the tailored supports (including customized ”attribution data”, Ministry of Health single point of contact, on-line resources and an OHT community of practice) to assist in refining our application
Page 40 of 564
Proposed
Oxford Ontario
Health Team
Partners
~
Coordinating
Table
Oxford
OHT
Partners
Community
Support
Services
Palliative Care Outreach Residential
Hospice
Woodstock Hospital
TDMH
AHI
Home & Community Care
NPLC
CHC TVFHT
Child/Youth
MH
Adult MH
Addictions
LTC
Human Services
Paramedic Services
eHealth
Public
Health
Page 41 of 564
Moving
forward
together
Oxford OHT
Steering
Committee
Patient Engagement Action Team
Communications Action Team
Year 1 Population
Action Team
Digital
Health
Action Team
Oxford
OHT
Partners
Community Support Services Palliative Care Outreach
Residential
Hospice
Woodstock Hospital
TDMH
AHI
Home & Community Care
NPLC
CHC TVFHT
Child/Youth MH
Adult MH
Addictions
LTC
Human Services
Paramedic Services
eHealth
Public Health
Governance
Action Team
Page 42 of 564
Oxford OHT at
Maturity
At Maturity, the Oxford Ontario Health Team will provide
a full and coordinated continuum of care to people
residing in the geography of Oxford County.
Page 43 of 564
are not the medium for
informing their physician
that they have been
hospitalized or undergone
diagnostic or treatment
procedures; been
prescribed drugs by
another physician; not
filled a previous
prescription; or been
referred to a health agency
for follow-up care
have 24-
hour access
to a
primary
care
provider
do not have to
repeat their
health history
for each
provider
encounter
with chronic disease, are
routinely contacted to
have tests that identify
problems before they
occur; provided with
education about their
disease process; and
provided with in-home
assistance and training in
self-care to maximize their
autonomy
do not have to
undergo the
same test
multiple times
for different
providers
do not have to
wait at one
level of care
because of
incapacity at
another level
of care
can make an
appointment for
a visit to a
clinician, a
diagnostic test
or a treatment
with one phone
call
have a wide
choice of
primary care
providers who
are able to give
them the time
they need
have easy-to-
understand
information about
quality of care and
clinical outcomes in
order to make
informed choices
about providers and
treatment options
How will patients know when
an integrated healthcare
system exists?
When they:
Page 44 of 564
Thank you
Questions?
Page 45 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca
www.hmaero.ca
Council Presentation
October 28, 2019
Page 46 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca
1
3
2
4
6
5
AIRPORT PROFILE
SWOT ANALYSIS
AIRPORT GOVERNANCE
SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
RECOMMENDATIONS
2
Page 47 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca 3
•Key Facts:
•Town-Owned Since 1981
•Runways - 5,502’ x 100’ Paved + 2 Turf
•600+ Acres
•9,500 Aircraft Movements (2018)
•User Profile:
•50-60 Locally-Based Aircraft
•CHAA/Flying School/Lee Air/Tailwind
•ORNGE, OPP, DND
•Services:
•24-Hour Fuel (JetA + 100LL)
•Aircraft Storage
•Aircraft Servicing and Repair
•Aircraft Tie-Downs
•Restaurant
Page 48 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca 4
•Manage, Plan, Develop & Market the Facility
•Current Governance – Town Owned and Operated:
Advantages Disadvantages
-Town Maintains Control -Decision Making: Council Approval Required Advisory
Committee: Advisory Role Only
-Tool for Economic Development -Town Holds All Responsibility – SWOX and County Benefit
-Shared Resources With Town (Maintenance, Engineering, etc.) -Potential for Missed Business Opportunities
•Airport Governance Models:
Page 49 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca 5
•Opportunities for Improvement
•County and SWOX Participation
•Building Relationships – Business Development
•Plan, Market and Develop Airport (20+ Years)
•Analysis of Appropriate Governance Models
•Suitability for Tillsonburg (Similar Size and Scope)
•Models Vary – Depending on Local Factors and Airport Activity
1.Commission/Board
2.Town Owned and Operated (Status Quo)
3.Town Owned and Contractor Operated
4.Town Owned and Airport Authority Operated
5.Airport Authority
6.Sell/Divest Airport
Airport Governance Model Ranking:
•Diverse Skillset Among Members
•More Business-Like Focus
•Increased Economic Development Potential
•Low Cost of Implementation
Page 50 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca
•Runway Length
•New Air Terminal Building
•Anchor Tenant
•Well-Managed (Reputation)
•Limited Noise Sensitivity
•Partnership With CHAA
•OPP Support Facilities
•Business Expansion
•Revenue Increases
•Current Development Demand
•Displaced Threshold – Runway 26
•Site Servicing
•Weather Information
•Traffic Congestion
•Competitor Airports
•Funding Availability
S
W
O
T
6
Page 51 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca 7
Current Status:
•Performing Well
•Small Cost/Revenue Gap
•Economic Benefit + Potential
•Deficit Small in Comparison
Revenue Strategy:
•SWOX and County Contributions
•Rates & Fees Optimization
•Fuel Prices New Rates and Charges, Sale of
Portion of Lands, etc.
Page 52 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca 8
•Certified Aerodromes Vs. Registered Aerodromes
•Different Regulatory Obligations
•Goal - Prevent Unauthorized Access
•Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs)
•301.08 – Prohibitions (No Person Shall)
•Airport Staff, Tenants, Users and Public Shall Abide
•No Requirement to Monitor Security – In Compliance
•Recommended Improvements:
•Establish Primary Security Line
•Identify Security Partners
•Review Aerodrome Signage
Page 53 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca 9
HM VERSO MISSION
Review Aerodrome Signage
Tree Removal – Runway 08-26
Hangar Development Business Case
Implement Negotiation Strategy
Implement Revenue Strategy
Implement Board/Commission
HM VERSO MISSION
Complete Airport Master Plan
Immediate Term
Short Term
Establish Primary Security Line
•Create Delineation: Airside & Groundside
•Remove Runway Length Restrictions
•Benefit From Entire 5,502’ Runway
•Confirm Return on Investment
•County of Oxford and SWOX
•Discuss Contributions and Benefits
•Reduce Cost/Revenue Gap Further
•SWOX and County Participation
•Semi-Autonomous
•Regular Reporting to Council
•Progressive Airport Development
•Long-Term (20-Year) Requirements
Page 54 of 564
HM Aero Aviation Consulting - www.hmaero.ca
QUESTIONS
R. Adam Martin, M.Sc., PMP
President, Senior Project Director
Dr. David Bell, PhD, P.Eng.
Senior Advisor – Airport Governance
Page 55 of 564
Community Planning
P. O. Box 1614, 21 Reeve Street
Woodstock Ontario N4S 7Y3
Phone: 519-539-9800 Fax: 519-421-4712
Web site: www.oxfordcounty.ca
Our File: A14-19
APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE
TO: Town of Tillsonburg Committee of Adjustment
MEETING: October 28, 2019
REPORT NUMBER: 2019-342
OWNER: Tran Xuan Dung
432 Plank Road, Tillsonburg ON, N4G 4G9
APPLICANT: Peter Unger
51530 Pressey Line, Springfield ON, N0L 2J0
REQUESTED VARIANCE:
1. Relief from Table 15.2, Lot Coverage, to increase the maximum permitted lot coverage
from 30% of lot area to 41%, and;
RECOMMENDED VARIANCE:
2. Relief from Table 15.2, Interior Side Yard Width, to reduce the required interior side yard
width from 2.4 m (7.8 ft) to 1 m (3.28 ft) to facilitate an addition of a covered porch at the
rear of the existing building which will be consistent with the existing interior side yard
width of the existing building on the subject lands.
LOCATION:
The subject property is described as Lot 1251, Plan 500 in the Town of Tillsonburg. The property
is located on the west side of Tillson Avenue, lying between Elgin Street and Durham Street, and
is municipally known as 67 Tillson Avenue, Tillsonburg.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
COUNTY OF OXFORD OFFICIAL PLAN:
Schedule ‘T-1’ Town of Tillsonburg Land Use Plan Entrepreneurial District
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG ZONING BY-LAW:
Neighbourhood Commercial Zone (NC)
Page 56 of 564
File Number: A14-19 Report Number 2019-342
Page 2
SURROUNDING USES:
Institutional Use to the east (Annandale Public School) and lands zoned ‘Entrepreneurial
Zone (EC)’ consisting of a range of residential and entrepreneurial commercial uses are present
to the north, south, and west.
COMMENTS:
(a) Purpose of the Application:
The applicant is requesting relief from the above-noted provisions of the Town Zoning By-law to
facilitate the construction of a covered porch addition to the rear of the existing building on the
subject lands. The building is comprised of two commercial units (a commercial school and an
eating establishment), as well as an existing residential unit on the upper level. The subject lands
have driveway access off of Tillson Avenue, as well as a parking area in the rear, off of Ebert
Alley. It is proposed that the said covered porch will be approximately 80.5 m2 (866.5 ft2) in size,
and will be used for additional amenity area for the existing residential dwelling unit.
The subject lands are approximately 913.1 m2 (9,829.17 ft2) in size, with approximately 20.5 m
(67.25 ft) of frontage along Tillson Avenue. Surrounding land uses are predominately residential
and entrepreneurial commercial uses, with Annandale Public School located to the west of the
subject lands.
Plate 1, Location Map with Existing Zoning, shows the location of the subject property and the
zoning in the immediate vicinity.
Plate 2, 2015 Aerial Photo, shows the location of the subject lands and surrounding properties.
Plate 3, Applicant’s Site Plan, shows the dimensions and setbacks of the existing and proposed
development on the subject property.
(b) Agency Comments:
The application was circulated to a number of public agencies.
The Town Building Department has commented that the proposed addition is not anticipated to
impact the parking requirements on the side. Further, this department has commented that the
Ontario Building Code spatial separation and limiting distance as it relates to the side yard setback
will need to be confirmed through the building permit application process.
The Town Manager of Water and Wastewater has commented that there appears to be multiple
water meters for the subject lands and it is assumed that the existing sanitary lateral is located at
the rear of the property (from Ebert Alley), which is contrary to current policy. As such, future
development of the site may be required to comply with current policy to only allow for one water
meter per property and to allow for sanitary connections at the front of private properties.
(c) Public Consultation:
Public Notice was mailed to surrounding property owners on September 27, 2019. As of the
writing of this report, no comments or concerns had been received from the public.
Page 57 of 564
File Number: A14-19 Report Number 2019-342
Page 3
(d) Intent and Purpose of the Official Plan:
The subject lands are designated Entrepreneurial District according to the County Official Plan.
Lands designated Entrepreneurial District are intended for a wide variety of commercial land uses
through the conversion of existing residential dwellings and new development or redevelopment,
as well as the continuation of residential uses resulting in a mix of land uses. Specifically, the
Entrepreneurial District is intended for such residential uses as single detached dwellings, semi-
detached dwellings, converted dwellings and bed and breakfast establishments, as well as
rooming, boarding and lodging houses and commercial uses such as office conversions, personal
services, business supply and service repair shops for small appliances and clinics, studios,
galleries and commercial schools, as well as residential uses in association with a commercial
use in existing buildings.
The applicant is proposing a minor addition for the purpose of a covered porch to an existing
building with two established commercial uses and an accessory residential dwelling, which is in
keeping with the intent of the Official Plan to allow for such uses on lands designated as
Entrepreneurial District.
(e) Intent and Purpose of the Zoning By-law:
The subject property is zoned ‘Neighbourhood Commercial Zone (NC)’ in the Town Zoning By-
law, which permits a range of uses in keeping with the Entrepreneurial District designation, as
described above. Specifically, the ‘NC’ zone permits such uses as convenience stores, day care
centres, eating establishments (excluding a drive-through facility), fitness clubs and studios, as
well as an accessory dwelling unit in the upper storey of a building containing a permitted non-
residential use.
The ‘NC’ zone establishes a number of development standards for such uses including minimum
lot frontage, area and depth requirements, and allows a maximum lot coverage of 30% of lot area.
The ‘NC’ zone also requires a minimum rear yard depth of 10.5 m (34.4 ft) where a building
contains an accessory residential unit and requires a minimum interior side yard width of 2.4 m
(7.8 ft). The current building has a lot coverage of 32%.
It is the intent of the lot coverage provision to ensure that lands zoned ‘Neighbourhood
Commercial’ maintain sufficient area to accommodate for such considerations as parking and, in
the case of a building containing a residential unit, sufficient area for private amenity space, as
well as space for adequate grading and lot drainage. The lot coverage provisions are also
intended to ensure that the general scale of development is appropriate for the size of the lot.
Further, it is the intent of the interior side yard provision to ensure that sufficient space is
maintained on private property to allow for adequate lot drainage and for typical building
maintenance. The interior side yard provisions are also intended to ensure that development has
a minimal impact on abutting land uses.
The applicant is seeking relief of the maximum 30% lot coverage provision to construct a covered
porch at the rear of the existing building on the subject lands, which contains two commercial
units and an upper level residential dwelling unit and is requesting an increase to the maximum
lot coverage to 41% to facilitate the proposed covered porch addition.
According to the applicant’s site plan, the proposed interior side yard on the south side of the
property will be 1 m (3.28 ft), which will maintain south side interior side yard setback of the
Page 58 of 564
File Number: A14-19 Report Number 2019-342
Page 4
existing building, but will not be in compliance with the minimum width requirement of the Zoning
By-law. To this end, it is noted that the proposed covered porch will result in an approximate 20.9
m (68.6 ft) rear yard setback, which is in keeping with the minimum rear yard setback provision
of the ‘NC’ zone.
In this instance, it is not anticipated that the proposed variances will have a negative impact on
lot grading or drainage of the subject lands, and a preliminary lot grading plan will be reviewed as
part of the building permit process to ensure that proposal will have no negative impact on
neighbouring properties, and given that the proposed interior side yard for the covered porch will
maintain the existing setback of the current building, minimal impact on the property to the south
is anticipated. Further, as the proposed covered porch is intended to provide for covered amenity
area for the residential dwelling unit on the upper floor, staff are satisfied that the proposed
variance is in keeping with the intent of the Town Zoning By-law.
(f) Desirable Development/Use:
It is the opinion of this Office that the applicant’s request can be considered minor and desirable
for the development of the subject property.
As the proposed relief is not anticipated to impact the ability of the property to provide for adequate
parking and amenity space, or negatively impact drainage, the requested relief can be considered
minor and staff are satisfied that the proposed covered porch will have minimal impact on
surrounding property owners and note that no comments of concern have been received.
In light of the foregoing, it is the opinion of this Office that the requested relief is in keeping with
the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Town Zoning By-law and should be given
favourable consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Town of Tillsonburg Committee of Adjustment approve Application File A14-19,
submitted by Peter Unger (Dung) for lands described as Lot 1251, Plan 500 in the Town of
Tillsonburg, Town of Tillsonburg, as it relates to:
1. Relief from Table 15.2, Lot Coverage, to increase the maximum permitted lot coverage
from 30% of lot area to 41%, and;
2. Relief from Table 15.2, Interior Side Yard Width, to reduce the required interior side yard
width from 2.4 m (7.8 ft) to 1 m (3.28 ft) to facilitate an addition of a covered porch at the
rear of the existing building which will be in keeping with the width of the existing building
on the subject lands.
Subject to the following condition:
i. a building permit for the proposed covered porch shall be issued within one year of the
date of the Committee’s decision;
As the proposed variances are:
(i) minor variances from the provisions of the Town of Tillsonburg Zoning By-law No. 3295;
Page 59 of 564
File Number: A14-19 Report Number 2019-342
Page 5
(ii) desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land;
(iii) in-keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Town of Tillsonburg Zoning By-law
No. 3295; and
(iv) in-keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan.
Authored by: Heather St. Clair, MCIP, RPP, Development Planner
Approved for submission by: Eric Gilbert, MCIP, RPP, Senior Planner
Page 60 of 564
File Number: A14-19 Report Number 2019-342
Page 6
Report Approval Details
Document Title: A14-19_rpt.docx
Attachments: - Report Attachments.pdf
- a14-19t_appl-20190927.pdf
- a14-19t_site-plan-20190927.pdf
- a14-19t_appl-sketch-20190927.pdf
Final Approval Date: Oct 21, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Ron Shaw - Oct 21, 2019 - 3:58 PM
Page 61 of 564
October 16, 2019
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and
is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be
accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. This is not a plan of survey
Legend
1300
Notes
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N
65 Meters
Parcel Lines
Property Boundary
Assessment Boundary
Unit
Road
Municipal Boundary
Environmental Protection
Flood Overlay
Flood Fringe
Floodway
Environmental Protection (EP1)
Environmental Protection (EP2)
Zoning Floodlines
Regulation Limit
100 Year Flood Line
30 Metre Setback
Conservation Authority
Regulation Limit
Regulatory Flood And Fill Lines
Land Use Zoning (Displays
1:16000 to 1:500)
Plate 1: Location Map with Existing Zoning
File No: A 14-19: Dung (Unger)
Lot 1251, Plan 500, 67 Tillson Avenue, Tillsonburg
Subject
Lands
Tillson Ave
Page 62 of 564
October 16, 2019
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and
is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be
accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. This is not a plan of survey
Legend
330
Notes
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N
16 Meters
Parcel Lines
Property Boundary
Assessment Boundary
Unit
Road
Municipal Boundary
Environmental Protection
Flood Overlay
Flood Fringe
Floodway
Environmental Protection (EP1)
Environmental Protection (EP2)
Zoning Floodlines
Regulation Limit
100 Year Flood Line
30 Metre Setback
Conservation Authority
Regulation Limit
Regulatory Flood And Fill Lines
Land Use Zoning (Displays
1:16000 to 1:500)
Plate 2: 2015 Aerial Photo
File No: A 14-19: Dung (Unger)
Lot 1251, Plan 500, 67 Tillson Avenue, Tillsonburg
Subject
Lands
Tillson Ave
Page 63 of 564
Plate 3: Applicant's Site Plan
File No: A 14-19: Dung (Unger)
Lot 1251, Plan 500, 67 Tillson Avenue, Tillsonburg
Page 64 of 564
Page 65 of 564
Page 66 of 564
Page 67 of 564
Page 68 of 564
Page 69 of 564
Page 70 of 564
Page 71 of 564
Page 72 of 564
Page 73 of 564
Page 74 of 564
Page 75 of 564
Community Planning
P. O. Box 1614, Woodstock Ontario N4S 7Y3
Phone: 519-539-9800 Fax: 519-537-5513
Web site: www.oxfordcounty.ca
Our File: A16-19
APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE
TO: Town of Tillsonburg Committee of Adjustment
MEETING: October 28, 2019
REPORT NUMBER: 2019-345
OWNER: Performance Communities Realty Inc.
1 Barrie Blvd, St. Thomas ON, N5P 2M3
REQUESTED VARIANCE:
Relief from Section 8.6.13.2.4, Maximum Lot Coverage Provisions (R3-13), to increase the
maximum permitted lot coverage from 50% to 55% to facilitate the creation of 4 street fronting
townhouse lots.
LOCATION:
The subject lands are described as Lots 64 & 65, Plan 41M-349 and Parts 4-7 & 14-17 on Plan
41R-9873. The subject lands are located on the east side of Denrich Avenue, lying between
Dereham Drive and Wilson Avenue and are municipally known as 151, 153, 159 and 161 Denrich
Avenue in the Town of Tillsonburg.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
OFFICIAL PLAN: Low Density Residential
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG ZONING BY-LAW: Special Low Density Residential Type 3 Zone (R3-13)
SURROUNDING USES: Surrounding uses include a number of vacant lots
and recently constructed single detached dwellings
and street-fronting townhouses, part of the Andrews
Crossing subdivision development.
COMMENTS:
(a) Purpose of the Application:
The applicant has requested the above-noted relief from the lot coverage provision of the Town
Zoning By-law, as it applies to the subject lands, to facilitate the creation of four street-fronting
townhouse lots on the subject lands.
Page 76 of 564
File No. A16-19 Report No. 2019-345
Page 2
For Committee’s information, the subject lands were created as blocks in a Plan of Subdivision
known as Andrew’s Crossing (41M-349), registered in June of this year. The subject lands have
been reviewed for the development of eight street fronting townhouses, and were approved for site
specific provisions to facilitate the proposed townhouse units in 2017 (By-law 4089), with a holding
provision that was removed in 2018 when appropriate servicing works were completed.
Building permits were issued for these units and they are under construction.
The owner is now proposing to divide these blocks into eight separately transferable lots by way
of a request for exemption to Part Lot Control, which will be brought forward to County Council in
the near future for exemption. Once separated into separate parts, there will be an increase in
coverage to 55% of lot area for the interior lots on the subject lands, beyond what existed when
the proposed development was located on the blocks as a whole.
Once separated, the subject lands will vary in size, averaging approximately 246.7 m2 (2,655.5 ft2)
in size, with an average frontage of 8 m (26.2 ft) for an interior unit and approximately 277 m2
(2,981.6 ft2) with an average frontage of 8.8 m (29.1 ft) for end units.
Surrounding land uses are predominately low density residential development, at various stages
of construction.
Plate 1: Location Map with Existing Zoning shows the location of the vacant subject lands and the
current zoning in the immediate vicinity.
Plate 2: Close-up of Subject Lands (2015 Air Photo) shows a close up view of the subject lands and
surrounding area.
Plate 3: Applicants’ Sketch illustrates the configuration of the proposed townhouse lots.
(b) Agency Comments
The application was circulated to those public agencies considered to have an interest in the
proposal. To date no comments of concern have been received.
Public notification of the application for minor variance was circulated to surrounding property
owners on October 16, 2019. As of the writing of this report, no correspondence has been received
from the public
(c) Intent and Purpose of the Official Plan:
The subject lands are designated ‘Low Density Residential’ in the County’s Official Plan which is
intended for the development of low density housing forms, consisting of single and semi-detached
dwellings, as well as townhouse development, and it is intended that there will be a mixing and
integration of different housing forms to achieve a low overall density of residential use. The
applicants are proposing the construction of eight street fronting townhouses which will maintain
the density targets of the Official Plan, which is in keeping with the intent of the Official Plan.
(d) Intent and Purpose of the Zoning By-law:
The subject property is zoned ‘Special Low Density Residential –Type 3 Zone (R3-13) in the Town
of Tillsonburg Zoning By-Law No. 3295, which permits the development of street fronting
townhouses, and establishes a number of site specific special development provisions intended to
facilitate the proposed townhouse dwelling units on the subject lands, including site specific
Page 77 of 564
File No. A16-19 Report No. 2019-345
Page 3
minimum lot area, frontage and interior and rear yard setback requirements, as well as an increase
to the maximum lot coverage provision from 40% lot area to 50%. These site specific provisions
were established in 2017 for the proposed townhouse dwelling units, and were reviewed based on
the block configuration in the subdivision plan.
The applicant is proposing to separate these blocks into eight separately transferable lots by way
of an exemption to Part Lot Control. The result of the proposed exemption to Part Lot Control and
the creation of separately transferable lots will increase the overall lot coverage for the proposed
interior street fronting townhouse units from the initial 50% to 55% lot area per lot, due to the
reduced lot area of the interior units; the dwelling size remains unchanged.
The purpose of the maximum lot coverage provisions in the Zoning By-law is to ensure that
dwellings and other structures in the ‘R3’ zone are sized appropriately for the residential needs of
the property, while allowing for sufficient area for such considerations as grading, drainage, parking
and private amenity space.
Staff have reviewed the applicants’ proposal and are satisfied that sufficient area can be
maintained on the subject lands to account for these provisions and a lot grading plan has been
reviewed and approved for the street fronting townhouse units. Given this, Planning staff are
satisfied that the proposal maintains the general intent of the Zoning By-law.
(e) Desirable Development/Use:
The applicants are proposing to recognize the increased lot coverage of four interior street fronting
townhouse dwelling units on an existing block in a recently registered subdivision, known as
Andrew’s Crossing. The requested increase is required to address the lot coverage impact that
will result once the proposed lots are divided, as they currently comply with the required 50% as
one whole block.
Planning staff have reviewed the proposal and are satisfied that the variance can be considered
minor and is not anticipated to negatively impact surrounding land uses and there will be no
appreciable change beyond what currently exists; the increased lot coverage impact is solely due
to the creation of the separate townhouse units.
Based on this, staff are satisfied that the proposal can be considered desirable development for
the intended use of the land and can be given favourable consideration.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Town of Tillsonburg Committee of Adjustment approve Application File A16-19,
submitted by Performance Communities Realty Inc. for lands described as Lots 64 & 65, Plan
41M-349 and Parts 4-7 & 14-17, Plan 41R-9873 in the Town of Tillsonburg as it relates to:
1. Relief from Section 8.6.13.2.4, Maximum Lot Coverage Provisions (R3-13), to
increase the maximum permitted lot coverage from 50% to 55% to facilitate the creation
of 4 townhouse lots.
As the proposed variance is:
(i) a minor variance from the provisions of the Town of Tillsonburg Zoning By-law No. 3295;
(ii) desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land;
Page 78 of 564
File No. A16-19 Report No. 2019-345
Page 4
(iii) in-keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Town of Tillsonburg Zoning By-law
No. 3295; and
(iv) in-keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan.
Authored by: Heather St. Clair, MCIP RPP, Development Planner
Approved by: Eric Gilbert, MCIP, RPP, Senior Planner
Page 79 of 564
File No. A16-19 Report No. 2019-345
Page 5
Report Approval Details
Document Title: A16-19_rpt.docx
Attachments: - Report Attachments.pdf
- a16-19t_appl-20191016.pdf
Final Approval Date: Oct 21, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Ron Shaw - Oct 21, 2019 - 3:47 PM
Page 80 of 564
October 21, 2019
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and
is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be
accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. This is not a plan of survey
Legend
1300
Notes
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N
65 Meters
Parcel Lines
Property Boundary
Assessment Boundary
Unit
Road
Municipal Boundary
Environmental Protection
Flood Overlay
Flood Fringe
Floodway
Environmental Protection (EP1)
Environmental Protection (EP2)
Zoning Floodlines
Regulation Limit
100 Year Flood Line
30 Metre Setback
Conservation Authority
Regulation Limit
Regulatory Flood And Fill Lines
Land Use Zoning (Displays
1:16000 to 1:500)
Plate 1: Location Map with Existing Zoning
File No: A 16-19: Performance Communities Realty Inc.
Lots 64 & 65, 41M-349, Parts 4-7 & 14-17, 41R-9873, 151, 153, 159, 161 Denrich Ave. Tillsonburg
Subject
Lands
Page 81 of 564
October 21, 2019
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and
is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be
accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. This is not a plan of survey
Legend
330
Notes
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N
16 Meters
Parcel Lines
Property Boundary
Assessment Boundary
Unit
Road
Municipal Boundary
Environmental Protection
Flood Overlay
Flood Fringe
Floodway
Environmental Protection (EP1)
Environmental Protection (EP2)
Zoning Floodlines
Regulation Limit
100 Year Flood Line
30 Metre Setback
Conservation Authority
Regulation Limit
Regulatory Flood And Fill Lines
Land Use Zoning (Displays
1:16000 to 1:500)
Subject
LandsDenrich
Ave
Plate 2: Close-up of Subject Lands (2015 Air Photo)
File No: A 16-19: Performance Communities Realty Inc.
Lots 64 & 65, 41M-349, Parts 4-7 & 14-17, 41R-9873, 151, 153, 159, 161 Denrich Ave. Tillsonburg
Page 82 of 564
Plate 3: Applicant's Sketch
File No: A 16-19: Performance Communities Realty Inc.
Lots 64 & 65, 41M-349, Parts 4-7 & 14-17, 41R-9873, 151, 153, 159, 161 Denrich Ave. Tillsonburg
Page 83 of 564
Page 84 of 564
Page 85 of 564
Page 86 of 564
Page 87 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
To: Mayor and Members of Tillsonburg Council
From: Eric Gilbert, Senior Planner, Community Planning
Applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision & Zone Change
SB19-06-7 & ZN 7-19-10 – Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS
The intent of the Draft Plan of Subdivision and zone change applications is to facilitate the
creation of 78 lots for single detached dwellings, and 20 blocks for street-fronting
townhouses, totaling 80 units, in a new residential plan of subdivision.
A number of special zoning provisions are requested to permit increased lot coverage,
reduced rear yard depths, reduced exterior side yard widths, and reduced lot frontage and
lot area for street-fronting townhouse units.
The proposal is consistent with the relevant policies of the Provincial Policy Statement and
County Official Plan and can be supported from a planning perspective.
DISCUSSION
Background
OWNER: Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc.
101 Spruce Street West, Aylmer ON, N5H 1B4
APPLICANT: Andrew Gilvesy, CJDL Consulting Engineers
261 Broadway, Tillsonburg ON, N4G 4H8
LOCATION:
The subject lands are described as Part Lot 72, Lot 72A, Plan 500, in the Town of Tillsonburg. The
lands are located on the south side of North Street East, between Falcon Road and Tillson
Avenue, in the Town of Tillsonburg.
Page 88 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 2 of 13
COUNTY OF OXFORD OFFICIAL PLAN:
Schedule ‘C-3’ County of Oxford Large Urban Centre
Settlement Strategy Plan
Schedule ‘T-1’ Town of Tillsonburg Residential
Land Use Plan
Schedule ‘T-2’ Town of Tillsonburg Low Density Residential
Residential Density Plan
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG ZONING BY-LAW 3295
Existing Zoning: Low Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-S (H))
Special Low Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-3(H))
Low Density Residential Type 3 Holding Zone (R3-T(H))
Future Development Zone (FD)
Passive Open Space Zone (OS1)
Active Use Open Space Zone (OS2)
Proposed Zoning: Special Low Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-20 (H))
Special Low Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-21 (H))
Special Low Density Residential Type 3 Holding Zone (R3-16 (H))
Future Development Zone (FD)
Passive Open Space Zone (OS1)
Active Use Open Space Zone (OS2)
PROPOSAL:
The intent of the applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision approval and zone change is to facilitate
the creation of 20 blocks for street-fronting townhouses, totaling 80 units, and 78 lots for single-
detached dwelling houses in a new draft plan of subdivision.
The application for Zone Change proposes to rezone the lands from ‘Low Density Residential
Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-S(H))’, ‘Special Low Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-
3(H))’, ‘Low Density Residential Type 3 Holding Zone (R3-T(H))’, ‘Future Development Zone (FD)’
to ‘Special Low Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-20 (H))’, ‘Special Low Density
Residential Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-21 (H))’, ‘Special Low Density Residential Type 3 Holding
Zone (R3-16 (H))’, ‘Future Development Zone (FD)’, ‘Passive Open Space Zone (OS1)’, ‘Active
Use Open Space Zone (OS2)’ to facilitate the above noted Draft Plan of Subdivision.
The intent of the requested zoning provisions are to provide a reduced rear yard depths, increased
lot coverage, increased permitted projection for covered decks and porches, reduced exterior side
yard width, and reduced lot frontage and minimum lot area for street fronting townhouse dwellings.
For Council’s information, a previous draft plan of subdivision was approved for these lands by
the Town and County in 1999, consisting of 142 lots for single detached dwellings and 26 street
fronting townhouse dwellings. The draft plan of subdivision approval lapsed in 2006.
The subject lands comprise approximately 9.83 ha (24.3 ac) and are currently vacant.
Surrounding uses include planned and existing low density residential development on the north
side of North Street East, the Trans-Canada Trail to the south, and a mix of high density and low
Page 89 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 3 of 13
density residential uses to the south. A sewage pumping station is located adjacent to the west,
with other service commercial uses present further west on the south side of North Street East.
Plate 1, Location Map with Existing Zoning, indicates the location of the subject site and the
existing zoning in the immediate vicinity.
Plate 2, 2015 Aerial Map, provides an aerial view of the subject property and surrounding area.
Plate 3, Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision, provides the layout of the proposed draft plan of
subdivision.
Application Review
PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT
The 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial
interest related to land use planning and development. Under Section 3 of the Planning Act, where
a municipality is exercising its authority affecting a planning matter, such decisions “shall be
consistent with” all policy statements issued under the Act.
Section 1.1.1 states that healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by promoting
efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province
and municipalities over the long term and cost-effective development patterns and standards to
minimize land consumption and servicing costs. Further, according to Section 1.1.2, sufficient
land shall be made available to accommodate an appropriate range and mix of land uses to meet
projected needs for a time horizon of up to 20 years.
Section 1.1.3.1 directs that settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and development, and
their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted. Furthermore, Section 1.1.3.2 directs that land
use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on densities and a mix of land uses which
efficiently use land and resources, existing infrastructure and public service facilities.
Section 1.1.3.3 also directs that planning authorities shall identify appropriate locations and
promote opportunities for intensification and redevelopment where this can be accommodated
taking into account existing building stock or areas, including brownfield sites, and the availability
of suitable existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities required to accommodate
projected needs.
As per Section 1.4.1, to provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing types and densities
required to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market
area, planning authorities shall:
a) Maintain at all times the ability to accommodate residential growth for a minimum of 10
years through residential intensification and redevelopment; and,
b) Maintain at all times where new development is to occur, land with servicing capacity
sufficient to provide at least a three-year supply of residential units available through lands
suitably zoned to facilitate residential intensification and redevelopment, and land in draft
approved and registered plans.
Further, Section 1.4.3 of the PPS directs that planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate
mix of housing types and densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents
of the regional market area by:
Page 90 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 4 of 13
Establishing and implementing minimum targets for the provision of housing which is
affordable to low and moderate income households;
Permitting and facilitating all forms of residential intensification and redevelopment and all
forms of housing required to meet the social, health and well-being requirements of current
and future residents, including special needs requirements;
Directing the development of new housing towards locations where appropriate levels of
infrastructure and public service facilities are or will be available to support current and
projected needs;
Promoting densities for new housing which efficiently uses land, resources, infrastructure
and public service facilities, and support the use of active transportation and transit areas
where it exists or is to be developed; and
Establishing development standards for residential intensification, redevelopment and new
residential development which minimize the cost of housing and facilitate compact form
while maintaining appropriate levels of public health and safety.
OFFICIAL PLAN
The subject lands are designated ‘Low Density Residential’, according to the Town of Tillsonburg
Land Use Plan & Residential Density Plan. Low Density Residential Areas are those lands that
are primarily developed or planned for a variety of low rise, low density housing forms including
single-detached dwellings, semi-detached, duplex or converted dwellings, quadraplexes,
townhouses and low density cluster development. In these areas, it is intended that there will be
a mixing and integration of different forms of housing to achieve a low overall density of use. It is
not intended that the full range of housing will be permitted in every individual neighbourhood or
development.
The policies of Section 10.3.3 (Plans of Subdivision and Condominium) provide that County and
Town Council will evaluate applications for a plan of subdivision on the basis of the requirements
of the Planning Act, as well as criteria including, but not limited to, the following:
Conformity with the Official Plan;
The availability of community services such as roads, water, storm and sanitary sewers,
waste disposal, recyclable collection, public utilities, fire and police protection, parks,
schools and other community facilities;
The accommodation of Environmental Resources and the mitigation of environmental and
human-made constraints;
The reduction of any negative effects on surrounding land uses, transportation networks
or significant natural features;
The design of the plan to be integrated into adjacent developments, and;
The design of the plan is to be compatible with the natural features and topography of the
site, and proposals for extensive cut and fill will be discouraged.
As a condition of draft plan approval, County Council will require an applicant to satisfy conditions
prior to final approval and registration of the plan. The applicant will be required to meet the
conditions of the draft approval within the specified time period, failing which, draft plan approval
may lapse. Additionally, to provide for the fulfillment of these conditions, and for the installation
of services according to municipal standards, County Council shall require the applicant to enter
into a subdivision agreement with the area municipality and, where necessary, the County, prior
to final approval of the plan.
Page 91 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 5 of 13
Section 8.6.2.3 of the Official Plan provides that Town Council will acquire lands for use as
parkland or leisure through conditions of draft approval of plan of subdivision. Land conveyed to
the Town as part of the required parkland dedication will be expected to meet minimum standards
for drainage, grading, landscaping, fencing and shape in accordance with the intended function
and will be located in appropriate locations.
ZONING BY-LAW
The subject lands are currently zoned ‘Special Low Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-
3(H))’, Low Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone (R2-S(H))’, ‘Low Density Residential Type
3 Holding Zone (R3-T(H))’, ‘Future Development Zone (FD)’, ‘Passive Use Open Space Zone
(OS1)’, and ‘Active Open Space Zone (OS2)’ according to the Town’s Zoning By-law. The current
zoning on the property is reflective of the previous draft plan approval that was in place from 1998-
2006.
The applicant is proposing to rezone the townhouse blocks ‘Special Low Density Residential Type
3 Zone (R3-Sp)’ and the single-detached dwelling lots ‘Special Low Density Residential Type 2
Zone (R2-sp)’, to facilitate the proposed draft plan of subdivision.
For a single detached dwelling, the ‘R2’ zone requires a minimum lot area of 315 m2 (3,390.7 ft2)
for an interior lot and 450 m2 (4,843.9 ft2) for a corner lot, a frontage of 10.5 m (34.4 ft) for an
interior lot and 15 m (49.2 ft) for a corner lot, a minimum lot depth of 30 m (98.4 ft), front yard
depth of 6 m (19.7 ft), rear yard depth of 7.5 m (24.6 ft), interior side yard width of 1.2 m (3.9 ft),
exterior side yard width of 6.0 m (19.7 ft), setback of 20.5 m (67.3 ft) from the centreline of an
arterial road, landscaped open space area of 30% and maximum lot coverage of 40%.
For a street-fronting townhouse, the ‘R3’ zone requires a minimum lot area of 240 m2 (2,583.3 ft2)
for an interior unit and 330 m2 (3,552 ft2) for an end unit, a frontage of 8 m (26.2 ft) for an interior
unit and 11 m (36 ft) for an end unit, a minimum lot depth of 30 m (98.4 ft), front yard depth of 6
m (19.9 ft), rear yard depth of 7.5 m (24.6 ft), interior side yard width of 3 m (9.8 ft) for an end unit,
exterior side yard width of 6.0 m (19.7 ft), setback of 20.5 m (67.3 ft) from the centreline of an
arterial road, landscaped open space area of 30% and maximum lot coverage of 40%.
A number of site specific provisions are required to facilitate the proposed development, as
summarized below:
Single-Detached Dwelling – R2-20 (lots abutting North Street)
Provision Required Proposed
Lot Coverage, max 40 % 55%
Exterior Side Yard, min 6.0 m (19.7 ft) 4.5 m (14.76 ft)
Interior Side Yard, min 3.0 m (9.8 ft) & 1.2 m (3.9 ft) 1.2 m (3.9 ft)
Rear Yard, min 7.5 m (24.6 ft) 7.5 m (24.6 ft)
Permitted Encroachment
for Covered Deck
1.5 m (4.9 ft) 3.0 m (9.8 ft)
Single-Detached Dwelling – R2-21
Provision Required Proposed
Lot Coverage, max 40 % 55%
Exterior Side Yard, min 6.0 m (19.7 ft) 4.5 m (14.76 ft)
Interior Side Yard, min 3.0 m (9.8 ft) & 1.2 m (3.9 ft) 1.2 m (3.9 ft)
Rear Yard, min 7.5 m (24.6 ft) 6.0 m (24.6 ft)
Page 92 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 6 of 13
Permitted Encroachment
for Covered Deck
1.5 m (4.9 ft) 3.0 m (9.8 ft)
Street- Fronting Townhouse Dwelling – R3-16
Provision Required Proposed
Lot Area for Interior Unit,
min
240 m2 (2,583.3 ft2) for an
end unit
190 m2 (2,045 ft2)
Lot Area for End Unit, min 330 m2 (3,552 ft2) 235 m2 (2,529 ft2)
Lot Frontage for Interior
Unit, min
8 m (26.2 ft) 6 m (19.69 ft)
Lot Frontage for End Unit,
min
11 m (36 ft) 7.6 m (24.9 ft)
Lot Coverage, max 40% 55%
Exterior Side Yard, min 6.0 m (19.7 ft) 4.5 m (14.76 ft)
Permitted Encroachment
for Covered Deck
1.5 m (4.9 ft) 3.0 m (9.8 ft)
AGENCY COMMENTS
The applications were reviewed by a number of public agencies. The following comments were
received.
Town of Tillsonburg Building & By-Law Services indicated that they have no concerns with the
proposed zoning changes.
The Town of Tillsonburg Engineering Services Department provided the following comments.
A 1-foot reserve shall extend across the access road shown as Block 99.
Please show detail of access road and drying area for sediment around the Stormwater
management pond.
Please ensure that the watermain is at a minimum, 0.6 m behind the back of curb.
To eliminate unsafe pedestrian crossings, please move sidewalk to the opposite side of the
road on Street B & C.
Sidewalk is required along North Street East.
Privacy fence will be needed for lots backing onto North Street East and the storm drainage
channel at the western limit of the subdivision.
The eastern section of the Pagent Municipal Drain, consisting of a 350mm concrete pipe
that transverses the property is required to be abandoned.
At the southern end of Street B near Block 99, storm sewer is shown connect to sanitary
sewer, please revise.
If approved, please include the following as conditions of draft plan approval:
a. The Owner agrees that 1-foot reserves shall be conveyed to the Town, free and clear
of all costs and encumbrances and to the satisfaction of the Town.
b. The Owner agrees to install fencing if required by the Town.
c. The eastern section of the Pagent Municipal Drain, consisting of a 350mm concrete
pipe that transverses the property shall be abandoned, to the satisfaction of the Town.
d. The Owner agrees to satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Town
regarding the construction of roads, installation of services, including water, sewer,
electrical distribution systems, street lights, sidewalks, and drainage facilities and
other matters pertaining to the development of the subdivision in accordance with
Town standards.
e. Road allowances included in the draft plan of subdivision shall be dedicated to the
Town as public highway to the satisfaction of the Town.
Page 93 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 7 of 13
f. The streets included on the draft plan of subdivision shall be named to the satisfaction
of the Town.
g. The subdivision agreement shall contain provisions indicating that prior to grading and
issuance of building permits, a grading plan, servicing plan, hydro and street lighting
plan, and erosion and siltation control plan, along with reports as required, be
reviewed and approved by the Town, and further, the subdivision agreement shall
include provisions for the owner to carry out or cause to be carried out any necessary
works in accordance with the approved plans and reports.
h. Such easements as may be required for utility or drainage purposes outside of the
proposed public right-of-way shall be granted to the appropriate authority.
The Town of Tillsonburg Parks Department provided the following comments:
The parkland block as laid out in the draft plan provides for excellent connectivity from North
Street through to the rail trail. Sidewalks on North Street East should be incorporated.
The developer will be required to work with RCP staff to design the parkland block to
incorporate Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles to mitigate
poor sightlines that could create maintenance and operational issues.
Lighting of the park blocks should be designed to be consistent with CPTED principles.
There should be consideration for a proper barrier-free connection to the rail trail at the mid-
block access as well as at the SWM pond access.
The overall parkland dedication (2.8% of land area) does not meet the 5% threshold and
will need to be supplemented with a cash-in-lieu contribution.
The Town of Tillsonburg Fire and Rescue Services Department indicated that they had no
concerns with the proposal.
The County Public Works Department requested that the following conditions be included:
1) Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County of Oxford, such easements as may be
required for utility or drainage purposes shall be granted to the appropriate authority.
- Easement width requirements will be reviewed during detailed design review (e.g. Lot
5/6 – dependant on depth of sanitary sewer).
- An easement through Block 99 may be required.
2) Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County of Oxford, the owner shall receive
confirmation from the County of Oxford Public Works Department that there is sufficient
capacity in the Town of Tillsonburg water system and wastewater system to service the
plan of subdivision. Confirmation shall be given in accordance with the “Protocol for
Allocation of Water and Sewage Capacity for Development”.
- In accordance with Oxford County’s “County-Wide Water and Wastewater Capacity
Allocation Protocol for Residential Development”, the maximum number of units to be
allocated water and wastewater capacity at one time (in Tillsonburg) is 50 residential
units; therefore, the proposed development should be phased/plan registration should
be limited to 50 units at a time.
3) The owner agrees in writing to satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise,
including payment of applicable development charges, of the County of Oxford regarding
the installation of water and wastewater distribution systems, and other matters pertaining
to the development of the subdivision.
Page 94 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 8 of 13
- As discussed during pre-consultation, proposed funding for the North Street project is
85% growth related (e.g. Water & Wastewater Development Charges), and 15%
benefit to existing development. Existing service “stubs” installed to the subject
property will be directly assessed to the property/Owner. Similarly, part of installation
cost for storm drainage works will be directly assessed to the subject property/Owner.
Future bill-out will tentatively occur in 2020.
- To gain grade while maintaining minimum velocities, oversized sanitary sewers
(250mmØ) are proposed; the County will not contribute to any applicable “oversizing”
costs.
- The County will model proposed watermain sizes/layout and advise if revisions are
required.
- Based on geotechnical findings, it appears that a Permit to Take Water will be required.
Related design/construction measures shall be undertaken in accordance with
requirements for high groundwater tables/Oxford County Specifications.
4) The subdivision agreement shall make provision for the assumption and operation, by the
County of Oxford, of the water and wastewater distribution systems within the draft plan
subject to the approval of the County of Oxford Department of Public Works.
5) As acknowledged on the circulated draft plan, the Applicant shall provide a road widening
to 13 metres from centreline of Oxford Road 20 R.O.W. (R.O.W. currently appears to be
approximately 20m wide, so ~ 3m widening is required). Also, 3 metre x 3 metre daylight
triangles shall be provided on lots abutting Streets ‘A’ and ‘D’. All transfers shall be free
and clear of liens, easements, and other encumbrances.
6) Installation of chain-link fencing or trees, to the County’s satisfaction, is required on all
common lot lines abutting County owned property.
The Long Point Region Conservation Authority provided the following comments:
Long Point Region Conservation Authority (LPRCA) staff has reviewed the above-noted
applications and the associated report and has no objection to the general concepts of site
development and storm water management (SWM) proposed in the submitted information.
Staff has reviewed the Preliminary Servicing Report prepared by CJDL, dated August 1, 2019
and has no objections to the concepts provided for site stormwater management. However, as
part of the final plans the major flow systems, outlet and stormwater management must not
increase flood risk to life, property and the environment. The major overland flow routes must be
determined with calculated flow depths and velocities. In addition, low impact Development
practices are to be explored and implemented where possible as this will help ensure a water
balance of the area.
LPRCA has concerns with potential impacts that this development may have on storm water
drainage, soil erosion and sedimentation. In this regard, we would recommend that a final lot
grading, soil conservation and stormwater management plans be completed as condition of
approval. To ensure a long term enhanced level of water quality from the site, the final SWM
report should include a statement on the maintenance schedule of the SWM facility.
Union Gas requested that the Owner/developer provide the necessary easements and/or
agreements required by Union Gas as a condition of draft approval.
Page 95 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 9 of 13
The Town Development Commissioner had no comments or concerns regarding the proposal,
indicating that the proposed plan of subdivision provides a mix of single detached homes and
townhouses, which is desirable from both a community building and market demand perspective.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Notice of complete application was sent to surrounding neighbours on September 10, 2019, and
notice of public meeting was sent on October 11, 2019, in accordance with the requirements of
the Planning Act. At the time of writing this report, no comments or concerns had been received
from the public.
Planning Analysis
The subject application for draft plan of subdivision approval and zone change proposes to create
78 lots for single detached dwellings, 20 blocks for 80 street fronting townhouse dwellings, 2 park
blocks, one block for future access to a vacant residential parcel to the east, and one stormwater
management block to facilitate the development of a residential plan of subdivision in the Town
of Tillsonburg.
It is the opinion of Staff that the proposal is consistent with the relevant policies of the Provincial
Policy Statement. The proposed development is considered to be a form of infilling that promotes
a mix of housing types and represents an efficient use of lands, municipal services and
infrastructure within a designated settlement area, which is consistent with Sections 1.1.1, 1.1.3.1,
1.1.3.2, 1.1.3.3 and 1.4.3 of the PPS.
With regard to the policies of Section 10.3 of the Official Plan (Plans of Subdivision and
Condominium) which require the developer to address a series of standard review criteria
concerning the adequacy of servicing, environmental impacts, transportation networks and
integration with surrounding developments, staff note that the required studies and reports have
been received and reviewed through this Office and other required reports can be satisfactorily
addressed through the inclusion of appropriate conditions of draft approval.
The proposal is in keeping with the Plan of Subdivision policies of Section 10.3.3, and the policies
of the Low Density Residential designation. The proposed draft plan has a net residential density
of 25 units per hectare, in keeping with the density target, being 15 to 30 units per hectare. In
addition, the proposed draft plan provides a range of lot sizes and a mix of housing type that are
integrated throughout the development, which is in keeping with low residential density policies.
Furthermore, the proposed street layout and sidewalk and pedestrian connections will provide
appropriate linkages to the Trans Canada Trail and other components of the Town’s trail system.
The North Street Class Environmental Assessment (2013) included a traffic study which
anticipated the vehicular traffic that would be generated from this development, provided
adequate width for future turning lanes was provided. The location of public streets in the
proposed draft plan are located opposite the planned streets on the opposite side of North Street
East and are in keeping with the preferred approach identified in the EA.
Staff are satisfied that the requested zoning provisions to provide for increased lot coverage,
increased building footprint and reduced exterior side yard widths for corner lots for the proposed
single detached dwellings within the development is generally appropriate. The applicant will be
required to demonstrate that the proposed stormwater management pond can accommodate
additional run-off resulting from the increased dwelling footprints. The increased permitted
Page 96 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 10 of 13
projection into the required rear yard depth for covered porches is similar to other recent requests
received and approved in Town.
The reduced rear yard depth will only apply to single detached dwellings that do not front on North
Street East, and minimal impacts to traffic safety and sight lines are expected from the reduced
exterior side yard widths. No adverse comments were received through the agency circulation.
The requested zoning provisions for the street-fronting townhouse blocks will provide for
increased building envelopes and will reflect other recent townhouse developments in the Town.
The reduced exterior side yard width is not expected to impact traffic sightlines or safety. The
reduced minimum lot area, lot frontage, and increased lot coverage are reflective of the four unit
street-fronting townhouse block design and appropriate amenity space will remain available. The
development will be reviewed by Building staff for zoning compliance at the time of building permit
submission. These requested provisions will facilitate the future creation of separate conveyable
lots, which will be completed in a subsequent application for exemption from Part Lot Control.
In light of the foregoing, Planning staff are satisfied that the proposed development is consistent
with the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement and meets the relevant policies contained in
the Official Plan. As such, Staff are satisfied that the applications can be given favourable
consideration.
The previously noted agency comments have been addressed in the recommended conditions of
draft approval, where appropriate, and are provided for Council’s consideration.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council of the Town of Tillsonburg approve in principle the zone change application
(File No. ZN 7-19-10) submitted by Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc., for lands legally
described as Part Lot 72, Lot 72A, Plan 500, in the Town of Tillsonburg, to rezone the lands
Special Low Density Residential Type 2 Holding Zone, Special Low Density Residential
Type 3 Holding Zone, Future Development Zone, Passive Open Space Zone, Active Use
Open Space Zone to facilitate the proposed draft plan of subdivision;
And further, the Council of the Town of Tillsonburg advise County Council that the Town
supports the application for draft plan of subdivision, File No. SB 19-06-7, submitted by
Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc., for lands legally described as Part Lot 72, Lot 72A, Plan
500, in the Town of Tillsonburg, consisting of 78 lots for single-detached dwellings, 20
blocks for townhouse dwellings, 4 new local streets, two park blocks and a block for
stormwater management purposes, subject to the following conditions of draft approval:
1. This approval applies to the draft plan of subdivision submitted by Mike Hutchinson
Properties Inc. (SB 19-06-7) and prepared by CJDL Consulting Engineers, as shown on
Plate 3 of Report No. 2019-314 and comprising Part Lot 72, Lot 72A, Plan 500, in the Town
of Tillsonburg, showing 78 lots for single-detached dwellings, 20 blocks for townhouse
dwellings, 4 new local streets, 2 parkland blocks, 1 access block, and a block for stormwater
management purposes, subject to the following modification:
a. A 0.3 m reserve block be included for Block 99.
2. The Owner shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the Town of Tillsonburg and
County of Oxford.
Page 97 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 11 of 13
3. If required by the Town, the subdivision agreement shall make provision for the dedication
of parkland and/or cash-in lieu thereof in accordance with the relevant provisions of the
Planning Act, to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.
4. The Owner agrees in writing, to install fencing as may be required by the Town, to the
satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.
5. The Owner agrees in writing, to satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Town
regarding construction of roads, installation of services, including water, sewer, electrical
distribution systems, sidewalks, street lights, and drainage facilities and other matters
pertaining to the development of the subdivision in accordance with the standards of the
Town, to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.
6. The road allowances included in the draft plan of subdivision shall be dedicated as public
highways, to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.
7. The streets included in the draft plan of subdivision shall be named, to the satisfaction of
the Town of Tillsonburg.
8. The Owner agrees in writing, that 0.3 metre (1 foot) reserves abutting local streets shall be
conveyed to the Town of Tillsonburg as required, free of all costs and encumbrances, to the
satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.
9. The subdivision agreement shall contain provisions indicating that prior to grading and
issuance of building permits, a grading plan, servicing plan, hydro and street lighting plan,
and erosion and siltation control plan, along with reports as required, be reviewed and
approved by the Town, and further, the subdivision agreement shall include provisions for
the owner to carry out or cause to be carried out any necessary works in accordance with
the approved plans an reports, to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.
10. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the eastern section of the Pagent
Municipal Drain, consisting of a 350mm concrete pipe that transverses the property shall
be abandoned, to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.
11. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, all lots/blocks shall conform to the
zoning requirements of the Town’s Zoning By-law. Certification of lot areas, frontages, and
depths shall be provided to the Town by an Ontario Land Surveyor retained by the Owner,
to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg.
12. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the Owner shall agree in writing that all
phasing of the plan of subdivision will be to the satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg and
County of Oxford.
13. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, such easements as may be required
for utility and drainage purposes shall be granted to the appropriate authority, to the
satisfaction of the Town of Tillsonburg and County of Oxford Public Works.
14. The Owner agrees in writing, to satisfy all the requirements, financial and otherwise,
including payment of applicable development charges, of the County of Oxford regarding
the installation of the water distribution system, the installation of the sanitary sewer system,
and other matters pertaining to the development of the subdivision, to the satisfaction of
County of Oxford Public Works.
Page 98 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 12 of 13
15. The subdivision agreement shall make provision for the assumption and operation of the
water and sewage system within the draft plan of subdivision by the County of Oxford, to
the satisfaction of County of Oxford Public Works.
16. The Owner agrees in writing, to prepare and submit for approval from County of Oxford
Public Works, detailed servicing plans designed in accordance with the County Design
Guidelines, to the satisfaction of County of Oxford Public Works.
17. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the Owner shall receive confirmation
from County of Oxford Public Works that there is sufficient capacity in the Tillsonburg water
and sanitary sewer systems to service the plan of subdivision, to the satisfaction of County
of Oxford Public Works.
18. The Owner agrees in writing, that a 0.3 m (1 ft) reserve along North Street East shall be
conveyed to the County as required, free of all costs and encumbrances, to the satisfaction
of County of Oxford Public Works.
19. The Owner agrees in writing, that a road widening along North Street East shall be
conveyed to the County as required, to provide a 15 m (49.2 ft) right-of-way from the
centerline of the Road, free of all costs and encumbrances, to the satisfaction of County of
Oxford Public Works.
20. The Owner agrees in writing, that 3 m (9.8 ft) x 3 m (9.8 ft) daylighting triangles along North
Street East shall be conveyed to the County as required for lots abutting Streets ‘A’ & ‘D’,
free of all costs and encumbrances, to the satisfaction of County of Oxford Public Works.
21. The Owner agrees in writing, to install fencing along the Trans Canada Trail and North
Street Road allowance as may be required by the County, to the satisfaction of the County.
22. The Owner agrees in writing, to the satisfaction of the County, through the subdivision
agreement, to ensure that all agreements of purchase and sale for lots abutting North Street
East shall have appropriate disclosure and warning clauses to inform future owners and
residents and the outdoor amenity areas for lots abutting North Street East may experience
noise levels that exceed the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Park’s NPC-300
Noise Guidelines.
23. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the Owner shall agree in writing to
satisfy the requirements of Canada Post Corporation with respect to advising prospective
purchasers of the method of mail delivery; the location of temporary Centralized Mail Box
locations during construction; and the provision of public information regarding the proposed
locations of permanent Centralized Mail Box locations, to the satisfaction of Canada Post.
24. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the Owner shall agree in writing, to
satisfy the requirements of Union Gas that the Owner/developer provide Union Gas Limited
with the necessary easements and/or agreements required for the provisions of gas
services, to the satisfaction of Union Gas Limited.
25. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the Owner shall secure clearance from
the Long Point Region Conservation Authority (LPRCA), indicating that final lot grading
plans, soil conservation plan, and stormwater management plans have been completed to
their satisfaction.
Page 99 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-314
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 28, 2019
Page 13 of 13
26. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the County of Oxford shall be advised
by the Town of Tillsonburg that Conditions 2 to 13 (inclusive), have been met to the
satisfaction of the Town. The clearance letter shall include a brief statement for each
condition detailing how each has been satisfied.
27. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the Owner shall secure clearance from
the County of Oxford Public Works Department that Conditions 12 to 22 (inclusive), have
been met to the satisfaction of County Public Works. The clearance letter shall include a
brief statement for each condition detailing how each has been satisfied.
28. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the County of Oxford shall be advised
by Canada Post Corporation that Condition 23 has been met to the satisfaction of Canada
Post. The clearance letter shall include a brief statement detailing how this condition has
been satisfied.
29. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the County of Oxford shall be advised
by Union Gas that Condition 24 has been met to the satisfaction of Union Gas.
The clearance letter shall include a brief statement detailing how this condition has been
satisfied.
30. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the County of Oxford shall be advised
by LPRCA that Condition 25 has been met to the satisfaction of LPRCA. The clearance
letter shall include a brief statement detailing how this condition has been satisfied.
31. Prior to the approval of the final plan by the County, the Owner shall provide a list of all
conditions of draft approval with a brief statement detailing how each condition has been
satisfied, including required supporting documentation from the relevant authority, to the
satisfaction of the County of Oxford.
32. This plan of subdivision shall be registered within three (3) years of the granting of draft
approval, after which time this draft approval shall lapse unless an extension is authorized
by the County of Oxford.
SIGNATURES
Authored by: original signed by Eric Gilbert, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
Approved for submission: original signed by Gordon K. Hough, RPP
Director
Page 100 of 564
August 6, 2019
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and
is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be
accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. This is not a plan of survey
Legend
2050
Notes
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N
102 Meters
Parcel Lines
Property Boundary
Assessment Boundary
Unit
Road
Municipal Boundary
Environmental Protection
Flood Overlay
Flood Fringe
Floodway
Environmental Protection (EP1)
Environmental Protection (EP2)
Zoning Floodlines
Regulation Limit
100 Year Flood Line
30 Metre Setback
Conservation Authority
Regulation Limit
Regulatory Flood And Fill Lines
Land Use Zoning (Displays
1:16000 to 1:500)
Plate 1: Location Map with Existing Zoning
File Nos: SB 19-06-7 & ZN 7-19-10- Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc.
Lot 72A, Part Lot 72, Plan 500, Town of Tillsonburg
Subject
Property
Falcon Road
North
Street East
Van
Norman
Drive
Centennial
Avenue
Page 101 of 564
August 6, 2019
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site andis for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not beaccurate, current, or otherwise reliable. This is not a plan of survey
Legend
2050
Notes
NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_17N
102 Meters
Parcel Lines
Property Boundary
Assessment Boundary
Unit
Road
Municipal Boundary
Environmental Protection Flood Overlay
Flood Fringe
Floodway
Environmental Protection (EP1)
Environmental Protection (EP2)
Zoning Floodlines Regulation Limit
100 Year Flood Line
30 Metre Setback
Conservation Authority Regulation Limit
Regulatory Flood And Fill Lines
Land Use Zoning (Displays 1:16000 to 1:500)
Centennial Avenue
Van
Norman
Drive
Subject
Property
Plate 2: 2015 Aerial Map
File Nos: SB 19-06-7 & ZN 7-19-10- Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc.
Lot 72A, Part Lot 72, Plan 500, Town of Tillsonburg
North Street
East
Falcon
Road
Trans
Canada
Trail
Page 102 of 564
Plate 3: Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision
File Nos: SB 19-06-7 & ZN 7-19-10- Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc.
Lot 72A, Part Lot 72, Plan 500, Town of Tillsonburg
Page 103 of 564
Page 104 of 564
Page 105 of 564
Page 106 of 564
Page 107 of 564
Page 108 of 564
Page 109 of 564
Page 110 of 564
Page 111 of 564
Page 112 of 564
~mail fpr Prescreening /
Box 1614
Woodstock ON N45 7Y3
Tel: 51 9-539-9800
Fax: 519-421 -4712
Website: www.oxfordcounty.ca
{(Pxford County Print Form
Growing stronger together
APPLICATION TYPE
[K} SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
1. Registered Owner(s):
D CONDOMINIUM APPROVAL
D CONDOMINIUM EXEMPTION
Name: MIKE HUTCHINSON PROPERTIES INC.
Address: 101 SPRUCE STREET WEST
AYLMER, ON
Postal Code: N5H 1B4
Applicant (if other than registered owner):
Email Address: mikehutchinson@rogers.com
Name: ANDREW GILVESY {CYRILJ. DEMEYERE LIMITED)
Address: 261 BROADWAY, BOX 460
TILLSONBURG, ON
Postal Code: N4G 4H8
Solicitor or Agent:
Email Address: agilvesy@cjdleng.com
Name: ANDREW GILVESY {CYRILJ. DEMEYERE LIMITED)
Address: 261 BROADWAY BOX 460
TILLSONBURG, ON
Postal Code: N4G 4H8
Ontario Land Surveyor:
Email Address:
Name: KIM HUSTED (KIM HUSTED SURVEYING LTD.)
Address: 30 HARVEY STREET
TILLSONBURG, ON
Postal Code: N4G 3J8 ...:...:....:..=..-=.=..;:::...,._ __ _ Email Address:
agilvesy@cjdleng.com
kimhusted@bellnet.ca
Unless otherwise noted, all communications will be sent to those listed above.
Residence:
Business:
Fax:
Residence:
Business:
Fax:
Residence:
Business:
Fax:
Residence:
Business:
Fax:
Do not send communications to: D Owner
2. Location of Subject Land:
D Applicant D Solicitor/Agent
Municipality TOWN OF TILLSON BURG former municipality
519-773-8491
519-765-3103
519-688-1000
519-842-3235
519-688-1000
519-842-3235
519-842-3638
519-842-3639
OOLS
Lot(s) ALL OF LOT 72A AND PART OF LOT 72
Lot(s)
Concession PLAN 500 ~~~~---------------
Part(s)
The subject land is located on the
lying between FALCON ROAD
Street and/or 911 Address (if any):
OFFICE USE ONLY
Date Application Received
cAiuOJ zJ;q
/ I
Registered Plan No.
Reference Plan No.
--=Sc..:Oc..:U:....:T-'-H'------side of N 0 RTH STREET
and TILLSON AVE.
Date Prescribed Information Complete PIN
(St./Rd./ Ave./Line)
(St./Rd./ Ave./Line)
ooo z-=t-oCJ(o d-
Static Form. DEC 2018
Page 113 of 564
County of Oxford-Application for Subdivision, Condominium or Condominium Exemption Page2
NATURE OF APPLICATION
3. Proposed Land Use
Indicate the intended uses of land in the proposal. Please use the following definitions for residential buildings
a) single detached: a detached residential building containing one dwelling unit
b) double or semi-detached: a residential building containing 2 dwelling units
c) townhouse or rowhouse: a residential building containing 3 or more dwelling units with individual direct access to the street or
parking area
d) apartment: a building containing 3 or more dwelling units each with access to the street or parking area via a common corridor.
Intended Use
single detached
double or semi-detached
town and row housing
apartments
seasonal (cottage or chalet)
mobile home
other (specify)* (Future _
Please fill out this table
Nos. of Lots or #of
Residential Letters of Blocks
Units on attached
draft plan
78 78
80 20
1
Acres or
Hectares
RESIDENTIAL
3.99 ha
2.24 ha
0.06
Units or #of Parking
Dwellings per Spaces for
hectare each use
19.5 2
35.7 2
In addition, complete this
section for Condominium
Applications
Floor
Coverage
(sq.m.)
Bedroom Count
Specify by# of
Residential Units
access to adjacent parcel) NON-RESIDENTIAL
neighbourhood commercial
commercial, other
industrial
institutional (specify below)*
0.71 ha
/' // /////
'/ . .· / / / /./// . ' park or open space
roads 2.82 ha
other (specify)* (Reserves) 0.01 ha
TOTAL 118 99 9.83 ha
4. Additional Inf ormation for Condominium Applications Only:
/,/// ////
,/' ,/ " ,.1 /
/ / / /////// /////
/ ·' / ,· / . . ./. // / .· / /
/ / / / / ~// / / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / . / / .// / / ./// / / . //////
/>/////
Application for: D Condominium Approval D Condominium Exemption
New Building
a) Has the local municipality approved a site plan?
If yes, Site Plan Application No.?
b) Has a site plan agreement been entered into?
c) Has a building permit been issued?
d) Is the proposed development under construction?
e) If construction is completed, indicate date of completion:
Yes
D
D
D
D
No
D
D
D
D
Page 114 of 564
County. of Oxford-Application for Subdivision, Condominium or Condominium Exemption
Existing Building
Date of Construction of existing building?
a) Is this the conversion of an existing building containing rental residential units? DYes D No
If yes, indicate the number of units to be converted.
The applicant is advised that an Engineering Report, indicating the strudural integrity of the building(s) proposed to be
converted may be required as part of the processing of the application.
5. Planning Information (All Applications):
a) Present Official Plan Designation applying to the subject land: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (SCHEDULE T-2)
Note: If the proposed land use conflicts with an Official Plan designation, this application will not be processed unless
an application to amend the County Official Plan has also been submitted for approval.
b) Present Zoning applying to the subject land: R2-5(H), R2-3 (HL R3-T(H), OSl, OS2
c) Provincial Policy Statement, 2014, as amended:
Is the plan consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. Yes [XI NoD
(see Item 4, Section A in the application guide)
d) Are the subject lands currently the subject of any other application under the Act, such as an application for consent
to sever, an Official Plan Amendment, a zoning by-law amendment, a Minister's Zoning Order, a minor variance or site
plan control?
NoD Yes [RJ If yes, File# UNKNOWN Status I Decision ZONE CHANGE-CONCURRENTLY FILED
e) Have the subject lands ever been the subject of any other application under the Act, such as an application for plan of
subdivision, a consent to sever, an Official Plan Amendment, a Minister's Zoning Order, a minor variance or site plan
control?
Unknown D
NoD Yes [[] If yes, File# 32T-97001 Status I Decision LAPSED/EXPIRED
f) Are there any easements or restrictive covenants affecting the subject land?
NoD Yes [XI If yes, describe the easement or restrictive covenant and its effect
PAGET MUNICIPAL DRAIN
SITE APPRAISAL AND EVALUATION
6. Existing Land Use:
Briefly describe:
a) the existing use of the subject lands
CULTIVATION OF LAND
b) if the subject lands are vacant or idle, describe the most recent productive use of the land
SEE ABOVE
c) do the subject lands constitute a brownfield site? If yes, please explain.
NO
Page 3 Page 115 of 564
County of Oxford -Application for Subdivision, Condominium or Condominium Exemption Page 4
7. Existing Buildings:
Describe any buildings, historical or otherwise, and any man-made features on the site and their proposed use. (eg . whether retained,
modified, demolished etc.)
N/A
b) if the subject lands are vacant or idle, describe the most recent productive use of the land
8. Natural Features:
What consideration has been given to preserving the natural amenities of the site (eg. prominent topographical features,
significant views, mature trees, etc.)
EXISTING FORMER IRRIGATION POND
SITE INFORMATION AND SERVICES
9. Services: (Existing I Proposed)
Water Supply and Sewage
A. Public Services
(i) municipal piped water
will the extension of a system be required
which water system will require extension
is supply capacity immediately available for this development
has a servicing study been submitted in support of this servicing solution
(ii) municipal sanitary sewers
will the extension of a system be required
which municipal system will require extension
is capacity immediately available for this development
has a servicing study been submitted in support of this servicing solution
(iii) other water supply: communal well, lake
B. Private Services
Is the site suitable for wells and/or septic systems?
(i) wells and/or septic systems for a residential subdivision
(ii) any development on individual private services not covered in B(i) above
(iii) Septic systems for a residential subdivision with fewer than 5 lots (or
units),
;mrl 4'i00 litrpc;; nr fpc;;c;; nf Pffh tPnt nrnrlttrPrl nPr rl;w
(iv) Septic systems for a residential subdivision with fewer than 5 lots (or
units), and 4500 litres or more of effluent produced per day
Yes No Studies Required
[ZJ D none
[Z] D
TILLSON BURG Servicing Study
00 D
[ZJ D
[X] D none
[] D
TILLSON BURG Servicing Study
[X] D
[Z] D
D 00 Servicing Study
D 00
D [Z] Hydrogeological Study
Servicing Options
D [ZJ Justification Study*
D [ZJ Hydrogeological Study
Servicing Options
(*including information on known water quality problems, depth of overburden and soil types)
Storm Water Management
sewers [Z] D Stormwater
ditches, swales 00 D Management
other (specify) [Z] D Study
Attached
n/a
00
D
n/a
00
[ZJ
D
D
D
IKJ
Page 116 of 564
County of Oxford-Application for Subdivision, Condominium or Condominium Exemption
SITE INFORMATION AND SERVICES-cont'd
10. Access Public access to the development is by:
Provincial Highway
County Road
Municipal Road (maintained all year)
Municipal Road (seasonally maintained)
*explain: owner of right-of-way or other
**describe boat docking and parking facilities
D
[X]
D
D
unopened road allowance
Right-of-way*
Water Access**
Other*
D
D
D
D
Page 5
on mainland and distance from development -------------------------------
11. Archaeological Potential
Does the subject land contain any areas of archaeological potential? [K] Yes
Does the plan permit development of land that contains known archaeological resources or [X] Yes
areas of archaeological potential?
D No
0 No
If yes to either question above, attach an Archaeological Assessment prepared by a person who holds a licence that is effective with
respect to the subject land, issued under Part VI (Conservation of Resources of Archaeological Value) of the the Ontario Heritage Act
and a Conservation Plan for any archaeological resources identified in the assessment.
Authorization of Owner(s) for an Agent to make this Ap_pli~ation
If the applicant is not the owner of the land that is the subject of this application, a written authorization of the owner that the
applicant is authorized to make the application must be included with this form, or the authorization set out below must be
completed.
1/WE, MIKE HUTCHINSON am I are the owner(s) of the land that is the subject of this application.
I /WE, authorize ANDREW GILVESY (CYRIL J. DEMEYE o make this application on my I our behalf.
Date (JJ/~ {;1,6b!j Signature ofOwner(s) --¥--::f--"'-..L-=--=--='------------------1
Dated this y'Jl day of '20 11
Signature of Owner L Applicant
Page 117 of 564
Page 118 of 564
HAYHOE™
-·HOMES·-
Pe.rforma.nce Conunw1ities Inc.
July 11, 2019
Eric Gilbert, MCIP RPP, M Sc., Senior Planner
Community and Strategic Planning I County of Oxford
P.O. Box 1614,21 Reeve Street Woodstock ON N4S 7Y3
Re: Zoning Bylaw Amendment for Northcrest Estates
Dear Mr. Gilbert,
This letter is to summarize the Zoning Bylaw Amendment application for Northcrest Estates. We request
that Lots 1 -98 be zoned to permit:
1. Rear yard depth: 6.0m minimum (note; where any portion of the rear yard is adjacent to North
Street the minimum rear yard depth is 7.5m)
2. Lot Coverage: 55% maximum
3. Interior Side yard: 1.2m minimum
4. Exterior side yard: 4.5m minimum
5. Covered decks, patios and porches (Lots 6-28; 37-69; 76-98): amend to permit structure to project
3.0m into rear yard and amend to permit 3.0m minimum setback between projection and rear
property line.
6. Covered decks, patios and porches (Lots 1-5; 29-36; 70-75): amend to permit structure to project
3 .Om into rear yard and amend to permit 4.5m minimum setback between projection and rear
property line.
Townhome Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 19-21, 44-47, 49, 50, 69, 78-80, 87 (20 total townhome lots):
7. Minimum Lot Frontage (Interior Unit): 6.0m
8. Minimum Lot Frontage (End Unit): 7.6m
9. Minimum Lot Area (Interior Unit): 190 sq. m
10. Minimum Lot Area (End Unit): 235 sq. m
Also, for comer Townhome lots we request that the site specific zoning include a provision that the longer
comer property line be deemed to be the front lot line.
Lot Number Deemed Front Lot Line
10 Westerly Lot Line
15 Easterly Lot Line
21 Westerly Lot Line
45 Easterly Lot Line
46 Westerly Lot Line
69 Easterly Lot Line
79 Westerly Lot Line
80 Easterly Lot Line
87 Westerly Lot Line
1 BARRIE BOULEVARD, ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO N5P 4B9 TEL. (519) 633-2050 FAX: (519) 633-2037
Page 119 of 564
We also confirm that the SWM Design is based on total impervious surface area of 65% to account for
55% Lot Coverage, shed coverage (10 sq. metres/shed) and typical driveway coverage.
I appreciate your assistance in commenting on our proposal,
Will Hayhoe. Performance Communities Realty Inc.
C.c. Kevin DeLeebeeck, Director of Operations, Town ofTillsonburg
Shayne Reitsma, Manager of Engineering, Town ofTillsonburg
Cephas Panschow, Development Commissioner, Town ofTillsonburg
Geno Vanhaelewyn, Chief Building Official, Town ofTillsonburg
Andrew Vranckx, Senior Design Technologist, CJDL Consulting Engineers
Andrew Gilvesy, Design Engineer, CJDL Consulting Engineers
Kim Husted, Kim Husted Surveying Ltd.
Mike Hutchinson, Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc.
Page 120 of 564
~ ~
OJ
STREET •e•
30.50m
jf1szm 14.81m
I -u 8 ;P-
"\ I 0 < <D ;u"' 0 OAl3 ~ L Irl 0 12.14m I c.o \ I )>
.~ 4.24m
I
N
Y' N 3 G) rn ~ \~ )> '"' 3 ;u "' )> <D 3 G) 3
I fTl
-1 FLUSH CONC. CURB
~ ~ "' "' G)
Jl 3 3 )> "' '"' ;u "' --J )> .,.
"' G) 3 f" 3 0 fTl m w N
b"58m
N 3.96m ~ 3 c.o m 1.52m
I OJ () -oo.,.
-1 I 0<0 ;u"' <D ~~3
I 0 ~
20.00m ROW <.n ----+ f----.-.. -<D ~ lU 3 )> I -u8 :f'-
I 0<0 -;u f"'l <D ~~3 12.14m I 0 ~
c.o 6.00m (MIN) &
8.00m ASPHALT 5.56m SHOWN SETBACK 3.96m 0 . ><lm '->
Y' N 3 G) ~ '"' )>
'"' --J ;u
--J )> "' 11 .. 56m 3 G)
.,.
0.44m .~ fTl 3
MOUNTABLE CURB
AND GUTTER FLUSH CONC. CURB 0 ;;, I G) 3 )> '"' I~ ;u "' )> <D
~ G) 3
I 3 ~ fTl
w 4.24m ~
I ~ c.o 1.52m ;;) I 0 i I I
-o ,.
0 <D l ;u 0 () 3 "' I I ~
i iii u t ~ 30.50m
I
e·
~ I N
~ 0
I
I
~ I (!11'0 (!) 010 (/)["'1~ crJ3 I~· orn~ l>~ t~R 3 t~f I
I
f I
I
0 ~~· fTl n "'
L7m
I I c~ ~ OJ
:::! I
;uO o
)> 3 0 3 ~;E 3
I I ~~ I IT1UI >cj (/):u
I ~i: "' z -T-----1--
I I I .
I ~ ~ I CD
0 ?' "' 0 I 3
3 "' 3
3.66m
I
I 6.0or;nJ. (MIN) SET ACK '-" "' "' T-7.58m.-- -c;: (}>
"' 1 SETBACK s'~OWN 'l 3 I I I
?' I 0 "' ?' 0 "' 3 0 I fTl "' "' n "' 13.93m 3 A 3
3.b6m
TO DECK
_l __ L __ .
I
I I
I
?' I I :::!
3 I
I "' 0
I
fTl 0 n "' 3.32m 3
•
A TO DECK
ft. 27m
I
fY' ~ ~ t[l)~ I I~· f'lO om'-" crJ3 ::El>o
2 o3 )>~ ;<: o;s::
I
"'z
I
LOT 19
TY PICAL INTERIOR TOWNHOME LOT
~
(1 STOREY)
NORTHCREST SUBDIVISION
MIKE HUTCHINSON
PROPERTIES INC.
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
s CALE: 1: 200 CJDL JOB 0626 4 JULY 2019
t~:-·t,.J'···~>i;'S',,.,k¥;·~1 ~'" '"''"'~;:;;~"'"~ .. 4 :r
DISTANCES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE IN METRES AND
CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048
LOT 19
ZONING SPECIFICATIONS
SETBACKS:
FRONT YARD
REAR YARD
SIDE YARD INTERIOR
FRONTAGES:
LOT OVERALL
LOT 19A
LOT 19B
LOT 19C
LOT 19D
LOT DEPTH
AREAS:
BUILDING OVERALL
LOT OVERALL
LOT 19A
LOT 198
LOT 19C
LOT 19D
LOT COVERAGE %
(INCL COVERED PORCH)
PROPOSED
6.00m
6.00m
1.20m
PROPOSED
PROPOSED
55.0%
SHOWN
6.00m
9.16m
1.30m
SHOWN
36.13m
10.01m
8.05m
8.05m
10.01m
30.50m
SHOWN
554.3m2
1102.0m2
245.6m2
245.6m2
50.3%
Page 121 of 564
"' 3
() 0 z ()
(f) 6 "' :::;: }> r "'
20.00m ROW
8.00m ASPHALT >=' "' "' 3
0.44m .~ I--MOUNTABLE CURB
rn
-1
II m m
-1 -)> -
AND GUTTER
"' 3
5.56m
5.56m
"'
()) 3
30.50m
30.50m
N
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
_,.
0 3
LOT 20
TYPICAL INTERIOR TOWNHOME LOT
(2 STOREY)
NORTHCREST SUBDIVISION
MIKE HUTCHINSON
PROPERTIES INC.
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
SCALE: 1: 200 CJDL JOB 0626 4 JULY 2019
f'"~1.-... ,J4";'•·\!\i\i"•\'·f''"4,,.,\;,?V'~:;~;cct,<•~J
DISTANCES SHOWN ON lHIS PLAN ARE IN METRES AND
CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048
LOT 20
ZONING SPECIFICATIONS
SETBACKS:
FRONT YARD
REAR YARD
SIDE YARD INTERIOR
FRONTAGES:
LOT OVERALL
LOT 20A
LOT 208
LOT 20C
LOT 20D
LOT DEPTH
AREAS:
BUILDING OVERALL
LOT OVERALL
LOT 20A
LOT 208
LOT 20C
LOT 20D
LOT COVERAGE %
(INCL. COVERED PORCH)
PROPOSED
6.00m
6.00m
1.20m
PROPOSED
PROPOSED
55.0%
SHOWN
6.00m
9.16m
1.30m
SHOWN
28.38m
7.79m
6.40m
6.40m
7.79m
30.50m
SHOWN
385.7m2
865.6m2
237.6m2
195.2m2
195.2m2
237.6m2
44.6%
Page 122 of 564
~
0
co 3
LOT 30
TYPICAL LOT
BACKING ON ARTERIAL STREET
SCALE: 1: 200
(NORTH STREET)
NORTHCREST SUBDIVISION
MIKE HUTCHINSON
PROPERTIES INC.
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
CJDL JOB 0626 4 JULY 2019
( 1 .~· . . 5.· ~ETR. ES 10 ··1. ··· · ·t. . I
DISTANCES SHO'MII ON THIS PLAN ARE IN METRES AND
CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048
~
NORTH STREE · COUNTY RD. No. 20
~
0
e .::oJ 3
PROPOSED 1.2m HIGH
BLACK VINYL CHAIN LINK
FENCE 0.05m ON LOT
SIDE
\----
\
"'--I "--.)
\
I
\
\
/
\
\
\
\
/
/
\
\
/
/
\
.N
0
co Ul
3
'l ;;o
N
0
~
Ul
3
;;o
0 :::;;;:
~ rB ;;olN H ~~
0
LN m I 0 C
Ul 3 r--..J
;d ;;o R' Q ln
1'1 1'1 z 0
1'1 Ul Ul C) 3 ___, 1'1 I
\
\
\
\
;;o 0 Ul---. < :::;;;: 1'1;;::
1'1 zaJ:z:
p~ n
A
\ I I
)
COVERED PORCH
\
\ \._-.------------
/
/
lN
DECK lo
0
3
COVERED
DECK
30
0 I'l-l'
R'O(.n Ao
Ul Ul 3 Il'l 0__,-----. :::;;;:m~ Z:~>z n~ A
GARAGE
-----
31
STREET •c•
Page 123 of 564
STREET •a•
E " 0
I
I 1----..--l---+-----,3-.1-1m ________ r-"":':"2~24-;-m-, 20.00m ROW
I \ 6 ~ 0 ~L----~8'""".86=-m_J:~==I----1~:::;.2:;::0n:fi---------tt-----~ ;::
4.05m
w
5.5im El 3 ~m ~ s;s ~~~-_j~ :;:j 886m
1----TO_D.:_· C_K_---121 ~ ;6 -.;::t-~ Jj
E <..?
OJ <(
"' ct: 1 ~~~ 6.oom
"' <(
<..? I
r<1 ci E ui
·, · SETBACK 2.86m 1.50m "'~-~-~---~--~~~ I ~ 1.20m 1-'r
w
E <..?
OJ <(
"' ct: "' <(
<..?
4.05m
tn
~
4.05m
w E <..? OJ <( "' ct: "' <(
<..?
w
E <..?
OJ <(
"' ct: "' <( <..?
4.05m
E N <D ci
"' _J E<C ""' .,w .o 0(/j
u
E z 0 " u U") ..= E "' ~
E U")
ci
E OJ
<li
r---l--l
1
- --l--1----+-----------+--------~i""""""""""""""FL""'u""sH""""c""o""Nc""' . .j::c=u=R=B==:o
~ El E 366m ·r-... [;:;
s I El G 6 u ~ "':il ..=
" ~I ~ 0 LD l
<D 1 -.:::t" ~~O 8.15m
6.Dom (MIN) 1 ;()~ gj 1 I CONC. SIDEWALK SETBACK E E NO o.. 1--tJ ~. l ro ro ~~I . r---st:1c~H:rN--+...!::~~---"~9-------...!:=..L-.L------==03 --- - - - -
~ ~ ~ 1~ ·-"-co:::..:N.:..oc::... -=s:.:..::ID::..::E:..:..:W,...cA:;:.LK-+--~---1
T 3.66m OJ "80.. ~ilm 8.15m
E I "' E L[) ~----.......JE''e1.73m C(~ ~~~ ~ -.:::t-~EI . ..., ~~I
. ~ ___ l __ -!--+-+--------+------"':~-·~ __ ~USH CON5.:._ URB
. I EEl ~~ I ~ ~ .-+----.!3....,.. 66"""m---l ~~I Ul~>J I "' E <( ~
E l!SL:i Jj ::d ~ L[) N
;!: li UJ • :;jl 0 0 -.:::t-~
" ~~ I 1 ~ ~~ ~f---'.------'--8_.86.._m-+-----i
L_t __ ~~~----~1~3.~11~m-------------~2~2~4m~
30.50m
8.00m ASPHALT
E N U")
ci 1~ 1--0.44m
MOUNTABLE CURB
AND GUTTER
I--
E "' N
0i
E N U")
ci
~
-m -
1-w w
II
1-m
""' '),~'),·
LOT 45
TYPICAL CORNER TOWNHOME LOT
(2 STOREY)
NORTHCREST SUBDIVISION
MIKE HUTCHINSON
PROPERTIES INC.
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
SCALE: 1: 200 CJDL JOB 0626 9 JULY 2019
l"···v t:.:-~;';;;""';;i0;t}·•·v;'t~5r'l'" ,,,.~;:,:;_ , .•. , .... 1 l
DISTANCES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE IN METRES AND
CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048
LOT 45
ZONING SPECIFICATIONS
SETBACKS: PROPOSED SHOWN
FRONT YARD 6.00m 6.00m
REAR YARD 6.00m 9.16m
SIDE YARD INTERIOR 1.20m 1.25m
SIDE YARD EXTERIOR 4.50m 4.55m
FRONTAGES: PROPOSED SHOWN
LOT OVERALL 31.58m
LOT 45A 7.74m
LOT 45B 6.40m
LOT 45C 6.40m
LOT 45D 11.04m
LOT DEPTH 30.50m
AREAS: PROPOSED SHOWN
BUILDING OVERALL 385.7m2
LOT OVERALL 958.6m2
LOT 45A
LOT 45B 195.2m2
LOT 45C 195.2m2
LOT 45D
LOT COVERAGE % 55.0% 40.2%
(INCL. COVERED PORCH}
Page 124 of 564
E
D' oi
E "' 0
<Xi
E "' 0
OJ
4.82m
TO DEC
I
1 4.27m
E 16 ;g w ...; 10
~I 6 <D w "'I o
I
6.0om· (MIN) 1
SET ACK
I
I
1
3.66m
El :.:: ~ u ·w "'lo
~"' ::;u
~-<
Ef':'
N(/) Ol<jt
f
E "' 0 <Xi
E "' 0 <Xi
Eoz N-<3: Nmo . f-I ~ ~ v1 t
32.00m
f
u
0 co
rn
0 co
~
CfJ
14.81m
E I u 0 "' 0> 0
"" "-
4.24m
w E 0
D' <( "' 0::: ...; <(
0
E w 0 .... <( "' ...; n::
<(
0
3.96m
0 E n "' CfJ n n
3.96m
w E 0 .... <( "' n:: ...; <( 0
w E 0 0> <( "' n:: ...; <(
0
4.24m
1.52m
STREET •e•
_·.·.·r.··.·.·_.·.·.· ..
·,,; . . -.·
-.-..
: :~
·Ill
• "0 .~
20.00m ROW
B.OOm ASPHALT
"'~ ~ 1-1--0.44m ~ MOUNTABLE CURB
i1i AND GUTTER
u z 0 0
E "'
E D' "' ui
f--c----;
. ·~
. 'N ·"' . ·ci
-m -
1-w w
II 1-
OJ
LOT 80
TYPICAL INTERIOR TOWNHOME LOT
(1 STOREY)
NORTHCREST SUBDIVISION
MIKE HUTCHINSON
PROPERTIES INC.
TOWN OF ~LLSONBURG
SCALE: 1: 200 CJDL JOB 0626 4 JULY 2019
L"'"'l ,_ :J·;,.J, .. ,.<>:;;·•··""'l.>:".:"''~::;,~.,," .. ·";.r
DISTANCES SHOWN ON lHIS PLAN ARE IN METRES AND
CAN BE CONVERTED TO FEET BY DIVIDING BY 0.3048
LOT 80
ZONING SPECIFICATIONS
SETBACKS: PROPOSED SHOWN
FRONT YARD 6.00m 6.00m
REAR YARD 6.00m 9.08m
SIDE YARD INTERIOR 1.20m 1.22m
SIDE YARD EXTERIOR 4.50m 4.52m
FRONTAGES: PROPOSED SHOWN
LOT OVERALL 39.25m
LOT BOA 13.23m
LOT BOB 8.05m
LOT BOC 8.05m
LOT BOD 9.91m
LOT DEPTH 32.00m
AREAS: PROPOSED SHOWN
BUILDING OVERALL 554.3m2
LOT OVERALL 1264.8m2
LOT BOA 432.2m2
LOT BOB 257.7m2
LOT SOC 257.7m2
LOT BOD 317.2m2
LOT COVERAGE % 55.0% 43.8%
(INCL. COVERED PORCH)
Page 125 of 564
FILE No:
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
1
1:1 'l(j\9 \
APPLICATION FOR ZONE CHANGE -[Ng~,Jkcv.e..Si Est~~J L .. -~: .. ~ '-~\,:~~~-·~o·-~-~.:.·• ~~"--"'"' ·.-,-~. o_::~·:~ =~~',::~-~-~: :·~:-.-:~: .. -~. :--, 'l
1. Registered Owner(s):
Name: Mike Hutchinson Properties Inc. Phone: Residence: --------
Address: 101 Spruce Street, Aylmer, ON, Business: 519.773.8491
Postal Code: N5H 3J1
Fax: ____________ _
E-mail: mikehutchinson@rogers.com -----------------------
Applicant (if other than registered owner):
Name: ---------------------------------------Phone: Residence: ---------
Address: ------------------------------------Business: ---------------
Postal Code: _____________ __
Solicitor or Agent (if any):
Name: Will Hayhoe
Address: 1 Barrie Blvd., StThomas, ON
Postal Code: ___ N_5_P_4_B_9 ___________ _
Fax: ______________ _
E-mail: --------------------------------
Phone: Business: 519.633.2050 x224
Fax: 519.633.2037
E-mail: will.hayhoe@hayhoehomes.com
All communications will be sent to those listed above. If you do not wish correspondence to be sent to the
D Owner, D Applicant, or D Solicitor/Agent, please specify by checking the appropriate box.
Name and address of any holders of any mortgage, charges or other encumbrances (if known):
none
2. Subject Land(s):
a) Location:
Municipality Town of Tillsonburg
Concession No. -------------------
Registered Plan No.-----------
Reference Plan No. _____________________ _
former municipality------------------------
Lot(s) All of Lot 72A and Part of Lot 72 Judge's Plan Registered
Lot(s) as Plan No. 500
Part(s) -----------------
The proposed lot is located on the ______________ side of __________ Street, lying between
-----------------------Street and Street.
Street and/or Civic Address (911#): -------------------------------------------------
b) Official Plan Designation: Existing: Low Density Residential
Proposed: Low Density Residential
If the proposed designation is different than the existing designation, has an application for Official Plan Amendment been
filed with the County of Oxford? D No D Yes
Page 126 of 564
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG APPLICATION FOR ZONE CHANGE Page 2
c) Zoning: Present: _R_2_-s_(H_)_, o_s_1_. ,o_s,.--2_, R_2_-3_(_H_).-.F __ D ... R_3_----=T(=-H_) :----:----:::------------
Proposed: as p~ /-ettet" dA-kJ... O'ul'1 I«« "2.otj
d) Uses: Present: __ V_a_c_a_n_t _La_n_d_aw_a_iti_n.:::g_d_e_v_e_lo.:_p_m_e_n_t _______________________ _
Proposed: (Include description) Residential building lots for single detached and town home dwellings
3. Buildings/Structures:
For all buildings/structures, either existing or proposed on the subject lands, please supply the following information:
Existing/Proposed
Use:
Date Constructed (if known):
Floor Area:
Setbacks:
Front lot line
Side lot lines
Rear lot line
0 None Existing
Building 1
none
0 None Proposed
Building 2
Please complete for residential, commercial/industrial or institutional uses.
,--~R~E-S-ID_E_N_T-IA-L---.--~C~O-M_M_E_R_C_IA-U~--.--~IN_S_T-IT_U_T_IO_N_A_L---,
Apt., semi, townhouse, retail, restaurant, church,
etc.
OF UNITS
·················--···-·-·····-····-·-·-········-·-·-·· ······-·-··········-·-·-····-··-·-· ··---·--······-·-·-···-·····-·-
CONVERSION/ADDITION TO EXISTING BUILDING
Describe
TOTAL# OF UNITS/BEDS --·-·-Fl:ooRARfi"A . ··--·---·---·---
by dwelling unit or by type (office, retail
common rooms, etc.)
oriieRFAcli:iries -------· --
(playground, underground parking, pool, etc.)
OF LOTS (for subdivision)
se"A.riN-Gc.A:P".A:.cirv··-· -----· ----
(for restaurant, assembly hall, etc.)
OF STAFF .........................................
OPEN STORAGE REQUIRED? ······---··-·····-·----···-·····---·······-·-·-···-···-·-·-·-·-... ·-· .. ·-········-----AccESSORY RESIDENTIAL USE?
4. Site Information (proposed use(s):
Lot Frontage
Lot Depth
Lot Area
Lot Coverage
Front Yard
Rear Yard
Interior Side Yard
INDUSTRIAL
If ···acces-s-a·;y····resi·a-en-tial u·se~·--·
complete residential section
Exterior Side Yard (corner lot)
Landscaped Open Space (%)
No. of Parking Spaces
No. of Loading Spaces
Building Height
Width of Planting Strip
Driveway Width
Page 127 of 564
'foWN OF TILLSON BURG APPLICATION FOR ZONE CHANGE
5. Services: (check appropriate box)
Water supply
Sewage Disposal
Storm Drainage
6. Access:
Publicly owned and operated piped water system
Privately owned and operated individual well
Other (specify) _________ _
Publicly owned and operated sanitary sewer system
Privately owned and operated individual septic tank
Other (specify)---------
Municipal Sewers
Municipal Drains
Ditches
Swales
0
0
Unopened Road Allowance
Existing
0
0
0
0
0
0
Provincial Highway
County Road
0
[J;j/ Right-of-Way owned by ______ _
Municipal Road maintained all year
Municipal Road seasonally maintained
7. Generallnformation:
0
0
Other (specify)----------
Proposed
~
0
0
cv-
0
0
0
0
0
Page 3
a) Is the Subject Land the subject of regulations for flooding or fill and construction permits of the Long Point Region
Conservation Authority? 1Jrl1o 0 Yes
If yes, has an Application been filed with the Conservation Authority? 0 No 0 Yes
b) Present land use(s) of adjacent properties: 0')<.~v J.. Co u.ll\±f Ret; ( 1f-~i I ' f( e.s id ~itt I
c) Characteristics of subject land (check appropriate space(s) and add explanation, if necessary)
(i) Does the land contain environmental features such as wetlands, woodlots, watercourses, etc.?
0 No 0 Yes lfyes,describe --------------------------
(ii) Has any part of the land been formally used for any purpose other than agricultural purposes?
~No 0 Yes
If yes, describe former use:
B. Historicallnformation:
a) Is the subject land the subject of a current Application for Consent to the Oxford County Land Division Committee or a current
application for draft plan of subdivision to the County of Oxford?
~No 0 Yes ---+ Application No.
b) Have the subject land(s) ever been the subject of any other application under the Planning Act, such as an application for
approval of an Official Plan amendment, a zoning by-law amendment, a Minister's Zoning Order amendment, consent, a minor
variance, or approval of a plan of subdivision?
~No 0 Unknown
0 Yes---+ File No. ______ _ Status/Decision----------
c) If known, the date the subject land was acquired by the owner?
d) If known, the length of time that the existing uses of the subject land have continued?
Page 128 of 564
.. rOWN OF TILLSONBURG APPLICATION FOR ZONE CHANGE Page4
r .............................................. ~iJ'iiloriiaii.oil .. of'oW:iler(sfior·"A·i>·i>Ti.cailti"A9·;;·;;Tto .. iViai<e.iii·;;··p;i)J>'iicati.oil ........................................................................ l
i11we, fJ,k ,~.Sr:>/7 , am/are the owner(s) of the land that is the subject of this application for zonei l'"!i' a;:;;;;;;;;-/,/illl{::!:::;::>s , to make thl' applloatioo oo my/ooc behalf. I
L.!?..?..~~.r. .................................................................. ~.i.9n.?..~~r.~.9.(9..~!J~f.(~2 ............................................................................. ~!.9.~.?.~~.r.~ .. 9.f .. Q~~.~E(.~L .................................................... ~
THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED IN THE PRESENCE OF A COMMISSIONER FOR TAKING AFFIDAVITS
1/W e W ; ll taW\. ~'1 IAo'L of the N c..ta.i.a pa.l; 4-1
of Ce.Ylh·a.( 12fj ~~ in the Lo~J.o~:f-1 of __ E..,...!J+--; ""'--------
DO SOLEMNLY DECLARE THAT:
All of the prescribed information contained in this application is true and that the information contained in the documents that may accompany
this application is true and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true and knowing that it is of the same force and
effect as if made under oath and by virtue of the Canada Evidence Act.
DEgJ\Rt:D before me at the ·_-_.I.!..D~w~· 0~-----~~· 'I""_
of A \ i\ lSOr\bL.L VJj r-: ::=;/ in the AAJ~ //flY "\.
L ou..r.=k:\ of-===:=D;;;...'/..~r-o __ •"_UJ_,__ ___ -:-=-Owner( S)ipiiCallt
this l \ day of ·: I i.._ \..___( 204
hi 11 !\~ ;/ Hl:LeNOwner(s)/Applicant /Jz 10A. I~~'~ J?HNSON, a Commissioner,
A Commissioner foY\aking Affidavits etc., Pro~mce of Ontario, for the
Notes:
u Cor~oratron of the Town of Tillsonburg
Exprres: March 1 o, 2020
1. Applications will not be considered complete until all requested information has been supplied.
2. It is required that one original of this application (including the sketch/site plan) be filed, accompanied by the
applicable fee of $1 ,200 .. 00 in cash or cheque, payable to the Treasurer, Town of Tillson burg. A fee of
$2,400.00 will be charged if an application is required 'after the fact' (after the use has occupied the site).
Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act-Notice of Collection & Disclosure
The collection of personal information on this form is legally authorized under Sec.34 of the Planning Act and O.Reg.545/06 for the
purpose of processing your planning application. Questions about this collection should be directed to the Director of Community
Planning at the County of Oxford, 21 Reeve St., P.O. Box 1614, Woodstock, ON N4S 7Y3 or at 519-539-9800 (ext.3207).
Pursuant to Sec.1.0.1 of the Planning Act, and in accordance with Sec.32(e) of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of
Privacy Act, it is the policy of the County of Oxford to make all planning applications and supporting material available to the public.
Page 129 of 564
Report Title
Economic Development Advisory Committee
Resolution Regarding Proposed Water/Wastewater
Billing Changes
Report No. DCS 19-33
Author Cephas Panschow, Development Commissioner,
Jesse Goossens, Chair
Meeting
Type Council Meeting
Council Date October 28, 2019
Attachments Letter to Council – Proposed Changes
Oxford County Report CS 2019-30
Page 1 / 3 Economic Development Advisory Committee Resolution Regarding Proposed Water/Wastewater Billing Changes
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive report DCS 19-33 Economic Development Advisory
Committee Resolution Regarding Proposed Water/Wastewater Billing Changes;
AND THAT Council supports the Economic Development Advisory Committee recommendation;
AND THAT the Economic Development Advisory Committee be authorized to
present their concerns to the County of Oxford.
BACKGROUND
At the Economic Development Advisory Committee meeting on October 8, 2019, the Committee
reviewed County of Oxford Report CS 2019-30 Water and Wastewater Billing and Collections
Review and the accompanying draft bylaw. Upon review, the Committee concluded that the
changes unfairly impact property owners. For example, while property taxes were made the
responsibility of property owners in the late 1990s (that was also when the Vacant Tax Rebate
program was created), property taxes are more or less fixed, unlike water/wastewater, which is
determined based on the tenant’s use.
Having the property owner responsible for these use induced charges would likely remove
tenants’ incentive to conserve and therefore negatively impact the County’s stated goals of
environmental sustainability and poverty reduction (as these costs will inevitably be passed on to
tenants).
Further, based on the information in the report, it appears that the amount of arrears is relatively
small, which suggests that the problem is not that significant.
The Committee then passed the following resolution:
THAT the Committee advises Council of their objections to the County’s proposed policy
changes to water and waste water billing which would shift responsibility of water and
waste water service costs to industrial, commercial and residential landlords and will
negatively impact environmental sustainability, affordability and fairness;
Page 130 of 564
Page 2 / 3 CAO
AND THAT the committee request Council’s support for the committee to present their
opposition to the proposed policy changes to County Council.
The Committee is requesting Council’s support to engage directly with the County of Oxford in
order to provide feedback and advice regarding the proposed changes.
Staff believes that the Committee has identified some key concerns with the proposed bylaw
and, should Council provide their support, will continue to support the Committee as they
engage with the County.
Staff has also identified a number of concerns with the text of the draft bylaw and will be
providing these comments to the County as well.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There is no financial impact related to this report.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT
1. Excellence in Local Government
☐ Demonstrate strong leadership in Town initiatives
☒ Streamline communication and effectively collaborate within local government
☐ Demonstrate accountability
2. Economic Sustainability
☒ Support new and existing businesses and provide a variety of employment opportunities
☐ Provide diverse retail services in the downtown core
☐ Provide appropriate education and training opportunities in line with Tillsonburg’s
economy
3. Demographic Balance
☐ Make Tillsonburg an attractive place to live for youth and young professionals
☐ Provide opportunities for families to thrive
☐ Support the aging population and an active senior citizenship
4. Culture and Community
☐ Promote Tillsonburg as a unique and welcoming community
☐ Provide a variety of leisure and cultural opportunities to suit all interests
☐ Improve mobility and promote environmentally sustainable living
Page 131 of 564
Page 3 / 3 CAO
Report Approval Details
Document
Title:
Report DCS 19-33 Economic Development Advisory Committee Resolution
Regarding Proposed Water Wastewater Billing Changes.docx
Attachments: - Letter_to_Council-
Proposed_Changes_to_Water_and_Wastewater_Billing(Oct18,19).pdf
Final Approval
Date:
Oct 22, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Ron Shaw - Oct 22, 2019 - 10:08 AM
Page 132 of 564
October 18, 2019
Town of Tillsonburg
200 Broadway, Suite 204
Tillsonburg, ON N4G 5A7
RE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE RESOLUTION REGARDING
PROPOSED CHANGES TO WATER AND WASTEWATER BILLING
Mayor & Members of Council,
The Development Committee passed the following resolution at their October 8, 2019 meeting:
THAT the Committee advises Council of their objections to the County’s proposed policy
changes to water and waste water billing which would shift responsibility of water and
waste water service costs to industrial, commercial and residential landlords and will
negatively impact environmental sustainability, affordability and fairness.
AND THAT the committee request Council’s support for the committee to present their
opposition to the proposed policy changes to County Council.
As an advisory committee to Council, this advice is being provided for Council’s consideration.
Sincerely,
Jesse Goossens, Chair
Page 133 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 1 of 12
To: Warden and Members of County Council
From: Director of Corporate Services
Water and Wastewater Billing and Collections Review
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. That Report No. CS 2019-30 and the attached draft Water By-Law and Draft
Receivable Management Policy, as amended, be received;
2. And further, that Council authorize staff to commence a public engagement
campaign as outlined in Report No. CS 2019-30 and report back to Council with
final policy recommendations for consideration by December 2019.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS
Introduction of a Water By-Law to govern the County’s municipal drinking water supply
Incorporates updated arrears policy to reduce administration costs and minimize loss of
revenues
Public engagement campaign to inform customers and solicit feedback regarding the
proposed changes
Implementation Points
Upon Council’s approval of the recommendations contained in this report, staff will initiate a
public engagement campaign to inform and solicit feedback from the public with a view to
determine the most cost effective and efficient service delivery model. Incorporating public
feedback, and in consultation with the County’s Billing Agents, staff will bring the Water By-Law
and related policies back to Council in December for further consideration.
Financial Impact
Adoption of the recommendations contained in this report have no financial impact beyond what
is included in the 2019 budget.
The Treasurer has reviewed this report and agrees with the financial impact information.
Risks/Implications
The recommended revision to the Receivables Management Policy, to hold landlords
responsible for water and wastewater costs in the same manner as other property owners, will
allow transfer of arrears to property tax bills to minimize delinquent accounts from becoming
uncollectable revenues, placing an unfair financial burden on the systems’ costs for other users.
Page 131 of 285Page 134 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 2 of 12
A formal water by-law that governs the County’s water systems, by outlining rules based on best
practices of other municipal water services, will provide a basis for equitable and efficient use of
the systems.
Any change to the current billing and collection services will involve collaboration with our
current service providers to ensure assignment of the appropriate resources and
accountabilities are clearly set out in a comprehensive project plan in order to be well executed
without disrupting billing and collecting services or negatively impacting customer service.
Strategic Plan (2015-2018)
County Council adopted the County of Oxford Strategic Plan (2015-2018) at its regular meeting
held May 27, 2015. The initiative contained within this report supports the Values and Strategic
Directions as set out in the Strategic Plan as it pertains to the following Strategic Directions:
3. iii. A County that Thinks Ahead and Wisely Shapes the Future - Demonstrated commitment to
sustainability by:
- Ensuring that all significant decisions are informed by assessing all options with regard to the community,
economic and environmental implications including:
o Life cycle costs and benefit/costs, including debt, tax and reserve levels and implications
5. i. A County that Performs and Delivers Results – Enhance our customer service focus and
responsiveness to our municipal partners and the public by:
- Implementing clearly defined customer service standards and expectations
- Regularly monitoring and reporting customer service performance
5. ii. A County that Performs and Delivers Results - Deliver exceptional services by:
- Regularly reviewing service level standards to assess potential for improved access to services / amenities
- Conducting regular service reviews to ensure delivery effectiveness and efficiency
- Identify best practices and appropriate benchmarking
DISCUSSION
Background
The February 27, 2019, Council Agenda included Report No. CS 2019-09 entitled “Water and
Wastewater Billing and Collections Review” prepared to present DFA’s findings and
recommendations from their independent review.
The following is an excerpt of the recommendations contained in the staff report:
“That Report No. CS 2019-09 and attached “Oxford County Water & Wastewater Billing
and Collection Policies and Practices Review”, dated January 31, 2019, prepared by
DFA Infrastructure International Inc., be received;
And further, that staff be directed to circulate this Report to initiate discussions with the
current water and wastewater billing and collection service providers and report back to
Council with final recommendations for consideration by the end of April 2019.”
Page 132 of 285Page 135 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 3 of 12
As a result of loss of quorum of Council at the time this report was to be considered, the
recommendations were not considered at the meeting. As such, the report appeared as
Unfinished Business on the following two regular Council Agendas, however was not brought to
the floor for consideration. To further productive consultations that began in preparation of the
aforementioned report regarding the DFA recommendations, staff continued meetings with our
billing providers to discuss implementation of some of the identified best practices.
Comments
The County is responsible for providing water and wastewater services to its residents within the
municipality including billing and collection based on a user pay/fee for service regime.
The structure supporting the delivery of water and wastewater services to residents in Oxford,
including third party contracted service arrangements and agreements with area municipalities,
is illustrated in an organization chart as Attachment 1 to this report.
In the spring of 2018, DFA Infrastructure International Inc. (DFA) was retained to assist in
reviewing the water and wastewater billing and collections processes as a way to ensure a fair,
equitable and efficient service is provided for the County’s water and wastewater customers.
The DFA Report identified a number of best practices with respect to water and wastewater
billing and collection policies and processes including, but not limited to:
assigned accountability for billing and collection be with Finance and supported by
Public Works;
of the municipalities that outsource, no municipality has more than one billing and
collection service provider;
all of the municipalities outsource meter reading;
most municipalities have either migrated, or are migrating to remote meter reading
technology;
many have a multi-step process for outstanding payments including staged notices and
timeframes;
many municipalities are charging a fixed service charge when water is shut off;
a few of the municipalities have policies containing a provision that the property owner
must be the customer for water and wastewater services, allowing any default of
payment for the services to be transferred to tax rolls for recovery;
frequency of billing cycle varies – typically bi-monthly with high volume billed monthly;
most municipalities have a water by-law that governs the control and use of the water
system; and
many municipalities have administration fees for services such as transferring arrears to
tax rolls, account setup and non-sufficient funds.
In consultation with Tillsonburg and ERTH billing providers one concern identified was how
changing the County’s water arrears process may impact the billing and collecting costs. In
order to ensure a fair evaluation process of delivering the service, establishing a Water By-law
Page 133 of 285Page 136 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 4 of 12
became the first priority which would serve in designing a more effective and efficient billing and
collection practice.
As a result, County staff from Finance and Public Work collaboratively drafted a Water By-law.
The draft By-law, attached to this report as Attachment 2, was informed and prepared on the
basis of:
incorporating current procedures and practices;
reviewing neighbouring municipalities’ Water By-Laws and discussions with staff
including those that use outside billing agents;
reviewing and discussing the By-Law with ERTH and Tillsonburg billing staff regarding
current and proposed processes and the effect on their billing and collecting operations,
and incorporating their feedback in the draft By-Law; and
reviewing and discussing the By-Law with the City of Woodstock and the Town of
Tillsonburg Water operations staff, and incorporating their feedback in the draft By-Law.
The resulting draft Water By-Law contains many of the current processes and procedures
exercised through the water operations and billing and collection service agreements. It
provides a framework for consistent and clearly defined work processes to follow in governing
municipal drinking water systems. There are a few notable changes to the current processes
being proposed in the draft Water By-law and reflected in the Accounts Receivable
Management Policy amendments, namely:
Arrears policy;
Administrative fees and charges; and
Vacancies.
The proposed changes are described in more detail under the respective headings that follow.
Arrears Policy
The County’s water and wastewater arrears policy is established under the Receivables
Management Policy and is administered jointly by County staff and the County’s billing service
providers.
The County’s billing service providers, Town of Tillsonburg, ERTH Solutions and ETP currently
issue water and/or wastewater bills to specific individuals – property owners or non-owners such
as tenants, based on the applicant for new accounts. The processes are as follows:
Town of Tillsonburg – forms are submitted to the Town at the time of setting up a hydro
account;
ETP – initiated by a phone call requesting a hydro account; and
Page 134 of 285Page 137 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 5 of 12
ERTH Solutions – initiated by a phone call or, if no one calls in, they contact the County
to provide the required billing information. County staff then perform a search to obtain
tenant or property owner information which is then relayed to ERTH for billing purposes.
As prescribed in the Receivables Management Policy, in the event that an account is in arrears,
notifications are to be sent to the account holder via automated voice messages, arrears letters
and property notice postings. In a case where the account holder is the property owner, the
property service can be shut-off if the arrears are over $250. And, if the account remains unpaid
after 90 days, accounts are dealt with in the following manner:
Property Owners - accounts are transferred to the property taxes. County staff prepare
letters to property owners advising them of the transfer to property taxes and where
these accounts can be paid.
Tenants or Property Owners have changed – accounts are sent to collections. County
staff use the arrears listing provided by ERTH and ETP to refer to the County’s collection
agent.
Tillsonburg – Tillsonburg staff manage this process, however, accounts are sent to
collections and a summary of the accounts sent to collections is provided to the County
once a year.
The current process for collecting water and wastewater arrears has proven to be inefficient to
administer and maximize revenue retention as a result of a combination of the following:
Customers do not always provide accurate information on whether they are the tenant or
the owner and billing agents do not have access to information to verify owner or tenant
information.
All accounts sent for collections or to the tax roll off must be manually reviewed to verify
the tenant and owner information.
Although shutting off service is an effective mechanism for collecting arrears, not all
services can be shut off, such as commercial, tenant and single-metered properties with
multiple tenants.
Water operations staff must divert time from performing system maintenance to perform
arrears shut-offs.
There are some situations where last minute payments are made and the water operator
is waiting at the property for verification before performing the shut off.
Tenant accounts are sent to collection rather than to the property tax roll for collection,
as there is no incentive to pay through shutting off service for tenants vacating the
premises
There are significant costs associated with collections services.
Page 135 of 285Page 138 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 6 of 12
Listings of accounts written off or sent to collections by the billing provider are not always
received in a timely manner which can result in property ownership changes, impeding
the ability to collect at the time of property sale.
Arrears payments are allocated to hydro arrears first, and then to the water and
wastewater arrears, giving hydro balances priority over water and wastewater.
In 2018, 93.3% of all water and wastewater accounts written off were sent to collection.
Although the Municipal Act allows unpaid accounts to be transferred to property taxes, the
County’s current process does not enable the County to collect unpaid water and wastewater
accounts through the tax roll unless we can verify the account is in the property owner’s name.
In response, staff are proposing revisions to the arrears provisions within the Account
Receivable Management Policy as they relate to water and wastewater revenues to gain
efficiencies; minimize loss of revenue; ease the administrative burden; and, ensure fairness and
equity.
Based on research of best practice for water and wastewater billing and collections cited in the
DFA Report, the draft Water By-law requires property owners to be the customer for water and
wastewater services. This will allow recovery of all accounts in arrears through the municipal
property tax roll in accordance with the Municipal Act, 2001 (the “Act”). The Act allows unpaid
fees and charges for public utilities, which include water and wastewater arrears, to be placed
on the tax roll for the property to which the public utility was supplied, regardless of who the
consumer is.
The following chart shows the water and wastewater write-offs for 2018:
2018 Write-offs Arrears in $ # of Accounts %
Tax Roll1 $11,943 20 5.6%
Collections 107,537 332 93.3%
Written-off 361 4 1.1%
Total $119,841 356 100%
Note 1: accounts sent to the tax roll would be collected through property taxes
There were a number of different practices evaluated to assign property owners responsibility
for delinquent accounts, including:
1) Implement an Authorization Agreement to Bill Tenants - Offer the option for property owners
to direct the water and/or wastewater bills to another person(s), such as tenants through an
authorization agreement. Notifications of arrears would then be sent to property owners thereby
allowing all tenant accounts to be transferred to property taxes in the event of non-payment.
This option was reviewed and carefully considered, however in discussion with the billing
providers, this option was considered administratively cumbersome. In light of the billing
providers varying ways of adding new accounts, and ensuring full compliance with the
respective privacy legislations, it was determined that this option would not be given further
consideration.
Page 136 of 285Page 139 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 7 of 12
2) Continue to allow non-owners to be billed and transfer arrears to property taxes - Continue to
allow non-property owners to contact the billing agents to request a bill be sent to the tenant,
however the owner must recognize that they are ultimately responsible for unpaid amounts.
Property owners would be notified of the arrears balance when transferring arrears to property
taxes. As the billing agents do not have access to property owner information to send out
notifications this would then require the County to ensure compliance with privacy legislation
when sharing personal information, creating an additional administrative requirement for the
County, effectively increasing the billing and collection costs.
3) Issue water and wastewater bills to residential property owners only – Most Ontario
municipalities are moving to this practice, most recently being the City of Hamilton. Billing
property owners would streamline the billing practices and ease administration for all parties.
Advantages of moving to this approach include:
Reduces the number of account changes - Account changes, final reads and final
bills are only generated when the property owner changes. This would be less frequent
than the number of times a tenant changes. Currently, when a tenant moves out there is
administration time required to complete a final read and bill and update the account with
new tenant information. In some cases the tenants do not notify the billing agent of the
change. Additional resources are then required to investigate and revenue loss occurs
and it increases the cost of administration.
Minimizes the system’s revenue loss – Transferring all accounts to property taxes
would reduce the system’s revenue loss as property taxes have priority lien status,
eliminating the need to incur costly collection fees. This would minimize the upward
pressure on water and wastewater rates. Historically, tenants have accounted for the
bulk of the County’s write-offs, and with minimal success in efforts to collect.
Tenants can still pay water and wastewater bill – Although the water and wastewater
account will be in the name of the property owner, the County’s billing agents can
continue to accept payments from tenants. Tenants will need to know their owner’s
account number in order to make the payment, as the water/wastewater account number
will be different than their hydro account number.
Ease of vacancy billing – Currently, vacancy billing for rental properties is difficult to
manage as the account is in the tenant’s name and must be changed over to either the
next tenant or to the owner’s name, which is not known by the billing provider. The
timing, communication, and administration of this practice has proven difficult to
manage.
Timing plumbing repairs – Water loss related to plumbing or inefficient plumbing
fixtures are the responsibility of the owner. Potential water leaks are more readily
identified by the owner when they receive and monitor the bill.
Consistent Practice – Currently there is inconsistency between tenant and owner
accounts where only owner accounts are being transferred to the property tax roll.
Changing the policy to transfer all accounts in arrears to the property tax roll results in a
consistent billing practice that is fair, equitable, efficient and effective.
Page 137 of 285Page 140 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 8 of 12
Interest and Penalty Cost Savings – Having the bill in property owners’ names for
rental properties means that owners are able to avoid interest and penalty costs
associated with transferring arrears to the property tax roll. As under the other options,
property owners would only be notified after these costs have been incurred. Access to
the bills means that any arrears charges would be controllable by the property owner.
It is proposed that implementation of this change would involve specifying a date for all new
accounts to be registered in the property owner’s name. Existing tenant accounts would be
grandfathered until such time as the tenant changes. Staff plan to implement related procedures
to assist the billing agent in updating the property owner information as the changeover occurs.
Transitioning the new policy in this manner is expected to minimize the effect of change on
current and future property owner account holders.
As learned through experience of other municipalities who require water/wastewater accounts to
be in the property owner’s name, water shut-offs to incent payment of arrears is no longer
necessary as the arrears are promptly transferred to the property tax roll. It is therefore
recommended that the current mechanism for collecting arrears by shutting off water be
eliminated except for in special circumstances authorized by County staff. Whereas current
charges for shutting off water and turning it back on is $100 total ($50 each), transferring arrears
to the property tax roll is proposed to be a $25 charge plus the area municipal administrative
charge, to reflect the reduction in technical and administrative intervention required.
The following represents what might be considered as potential shortcomings of the transition to
having all accounts in the owners’ names:
Consumption – With the tenant being responsible for the bill, they may be more inclined
to exercise conservation measures. However, to alleviate that notion, tenants still have
the ability to pay the bill through the billing agent, effectively being accountable for their
use. Otherwise, the owner can address consumption concerns through rental/lease
agreements with their tenants.
Tenant account may have two bills – Currently, all Oxford County water and
wastewater customers (except Hydro One customers – being Tillsonburg and Ingersoll)
receive a combined bill for water and wastewater. Changing the billing for water and
wastewater to the owner would mean that the efficiencies associated with the combined
bill is lost as two separate bills (for tenant accounts only) would need to be generated
and sent. Additional costs may result from the Billing Agents to account for this.
The proposed changes to the arrears policy provisions have been outlined in the draft Water By-
law and the Receivables Management Policy with proposed amendments included in this report
as Attachments 2 and 3 respectively.
Service Fees and Charges
The Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002, and related regulations require municipalities to make plans
to ensure long term financial sustainability of their drinking water systems. Water and
wastewater rates are established and approved by the County, with current rates authorized
under By-Law No. 5903-2017. This by-law establishes the water and wastewater rates for all
Oxford County systems for 2017-2020. Additionally, there are a number of water and
Page 138 of 285Page 141 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 9 of 12
wastewater service related fees and charges approved in the County’s Fees and Charges By-
law No.4889-2007, which is subject to annual review and amendment.
Through a review of administrative charges utilized by the County compared to fees and
charges employed by other municipalities, staff propose to introduce certain fees that will relieve
some of the upward pressures on the water and/or wastewater rates in the future while ensuring
fairness and equity in rates are maintained for financially sustainable systems.
Proposed new service fees are included in the revised Fees and Charges By-Law schedule in
Attachment 4 of this report. The following are highlights of the proposed new charges:
Change in Occupancy Charge - $15.00 – Represents a one-time cost recovery charge
for time to set up an account
Transfer to Property Taxes – $25.00 – Represents cost recovery for County staff time to
send notices to property owner, and area municipalities, including postage and mailing
costs associated with notices. Area municipalities may also have an administrative
charge for their involvement in applying the arrears to the tax roll. Combining the area
municipal charge, plus the County’s charge would be roughly equal to the charge to turn
on and off water service.
Standby Charge – $25.85 - this charge is discussed in detail in the section below entitled
Vacancies.
Interest Rate – Hydro Regulation, currently 1.5% - Interest rate charged on overdue
accounts is not a new charge and is set by the billing providers through their hydro
regulation and, for transparency, is added to the By-law. The County’s interest rate and
the billing agents’ interest rates differ slightly, however it is not a significant variance.
The County’s policy, which is the same as the area municipalities’ interest rate for tax
arrears is 1.25% per month, with the billing agents being 1.5% per month. This revenue
is retained by the County or by the area municipality once the arrears are added to the
tax roll.
NSF – Billing Agent, currently $15 - NSF charged for payments returned or declined
by the bank. This is not a new charge, however it is set by the billing providers and, for
transparency, added to the By-law. This revenue is retained by the Billing Agent to offset
banking fees charged.
Missed Appointments - $55.00 – This fee is proposed to be charged to customers who
have a set appointment for a service call, and are not at the property at the scheduled
appointment time. This fee is to reimburse for lost productivity of the operator’s time to
attend the property for which time would have been spent on other operational
maintenance issues.
Annual Private Unmetered Connection for Fire Protection - $60 - $900 depending on
meter size - This is the annual charge for each private unmetered connection made to
the Water Systems to supply private fire hydrants in a prorated monthly charge. The
County does not perform regular maintenance on these hydrants, therefore any repairs
and maintenance costs are the responsibility of the property owner. This fee is in
Page 139 of 285Page 142 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 10 of 12
recognition for the benefit of having ready access to water supply available to the
property by covering a portion of the system’s fixed operating cost.
Frozen Services – $100 per hour or $145 per hour after regular business hours -
Currently the County does not charge for this service, however some municipalities bill
for thawing water services, and others do not offer this service at all. Thawing privately
owned water services one-time shall be attempted at the County’s expense. Any
additional thawing of privately owned water services shall be the Owner's responsibility
and expense at the proposed applicable charge.
It is important to note that many of these charges rely on operation staff from the County,
Woodstock and Tillsonburg, and its Billing Agents to implement. County Finance staff will work
to establish consistent processes, including standardized forms to facilitate consistent
implementation across the County.
Vacancies
Currently, during periods of vacancies or when a private water service is shut-off, the County
does not bill the property owner. It is a best practice employed by other municipalities for
prolonged vacancies in a serviced building to have the water service shut-off to avoid damage
to contents and/or property in the event of leaking, burst pipe or water meter.
As such, the proposed Water By-Law introduces a flat rate standby charge applied in periods of
vacancies for having the water and or wastewater supply available. Although the customer is
not consuming water, municipal infrastructure must still be maintained to supply the water and
wastewater services when needed.
Ideally this fee would be equal to the flat rate service charge for a metered account, however
given the range in 2020 service charges across the County, ranging from $25.85 to $99.18, and
the upcoming water rates study, a temporary monthly standby charges is proposed as outlined
below. These charges are equal to the Woodstock system’s current metered service charge and
will be further reviewed as part of the next rates study planned for 2020.
Standby Charge Monthly Rate
Water $17.10
Wastewater $8.75
Public Engagement
Public consultation for changes to water and wastewater billing primarily affect two groups:
property owners of rental properties and tenants.
The County has consulted the Billing Agents, Area Municipal Finance staff and the Water
Operating Authorities through the development of the Water By-Law. Staff will need to continue
to work closely with these priority stakeholders to incorporate their feedback into the
implementation plan. Other stakeholders that will need to understand the by-law changes
Page 140 of 285Page 143 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 11 of 12
include the general public, the business community, and community partners for whom tenants
form a key client base.
The County’s inform and engage strategy will focus on informing the public regarding the
proposed changes and solicit feedback on the By-Law and how the County can best implement
the new By-law provisions. To best deliver this strategy, the following tools will be utilized:
News media
Social Media
Website Posting
Posters
Updates to billing agents and water operating authorities
Direct mailing to multi-residential property owners
Speak up Oxford with online comment card
Frequently asked questions
Interactive question and answer portal
Billing and Collection Agreements
It is important to note that the billing and collection service contract with ERTH Corporation
(ERTH) is set to expire on December 31, 2019 (all parties agreed to one-year extension on
December 31, 2018); and, the contract with the Town of Tillsonburg (Tillsonburg) expires on
December 31, 2020 (both parties agreed to a second one-year extension on June 26, 2019).
Extending the billing and collection service contracts to December 31, 2020, is necessary in
order to allow time to carry out a public engagement campaign, authorize a Water By-Law, and
amendment the Receivables Management Policy and the Fees and Charges By-law, to reflect
the revised arrears policy provisions. With that in mind, staff continue to work with ERTH to
secure their service contract until December 31, 2020.
The extension of these agreements will also provide for a fair and equitable evaluation process
to be undertaken to determine the most appropriate waste and wastewater billing and collection
service delivery model as we strive to seek service improvements as part of the County and
Area Municipal ongoing service delivery review, in response to the broader Regional
Government Review.
Conclusions
The development of a Water By-Law combined with amendments to the Receivables
Management Policy and Fees and Charges By-Law will allow the County to realize efficiencies
for the administration of billing; enhance customer service; minimize revenue loss; and, ensure
billing is fair and equitable to all customers.
Page 141 of 285Page 144 of 564
Report No: CS 2019-30
CORPORATE SERVICES
Council Date: September 11, 2019
Page 12 of 12
Considering the breadth of proposed changes arising from the change in arrears policy for water
and wastewater billing, staff recommend that a public engagement campaign as outlined in this
report be undertaken. Based on the public’s feedback, staff will report back to Council for further
consideration by the end of December.
SIGNATURES
Report Author:
Original signed by
Carolyn King, CPA, CA
Manager of Finance
Departmental Approval:
Original signed by
Lynn S. Buchner, CPA, CGA
Director of Corporate Services
Approved for submission:
Original signed by
Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 Oxford County Water and Wastewater Operations Map
Attachment 2 Draft Water Use By-Law
Attachment 3 Draft Receivable Management Policy
Attachment 4 Draft Fees and Charges By-Law update – effective March 1, 2020
Page 142 of 285Page 145 of 564
Page 146 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 1 of 14
To: Warden and Members of County Council
From: Director, Community Planning
Municipal Implications of Bill 108, the “More Homes, More
Choice Act, 2019”
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. That Report No. CP 2019-273 entitled “Municipal Implications of Bill 108, the ‘More
Homes, More Choice Act, 2019’”, be received for information;
2. And further, that Report No. CP 2019-273 be circulated to the Area Municipalities
for their information.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS
Bill 108, the More Homes, More Choices Act received Royal Assent on June 6, 2019. The
Act will considerably reshape the regulatory framework and decision-making process for
municipalities pertaining to land use planning, development related charges and contributions,
and environmental approvals.
A number of new and/or amended regulations have recently been proposed and/or enacted
to provide further implementation detail on various legislative changes resulting from the Bill.
This report provides an overview of these regulatory changes and the associated comments
submitted by County staff on behalf of the County to meet the short commenting timeline
provided by the Province.
Implementation Points
County and Area Municipal staff and Council’s will need to begin considering what initiatives
(e.g. studies, policy and process changes etc.) may need to be undertaken to address the various
legislative and regulatory changes introduced through Bill 108 as they come into effect.
Financial Impact
The comments in this report have no financial impact beyond what has been approved in the
current year’s budget.
Page 147 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 2 of 14
As more implementation detail on the Bill 108 changes becomes available, staff will further assess
any potential financial impacts and considerations (e.g. impacts on fees and charges, cost of
studies and process changes etc.) and report to Council as necessary.
The Treasurer has reviewed this report and agrees with the financial impact information.
Risks/Implications
There is no risk or other implications associated with this report. However, there may be potential
implications associated with future implementation of the legislative and regulatory changes, as
outlined in the discussion section this report.
Strategic Plan (2015-2018)
County Council adopted the County of Oxford Strategic Plan (2015-2018) at its regular meeting
held May 27, 2015. The initiative contained within this report supports the Values and Strategic
Directions as set out in the Strategic Plan as it pertains to the following:
1. ii. A County that Works Together – Enhance the quality of life for all of our citizens by:
- Maintaining and strengthening core infrastructure, including affordable housing and fibre
optic systems infrastructure
- Ensuring a full range of housing type and density options
- Implementing a healthy community strategy
- Adapting programs, services and facilities to reflect evolving community needs
- Working with community partners and organizations to maintain / strengthen public
safety
- Promoting community participation and life-long involvement in recreational and cultural
activities
3. i. A County that Thinks Ahead and Wisely Shapes the Future – Influence federal and
provincial policy with implications for the County by:
- Advocating for fairness for rural and small urban communities
- Advocating for federal and provincial initiatives that are appropriate to our county
4. ii. A County that Informs and Engages - Inform the public about County programs, services and
activities through planned communication that includes:
- Regular County-Area Municipal information exchange
Page 148 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 3 of 14
DISCUSSION
Background
On June 6, 2019, Bill 108, the More Homes, More Choices Act received Royal Assent. The Act
amends 13 Provincial statues, with the stated aim of encouraging housing development. This Bill
modifies multiple legislative processes in a way that reshapes the regulatory framework and
decision-making process for municipalities pertaining to land development, planning, and
environmental approvals.
Following Royal Assent of the Bill, the Province released multiple postings on the Environmental
Bill of Rights Registry (postings 019-0181, 019-0183, and 019-0184) outlining proposed changes
to regulations under various Acts (primarily the Planning Act and Development Charges Act)
which provide further implementation detail on a number of matters introduced through the Bill,
including transitional matters (e.g. details on when a number of the proposed changes would
come into effect), Development Charges and the newly proposed Community Benefit Charge
(CBC).
Due to the very short timeframe provided for comments on Bill 108 (e.g. 30 days) and associated
regulations, comments were prepared and submitted by staff on behalf of the County, in advance
of this report, to ensure they were received by the Province within the consultation window. The
Province has indicated that all comments received were considered, however, it is noted that
many of the proposed regulations (e.g. Planning Act Transition and Additional Residential Units)
were enacted shortly after the close of consultation with no substantive changes.
Comments
The following provides a general overview of the enacted legislative amendments and proposed
regulatory changes. It is organized into three parts: Part I outlines the amendments related to
land use planning and development; Part II summarizes the amendments related to development
charges; and Part III outlines the changes related to environmental legislation.
Part I: Land Use Planning Amendments
Multiple amendments have been made to the Planning Act (PA). One of the more notable
changes is the reversal of many of the changes to the planning appeals process that were made
through Bill 139 in 2017, essentially reverting back to the former Ontario Municipal Board (OMB)
process for appeal of a planning matter. However, the newer “Local Planning Appeal Tribunal
(LPAT)” name will be maintained.
Another notable change is that the timeframes for processing many planning applications have
been reduced to “pre-Bill 139” timelines (e.g. 90 days for zoning amendments and 120 days for
official plan amendments and plans of subdivision). Unlike many other municipalities in Ontario,
the County and Area Municipalities in Oxford do not typically exceed these processing
timeframes, so this amendment is not expected to substantially impact current planning
processes. That said, planning staff will be reviewing the requirements and process for ‘complete
Page 149 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 4 of 14
applications’ in the County to ensure it is clear when a planning application is deemed to be
‘complete’, as that is the processing timeline trigger for most applications.
a) Second/Additional Units
The ‘second unit’ provisions in the Planning Act have been amended to change the term ‘second
unit’ to ‘additional residential unit (ARU)’ and now require that Official Plans contain policies to
permit an ARU in a dwelling (e.g. single detached, semi-detached or townhouse) and in an
ancillary building. Previously, Official Plans were required to contain policies to permit a second
unit in a dwelling or in an ancillary building, but not in both. As such, the County and Area
Municipalities will need to review the Official Plan policies and Zoning By-law provisions to
determine what changes may be necessary to comply with this change. Although this does not
mean ARUs must now be permitted ‘as of right’ everywhere, there does appear to be a Provincial
expectation that such units generally be permitted, where appropriate (e.g. based on local criteria
and standards).
A summary of proposed regulations for ARUs was released by the Province for public comment
under EBR Registry posting 019-0181. The comments submitted by staff in response to that
posting (Attachment No. 1) primarily focused on urging the Province to not unduly limit the
approaches and tools (e.g. required parking, level of services, occupancy etc.) that municipalities
may use to ensure that ARUs can be appropriately defined, located and regulated. The regulation
was subsequently enacted without change on September 3, 2019, thereby imposing the following
requirements and standards for such units (where they are permitted by zoning):
A maximum of one parking space may be required for each ARU, which may be provided
through tandem parking;
An ARU may be occupied by any person regardless of whether the primary residential unit
is occupied by the owner of the property; and
An ARU shall be permitted without regard to the date of construction of the primary or
ancillary building.
Recent Provincial communications indicate that the intent of ARUs is to increase the range and
supply of affordable rental housing. However, there does not appear to be anything in the
legislation, regulations or policies that would ensure, or even suggest, that such units are
affordable (e.g. smaller rental units that are secondary to the primary dwelling/unit). The Province
has indicated that municipalities can identify certain limits to the establishment of additional
residential units, if there are planning and policy considerations (e.g. not on private roads, in
hazard or floodplain areas, on prime agricultural lands, or where sewage services are not
adequate), however, there is no specific reference to the ability to establish standards to ensure
such units are actually secondary and affordable.
County staff are generally supportive, and recognize the value of ARUs as a means of increasing
the supply of affordable housing and helping to address our current housing crisis. However, the
Province needs to ensure it is clear (e.g. through policy or other guidance) that such units are to
be secondary and affordable and that municipalities have the authority to identify appropriate
locations and development standards for such units (e.g. with the exception of those already
dictated through regulation). Planning staff will be following up with each of the Area
Page 150 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 5 of 14
Municipalities in the near term to discuss potential planning and other implications of the updated
Provincial direction on ARUs and related implementation considerations.
b) Land Use Planning Appeals
The permitted grounds for appeal of a decision on a planning application are no longer restricted
to the application not being consistent with/conforming to provincial or official plan policies.
Although this change is not expected to significantly impact current County or Area Municipal
practices, it will expose planning decisions to greater potential for appeal (e.g. on broader land
use planning grounds).
The two-stage appeal process (e.g. the requirement to refer certain decisions back to the
municipality for re-consideration before making a final decision) has also been eliminated, which
re-empowers the Land Use Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) to approve or refuse to approve all
or part of an official plan, official plan amendment, zoning by-law or zoning by-law amendment,
or make any modifications thereto. From an administrative standpoint, this will simplify the appeal
process (e.g. reduce time and duplication) by largely reverting back to the previous Ontario
Municipal Board (OMB) process mechanics.
The amendments also re-introduce ‘de novo’ hearings, which allows both sides in an appeal
hearing to bring forward new evidence/material that was not available to municipal councils and/or
committees at the time of making their decision on a planning matter. Further, the right for
participating parties to cross examine witnesses has also been restored. The net effect of these
changes is that the LPAT will now have greater power to reconsider local planning decisions
based on new evidence and broader ‘good planning’ grounds.
Under Bill 108, appeals of decisions regarding plans of subdivision are limited to a list of
persons/public bodies identified in the Planning Act (PA). Previously, any person who made oral
or written submissions to the approval authority in regard to the decision on a plan of subdivision
had a right to appeal that decision. This change significantly scopes the ability to appeal
subdivision plans. However, these same appeal restrictions do not apply to other applications
(e.g. Official Plan and Zoning amendments) that may be required to facilitate a subdivision
application.
Staff generally support the elimination of the two stage LPAT appeal process. However, the return
to full cross examination and ‘de novo’ hearings could potentially result in more confrontational,
expensive and time consuming hearings, eliminate the incentive to ensure municipalities have
been presented with full and complete information at the time of making a decision on a planning
matter and reduce municipal autonomy over planning decisions. The comments submitted to
the Province (Attachment No. 2) are primarily focused on identifying these concerns. That said,
it should be recognized that these provisions have already been enacted into legislation, so are
unlikely to change.
c) Inclusionary Zoning & Development Permit Systems
The ability of municipalities to implement ‘inclusionary zoning’ (i.e. the establishment of specific
requirements for the inclusion of affordable housing units within residential developments over a
certain size) has been substantially scoped through Bill 108. Prior to Bill 108, all municipalities
Page 151 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 6 of 14
had the authority to implement inclusionary zoning in any area they deemed appropriate, subject
to satisfying certain requirements (e.g. completion of housing needs assessment and enabling
Official Plan policies).
The Bill 108 amendments remove the ability of municipalities (except those prescribed by
regulation) to enact ‘inclusionary zoning’, except in protected ‘major transit station areas’ or in an
area where a development permitting system (also referred to as a ‘community planning permit
system’) has been established pursuant to a Minister’s Order. To date, no regulations have been
established to prescribe municipalities that have ‘inclusionary zoning’ powers, nor is there any
indication of the circumstances in which the Minister may consider enacting such a regulation.
Given that no areas in Oxford currently meet the definition of a ‘major transit station area’, it
appears that the only way the ‘inclusionary zoning’ tool could potentially be implemented in Oxford
(i.e. other than by being prescribed by regulation) would be through the implementation of a
development permit system (DPS).
The DPS tool essentially allows a municipality to combine zoning, minor variance and site plan
approval processes into a single permitting process. The intent is that this tool could help to
facilitate development by reducing approval timeframes (e.g. maximum of 45 days to process a
‘complete’ application) and providing greater certainty (e.g. more limitations on appeal rights) than
the standard planning approval process. However, very few municipalities in Ontario have chosen
to implement a DPS to date, likely due to the considerable time and front-end work required (e.g.
background studies, policy and regulation development, consultation etc.) in comparison to the
potential benefits. To implement a DPS, detailed Official Plan policies, zoning and development
review standards must be developed for the subject area and extensive public and agency
consultation undertaken, following which a Minister’s order may be requested to enable the DPS.
County staff have requested further clarification from the Province on a number of implementation
and process details related to use of the DPS tool (Attachment No. 2) in the event one or more
Area Municipalities should wish to consider implementation of such a system in the future.
d) Heritage
A number of changes have been made to the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA), the most significant of
which is the introduction of new rights of appeal to the LPAT with respect to municipal decisions
on cultural heritage matters (e.g. establishing or removing a heritage designation) under the OHA.
This could result in local decisions on cultural heritage matters being overturned by the LPAT,
whereas disputes with respect to such matters were previously resolved through a local
Conservation Review Board. Other changes to the OHA include requiring justification statements
for listing designations or passing by-laws; new newspaper publishing requirements; and
reminder notices to the public regarding the right to appeal.
The Area Municipalities in Oxford are responsible for heritage designations under the OHA. As
such, they may wish to review their current approach to such designations and become familiar
with the new processes and timelines.
Page 152 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 7 of 14
Part II: Amendments to Development-Related Charges
a) Community Benefit Charge
A new ‘Community Benefits Charge (CBC)’ financing tool has been introduced through
amendments to both the Planning Act (PA) and Development Charges Act (DCA). The intent of
the CBC is to consolidate a range of development related charges and contributions into a single
financing framework.
Municipalities will now be able to implement a Community Benefits Charge (CBC) by-law to
impose charges against land to pay for “the capital cost of facilities, services and matters required
because of development or redevelopment in the area to which the by-law applies.” This would
require the preparation of a strategy that identifies the facilities, services, and matters that will be
funded and consultation with prescribed persons and public bodies. The charges and
contributions that are permitted to be collected under the new CBC framework are generally as
follows:
The authority to charge development for the cost of ‘soft services’ (e.g. recreation facilities,
libraries etc.) will be moved from the DCA to the CBC;
The authority to require parkland dedications/contributions under the PA; and
The authority to collect monetary contributions in exchange for increased height
and/density (e.g. bonus zoning) in accordance with Section 37 of the PA.
The CBC may only be imposed for development/redevelopment that requires the approval of a
zoning by-law/amendment, minor variance, plan of subdivision or condominium, consent, part lot
control exemption, or issuance of a building permit. Further, the charge cannot be imposed for
any services that continue to be eligible for development charges (e.g. water and wastewater,
stormwater management, roads, waste diversion, police, fire, ambulance, transit). As proposed,
the charge is to be based on a percentage of the value of the land on the day before the first
building permit is issued, which is to be determined through a land appraisal process. This is a
fundamental change from the number of dwelling units and gross floor area basis that is currently
used to determine the development charge (DC) for ‘soft services’.
The Province has indicated that a key goal of this new funding tool is to ensure municipal revenues
historically collected from DCs, parkland dedication and density bonusing are maintained.
However, without additional implementation details (e.g. draft regulations) it is very difficult to
determine the potential risks and benefits of implementing the CBC (e.g. impacts on municipal
processes and revenues, what additional ‘soft services’ may be eligible for the charge, extent of
study and information required to develop the strategy, etc.). As the legislative changes
associated with the CBC were outlined in a previous staff report (CS 2019-18), the discussion in
this report is focused primarily on the proposed content of the CBC regulations and related
comments and concerns.
To date, the Province has only released a high level summary of the proposed CBC regulations
(ERO posting Nos. 019-0184 and 019-0183) which provide a very general indication of how the
tool is intended to be implemented. In terms of transition, the proposed regulation indicates that
the existing section 37 (bonus zoning) and parkland dedication provisions of the PA will largely
remain in effect until a municipality enacts a new CBC by-law. That said, as of a date yet to be
Page 153 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 8 of 14
proclaimed (currently proposed to be Jan. 1, 2021), a municipality must have a CBC By-Law in
place if they wish to continue to charge new development for ‘soft services’, the provision of
parkland and/or in exchange for increased height or density.
Attachment No. 2 contains the initial comments submitted in response to these postings, which
are generally summarized as follows:
General agreement with the questions and concerns raised by the County’s development
charge consultant (Watson and Associates) and the Municipal Finance Officers
Association (MFOA), which were attached to the County’s comments for reference.
As the DCA already provides a flexible, predictable and proven regime for financing of
growth related servicing costs, municipalities should retain the option of continuing to
utilize the existing Planning Act parkland dedication provisions and Development Charge
Act provisions for ‘soft services’, and simply enable the new CBC as an optional,
alternative financing tool.
A key concern is the use of land value and appraisals for determination of the CBC funding
formulae. The details and appropriateness of this approach will require careful
consideration through further consultation with municipalities.
The rationale for and potential consequences of exempting a number of proposed
development types (e.g. retirement homes, non-profit housing and universities/colleges)
from the CBC requires more thorough consideration.
Municipalities should have the ability to determine what services are required to support
growth and development of complete communities (e.g. no services should be specifically
excluded), provided appropriate justification is provided.
Requested clarification as to the scope of ‘soft services’ that are intended to be eligible for
the CBC (e.g. will it be broader than just those previously eligible under the DCA).
A number of implementation related concerns including the aggressive timeline for
migration to the CBC regime (e.g. January 1st, 2021), whether municipalities will still have
the authority to require the dedication of land for parks (e.g. not just a charge) where
deemed appropriate, and whether the range of public amenities that may be provided in
exchange for increased height and/or density will remain as broad as currently permitted
under the PA.
For the above noted reasons, the County’s comments urged the Province not to proceed with
proclaiming/bringing into force the proposed amendments until such time as fulsome consultation
with municipalities on the full text of the draft regulations and implementation details of the CBC
has been undertaken and all significant concerns addressed.
b) Development Charges
Substantial amendments to the Development Charges Act (DCA) were also enacted through Bill
108. The main changes pertain to the types of services that can be included in development
charges; the timing of payment for development charges; and at what stage in the development
process the amount of the charge is determined. A previous staff report CS 2019-18 provided a
detailed overview of these amendments and potential implications. As such, the discussion in
this report is focused on the proposed content of the associated regulations that were recently
released under ERO No. 019-0184, which is summarized as follows:
Page 154 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 9 of 14
January 1, 2021 is identified as the proposed transition date for the Community Benefits
Charge (CBC). Beyond that date, municipalities would generally no longer be able to
collect development charges for discounted services (e.g. ‘soft’ services).
Draft definitions for the types of development that are to be eligible for development charge
deferral (e.g. ability to pay applicable DCs in installments over a 6 year period). For
example “non-profit housing development” and “institutional development”.
Proposing a period of two years from the date of approval of a site plan application that a
DC freeze would be in place (e.g. the DC applicable on that date would be locked in).
Alternatively, in the absence of the site plan application, two years from the date the zoning
application was approved.
A maximum interest rate that may be charged on DC amounts that are deferred or frozen
is not being proposed at this time.
A DC exemption for one ‘additional residential unit’ per lot (e.g. for those created in a main
dwelling or ancillary structure) and for additional residential units created in an existing
apartment building (e.g. where they comprise not more than 1% of existing units).
Attachment No. 2 contains the comments submitted by staff in response to the proposed DCA
regulation, which are summarized as follows:
General agreement with the related questions and concerns raised by Watson and
Associates and the Municipal Finance Officers Association (MFOA).
DC payment deferrals – commercial, industrial and/or institutional development should not
be eligible for automatic DC payment deferral (e.g. municipalities should be able to
determine when it may be appropriate). Further, other development types for which DC
deferrals are proposed (e.g. non-profit housing, long term care homes, some rental
housing) should be further scoped and defined to avoid disputes and unintended impacts.
DC rate freeze - Municipalities should be given the authority to determine the
circumstances in which a DC rate freeze may be appropriate, as opposed to be being
directed by regulation (e.g. set out circumstances where a DC rate freeze could be
considered as opposed to when it must be applied).
Additional Dwelling Units – The mandatory DC exemption for ‘Additional Dwelling units’
could result in a substantial shortfall in DC revenue in comparison to the cost of the
required municipal services, if a significant number of such units were to be created.
Further, given that access to and demand for affordable housing is not restricted to just
the existing residents of the municipality, the comments stressed that financing or
subsidies directed at reducing the costs and/or increasing the supply of affordable housing
should come primarily from Provincial funding sources.
Increased Administration – Concern that many of the proposed changes will increase the
administrative burden on municipalities without a clear benefit in terms of the stated goal
of increasing the supply or affordability of housing.
Part III: Environmental Legislative Amendments
The Province has undertaken a review of many existing Acts related to the protection of the
environment. Through Bill 108, a number of amendments have been made with the stated goal
being to streamline processes and identify efficiencies, while protecting the environment and
human health. Following is a summary of the key areas of amendment.
Page 155 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 10 of 14
a) Conservation Authorities Act
The main thrust of the amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act (CAA) is to increase
financial accountability and oversight of conservation authorities (CAs) and streamline the
regulation of development within their jurisdictions. Oxford County is currently considered to be
a ‘participating municipality’ with respect to four CAs: Grand River, Upper Thames River, Long
Point Region, and Catfish Creek.
Following is a summary of some of the more significant changes to the CAA.
Duty of Members - Members of a CA now have a duty to act honestly and in good faith with a
view to furthering the objectives of the authority. Although the amended CAA does not indicate
how this new provision will operate, the context implies that it can be interpreted as imposing a
standard for reappointing or replacing CA members.
Programs and Services Offered - The CAA is now places greater restrictions on what CAs can do
with respect to provision of programs and services, which are divided into the following three
categories:
1) mandatory programs and services required by regulation;
2) municipal program and services which the authority agrees to provide under an agreement
with a municipality; and
3) other programs and services the authority determines are advisable to further its
objectives.
The mandatory programs and services prescribed by regulation are to be limited to those that are
related to the risk of natural hazards; the conservation or management of land controlled by the
CA; or the CAs duties, functions and responsibilities as a source protection authority under the
Clean Water Act or another Act prescribed by the regulations. If municipal funding of capital or
maintenance costs is necessary for a program or service in the furtherance of the CAs objectives,
the authority must now enter into an agreement with that municipality for the provision of that
program or service.
Fees for Service - CAs may only charge a fee for a program or service that is listed by the Minister
and are required to develop a fee policy containing, among other things, a fee schedule and a
procedure for fee reconsideration. As such, municipalities and others may now refer to a CAs fee
policy and challenge fee amounts charged to them by a CA.
Investigation by the Minister - The Minster is now empowered to investigate an authority’s
operations, including its programs and services. This can be conducted through a financial audit
or by requiring any person to appear before an investigator to give evidence. This represents a
significant increase in the control a Minister may now exercise over an authority.
Apportionment of Costs to Municipalities - There have been a number of amendments to the way
in which a CA may apportion project capital costs and operating expenses to municipalities, with
the general intent of providing for increased municipal control over funding for CAs. On or after
a day to be named by regulation, the CA may only apportion the following costs to a municipality
if that program or service has been identified in an agreement with the municipality:
Page 156 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 11 of 14
capital costs in connection with a project related to a ‘non-mandatory’ CA program or
service; and/or
operating expenses related to a ‘non-mandatory’ CA program or service.
Despite the above noted restriction on operating expenses, the CA may impose a fixed annual
apportionment of operating expenses to a municipality without having an agreement in place.
Further, a municipality may now appeal any CA apportionment to the Local Planning Appeal
Tribunal (LPAT) within 30 days of receiving notice.
Regulatory and Enforcement Powers - The amendments take away the CA’s power to establish
regulations. Before Bill 108, a CA was permitted to establish regulations with respect to a list of
matters, which resulted in each CA having a corresponding regulation to identify the regulated
area and establish prohibitions, the process for giving permissions (e.g. permit process) and a
number of other matters. Instead, the CAA now sets out the general prohibitions and permitting
process, with the power to make regulations now lying solely with the Province. In this regard,
the Province has proposed a new regulation that would replace all 36 existing CA regulations.
Although the draft contents of this regulation have yet to be released, the Province has indicated
that the regulation will provide additional definitions, create exemptions for certain development,
and impose requirements on CAs. It is expected that municipalities will need to consider both the
prohibition and permitting processes under the CAA and the contents of the proposed
consolidated CA regulation when reviewing future development.
In terms of potential implications from the proposed changes, the County and Area Municipalities
will need to determine to what extent agreements with the CAs may now be required if they wish
to maintain various ‘non-mandatory’ CA services (e.g. development review services for natural
heritage resources, administration of the Clean Water Program, environmental monitoring and
stewardship services etc.). Further, as many of the changes are to be implemented through future
regulation, County staff will continue to monitor the progress of any proposed regulations and
identify any significant implications or concerns for the County and/or Area Municipalities. Once
the new CA regulation is enacted, the County and Area Municipalities will need to determine
whether any changes to local planning documents and review process may be required to reflect
the new regulatory direction.
b) Endangered & Threatened Species
Bill 108 introduces amendments to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) which narrow the
application of the current ‘prohibitions’ with respect to “killing a member of a species” or “damaging
the habitat of the species” for species classified as “species at risk”. Further, the amended ESA
establishes a new fund, called the Species at Risk Conservation Fund, for the purpose of
providing for “the funding of activities that are reasonably likely to protect or recover conservation
fund species or support their protection or recovery”. As with the CAA, Bill 108 moves the
administration of the ESA from the Minster of Natural Resources to the Minister of the
Environment, Conservation and Parks.
These changes to the ESA are not expected to have a substantial impact on the day-to-day
operations of the County or Area Municipalities. Generally, the amendments reduce the
applicability of the above noted prohibitions by creating exemptions and delaying the applications
Page 157 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 12 of 14
of the prohibitions with respect to newly-listed species. Where a person is exempt from the ESA,
the Act typically requires the person to pay a species conservation charge to the new Fund.
c) Environmental Assessments
The amendments to the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) are part of the Province’s broader
changes to the environmental assessment regime. The “modernization” of this regime is intended
to reduce complexity and encourage job creation. The ultimate objectives are to:
balance the complexity of assessment with the level of environmental risk;
eliminate duplication between environmental assessments and other approval
processes;
find efficiencies in the EA process and other processes to shorten timelines; and,
permit online submissions.
These changes have been communicated as short-term steps, so it is likely that more extensive
changes will be made to Ontario’s environmental assessment process. That said, the two main
changes to date are to exempt low-risk undertakings from requiring a Class EA (i.e. a routine
assessment required for projects with predictable impacts) and to limit the application of
Ministerial orders to raise an assessment from a Class EA to an individual EA (i.e. an assessment
required for major, high-risk undertakings). As such, some low risk infrastructure projects in the
County may no longer require a Class EA.
d) Environmental Protection Act
Bill 108 made minor amendments to the Environmental Protection Act (EPA), which provides for
the protection and conservation of the natural environment through a variety of means, including
prohibitions on contaminations, compliance approvals for permitting exemptions to contamination,
provisions regarding contaminated sites, and provisions intended to address climate change.
The main changes to the Act include expanding a provincial officer’s power to seize the number
plates of a vehicle used in the commission of an offense under environmental Acts and
broadening the application of administrative penalties under the EPA. The province has noted
that the intent of these changes is to better enable front-line provincial officers to take action
against the illegal movement of soils and effectively hold polluters accountable.
It is noted that two proposed regulatory changes accompany the legislative changes to the EPA:
a new excess soil regulation and an update to the Record of Site Condition regulation. An
overview of these proposed changes was provided in a previous staff Report No. PW 2018-24
and County staff are continuing to monitor the progress of these proposed amendments.
Conclusions
County staff appreciate the Province’s willingness to undertake a broad legislative review for the
purposes of identifying ways to improve the supply and affordability of housing in the Province.
However, we are concerned that a number of the changes introduced through Bill 108 and
associated regulations could have a substantial impact on municipal processes and decision
Page 158 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 13 of 14
making with respect to land use planning, finance and the environment, without any clear benefit
in terms of improving the supply and affordability of housing.
To ensure the Province was made aware of these concerns within the short commenting time
frame provided, staff have submitted a number of comments (as outlined in this report) on behalf
of the County. These comments indicated that, if any revisions or additions to the comments
should arise from subsequent review with County Council, those would be forwarded to the
Province under separate cover. Therefore, if Council should have any additional concerns that
they feel need to be communicated to the Province, they can be compiled and forwarded to the
Province following consideration of this report.
A key focus of the County’s comments is that the Province provide further clarification and
implementation detail on a number of the changes for municipal review through the release of the
draft text of the proposed regulation, particularly the community benefit charge. Therefore,
County staff will continue to monitor for any new regulatory direction and/or guidelines that may
be released by the Province in the upcoming months and identify any potential implications for
the County or Area municipalities and advise the Province of any associated questions or
concerns. Further, staff will continue to advise County Council of any relevant changes that may
be of particular interest or concern to the County or Area Municipalities.
SIGNATURES
Report Author:
“Original Signed By”
Amelia Sloan, MCIP, RPP
Planner
Departmental Approval:
“Original Signed By"
Gordon K. Hough, RPP
Director of Community Planning
Approved for submission:
“Original Signed By”
Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
Page 159 of 564
Report No: CP 2019-273
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 9, 2019
Page 14 of 14
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment No. 1: Response to Proposed Planning Act Regulation (EBR posting 019-0181),
July 31, 2019
Attachment No. 2: Response to Proposed Planning Act and Development Charges Act
Regulations (EBR postings 019-0184 & 019-0183), August 21, 2019
Page 160 of 564
Community Planning
P. O. Box 1614, 21 Reeve Street
Woodstock Ontario N4S 7Y3
Phone: 519-539-9800 Fax: 519-421-4712
Web site: http://www.oxfordcounty.ca/
Page | 1
Our File: L11 Second Unit Regulation - 2019
July 31, 2019
Planning Act Review
Provincial Planning Policy Branch
777 Bay Street
13th floor
Toronto, ON M5G 2E5
To Whom it May Concern,
Re: Proposed Planning Act Regulation with respect to Bill 108 Implementation
EBR Posting 019-0181
This letter comprises the County of Oxford’s comments with respect to the Ministry of
Municipal Affairs current phase of consultation on the proposed regulatory changes to the
Planning Act, with respect to Schedule 12 of Bill 108 implementation, as posted under the EBR
posting no. 019-0181.
Please note that the attached comments are provided from the perspective of County staff,
in brief consultation with Area Municipal staff and have not yet been formally endorsed by County
Council.
Concerning the proposed content suggested for Regulation 173/16 “Community Planning
Permits”, in this regulation (based on provisions outlined in Schedule 12 to Bill 108), the County
requests that the Province provide further detail on the rationale for these changes so
municipalities can better understand the intended goals and objectives of this amendment. The
More Homes, More Choice Action Plan simply notes that the changes would enable the Minister
to require the use of the community planning permit system (CPPS) in specific areas, such as
transit station areas and provincially significant employment zones. We also note that through Bill
108 amendments, the Minister would have discretionary use of inclusionary zoning in areas where
a CPPS has been required. Further, the description of the proposed changes indicates that both
the Official Plan amendment and implementing by-law required to establish the CPPS would be
non-appealable where the Minister has issued an order to require a municipality to adopt or
establish such a system. The County is requesting clarification as to whether a Minister’s order to
adopt or establish such a system could applied (e.g. if requested by a municipality) for areas
outside transit station areas and provincially significant employment zones, if deemed necessary
or appropriate to address specific Provincial and/or Municipal planning objectives (e.g. provision
of affordable housing). If so, what conditions or criteria might need to be addressed for it to be
considered by the Minister for such other areas?
Report No. CP 2019-273 - Attachment No. 1 Page 161 of 564
Page | 2
The County generally supports the concept of allowing for additional units in appropriate
settlement area locations to provide for additional affordable and/or alternative housing
opportunities (e.g. housing options for elderly parents and/or live-in caregivers) and support
residential intensification and efficient use of existing public services and infrastructure. As such,
the County’s Official Plan policies are already very supportive of residential intensification and
providing for a range of housing choices and affordability, including converted dwellings, garden
suites, dwelling units in accessory buildings, purpose built duplexes and other multiple unit
dwellings, in appropriate locations.
Although the County is very supportive of affordable housing options and the provision of
additional tools and measures to assist municipalities in the provision of more affordable housing
options, we have serious concerns with specific aspects of the proposed content for a new
regulation under section 35.1 (2) (b) of the Planning Act, pertaining to additional residential unit
requirements and standards. In general, the County is strongly of the opinion that municipalities
are in the best position to determine the relevant land use planning considerations and potential
impacts associated with such units and how they would best be addressed in their local context.
As such, the County requests that the final regulation contains wording that makes it very clear
that the Provincial intent is that additional residential units can only be established in areas/zones
where a local municipality has determined that the establishment of such units would be
sustainable and have no substantial negative impacts (e.g. only within settlements or areas of
settlements where an appropriate level of water and wastewater services is available). Further,
it should also be clear that such units must be in compliance with all requirements and standards
set out in local zoning by-laws (i.e. are not simply intended to be permitted everywhere ‘as of
right’) - provided such requirements and standards do not conflict with those set out in the
regulations. The proposed content seems to try to address this concern to some extent in the last
two points (i.e. for occupancy and date of construction), but wording such as “where permitted in
the zoning by-law” should be repeated in the lead in of the regulation as well, and ‘in accordance
with all applicable provisions of the zoning by-law’. From our experience, general public
perception of this issue can influence individual homeowners’ renovation/construction decisions,
which can create complications for municipalities. As such, we feel that Provincial clarification to
ensure these units are not permitted everywhere is necessary (e.g. through the wording of the
regulation and any associated guidelines).
Overall, it is the County’s position that municipalities are the level of government in the
best position to determine the need for, appropriateness and impact of allowing such forms of
housing in a particular area and what limitations and requirements, if any, are necessary and/or
appropriate for the establishment of such units. As such, the County feels very strongly that
municipalities should retain both the authority and discretion to determine whether and where
additional units are permitted and to establish appropriate definitions and provisions for such
units. This would allow municipalities to ensure Provincial and local objectives for such units are
addressed (e.g. remain secondary to the main dwelling unit and do not simply become purpose
built duplexes that avoid development charges), while avoiding or acceptably mitigating negative
impacts on neighbourhood character (e.g. built heritage), municipal services and operations, and
municipal fiscal sustainability.
As the requirements and standards set out in the list of proposed content is not an
exhaustive list of considerations for local municipalities when determining appropriate locations
for growth, it should be clear that they are not the only considerations for appropriately locating
additional units. With a new provision to allow additional units in both the main dwelling and an
ancillary dwelling, this is even more important.
With respect to the standards and barriers for additional units set out in the posting, the
County, in consultation with Area Municipalities, has outlined the following specific concerns:
Page 162 of 564
Page | 3
PARKING
Ensuring adequate and accessible parking is a primary concern for municipalities when
evaluating whether the establishment of additional units on a property would be appropriate,
especially in areas not served by higher levels of transit, like rural or smaller urban centres.
Therefore, introducing arbitrary limitations that impede municipalities from adequately controlling
and regulating parking could negatively impact willingness to implement additional unit provisions
and broader permissions for establishing such units and reduce local acceptance of such units.
Many towns and villages in Oxford do not allow on-street parking overnight or in the winter
months, which increases the need to ensure adequate on-site parking is provided for the
occupants of every residential unit. Further, many families in Oxford require more than one vehicle
to access employment opportunities and other services. As such, the proposed limitations on the
number of spaces that can be required for additional units and ability to provide tandem spaces
will only aggravate existing parking, property standards and related enforcement issues. Allowing
up to three units on a lot that was intended for a single unit presents obvious restrictions for vehicle
space, and could add pressure to parking/property standards by-law enforcement role. Therefore,
it is questioned why the Province would prevent municipalities from requiring more than one space
or non-tandem space for any additional units with no consideration of context, when it is
municipalities that are in the best position to understand the local impacts from such restrictions.
Municipalities should retain the authority and responsibility for establishing the parking
requirements for such residential uses, including ensuring the number and location of required
parking spaces for additional units is reasonable and appropriate given the local context. For
instance, given the absence of public transit, larger lots, level of vehicle ownership and distance
to work and services, many municipalities in Oxford currently require two parking spaces for an
additional dwelling unit. As such, the County requests that this proposed regulatory restriction be
eliminated, or only applied within large urban municipalities where those municipalities deem it to
be appropriate.
OWNER-OCCUPANCY & DATE OF CONSTRUCTION
A requirement to permit the second and third additional units to be occupied by any
person, regardless of whether the primary unit is occupied by the owner of the property, should
be left to the discretion of a local municipality. It is understood that there was previously a concern
that municipalities cannot pass by-laws that have the effect of distinguishing between persons
who are related and persons who are unrelated in respect of the occupancy of use of a building
or structure; however, section 35 (2) of the Planning Act only refers to distinguishing on the basis
of relationship, not ownership of a dwelling unit or building.
Additionally, other implementation tools (such as registration or licensing) could potentially
limit occupancy based on ownership, if the local intent was to ensure ‘additional units’ remained
‘secondary’ to the main unit (e.g. to ensure they can be clearly differentiated from purpose-built
duplexes and converted dwellings). Many short-term rental licensing schemes are contemplating
the restriction of rentals based on whether the unit is the landowner’s principle residence. There
could also be condominium provisions that may regulate/limit the ability of landowners to rent
units on their property, and these would supersede the zoning provision. Therefore, including this
stipulation in the regulation would complicate and confuse the issue for landowners and unduly
limit municipalities. It could also prevent a municipality from requiring the primary unit to be owner-
occupied as a reasonable means of ensuring the additional units are, in fact, secondary in nature
(and differentiated from a purpose-built duplex).
Page 163 of 564
Page | 4
Many municipalities use owner-occupancy as a requirement in Official Plan policies or
zoning provisions for certain types of uses, with the understanding that it does not conflict with
section 35 (2) of the Planning Act and is an effective means of ensuring certain planning objectives
are achieved. For instance, home occupations, on-farm diversified uses and second houses on a
farm are often permitted only if the owner resides on the subject lands/premises. Even the
Provincial Policy Statement contains policies that are based on ownership (e.g. lot creation for a
residence surplus to a farming operation as a result of farm consolidation). Therefore, using
ownership as a legitimate consideration for the reasonable and appropriate implementation of
various planning goals and objectives is already a well-established practice. Further, even if it
were to be determined that the Planning Act provisions restrict municipalities from using zoning
to distinguish on the basis of ownership then this regulation would be unnecessary/redundant, so
why include it at all.
The Province’s More Homes, More Choice Action Plan discusses the recent provincial
actions to support homeowners in increasing the supply of affordable and rental housing. It
indicated that these Planning Act amendments will “make it easier for homeowners to create
residential units above garages, in basements and in laneways” which implies that the additional
supply will be created on their primary residence. Providing homeowners with additional income
sources seems to be a strong focus of the Province’s communication regarding second/additional
units. Ensuring these units are only permitted in a primary residence (e.g. owner occupied) seems
to be a reasonable way for municipalities to ensure these units remain secondary to the main
dwelling unit and are differentiated from a converted dwelling or purpose built duplex. Similarly,
being able to stipulate the age of construction of the dwelling seems to be a reasonable approach
for differentiating such units from purpose-built duplexes. Being able to distinguish such units from
converted dwellings and purpose built duplexes is important for a number of reasons, including
the proposed exemption from development charges for additional units and the potential impact
on density and residential intensification targets, as well as on infrastructure and public services.
We question why the Province would try to eliminate potentially appropriate and effective tools for
municipalities to achieve the Provincial and local planning and affordable housing objectives for
such units, while avoiding or mitigating unacceptable impacts.
For the above reasons, the County requests that the proposed regulations to remove the
ability for municipalities to regulate the ownership and age of dwelling required for the
establishment of additional dwelling units be eliminated. Again, municipalities are in the best
position to determine the need for, appropriateness and impact of allowing such forms of housing
in a particular area and what limitations and requirements, if any, are necessary and/or
appropriate for the establishment of such units.
SERVICING
The Province should identify the key considerations that should be reviewed by
municipalities in the establishment of appropriate regulations for additional units, such as
servicing and unit size, through updates the guidance documents previously provided. In regard
to servicing, it is noted in the Spring 2017 Info Sheet that, “in areas with municipal services,
second units should be permitted without a requirement to demonstrate sewer or water capacity,
unless there are previously documented servicing constraints.” The County feels that this
statement is too simplistic and does not adequately address the potential implications of
increasing density (even if only allowing one or two additional units on an existing property) in
smaller, fully-serviced villages with municipal sewer and water services. It is the position of the
County that nothing should limit a municipality’s ability to regulate the creation of second (or third)
unit(s) in settlements (or areas within settlements) where the municipality deems it to be
Page 164 of 564
Page | 5
inappropriate based on the type or availability of water and wastewater services (e.g. not a reverse
onus as implied in the Spring 2017 Info Sheet).
To provide an example that would better illustrate this problem, a typical serviced village
in Oxford County with a population of about 1,500, in about 650 homes, would have a forecasted
growth of about 250 households over the planning horizon. Permitting an additional unit as-of-
right in existing and new homes would result in approximately 90-180 new units (an estimate if
only 10-20% uptake) needing to be accommodated by the existing water and wastewater
infrastructure. This could nearly double the expected growth that the system was planned to
accommodate, increasing demand on planned infrastructure upgrades in a manner that would be
unknown by the upper-tier government overseeing water and wastewater services. Without the
ability to oversee, monitor, or track these new units, issues with water treatment and distribution,
as well as wastewater collection and treatment would likely result. In the short term, this could
trigger unforeseen, untimely and uneconomical upgrades of existing municipal water and/or
wastewater infrastructure in order to meet residential demand. In many cases, this could cause
upgrades to systems that were not intended to be upgraded within the planning horizon. The
municipal financial impacts of any such upgrade or expansion would be compounded by the fact
that such units are proposed to be exempted from development charges.
DENSITY
It is not clear how these additional units would contribute to and/or affect the achievement
of a municipality’s minimum residential density targets. Clarification of whether such units are
intended to be included in the determination of residential density should be provided prior to the
implementation of these regulations. If second or third units are to be permitted in new dwellings,
it is important to understand whether they should be included in the determination of compliance
with minimum density targets, particularly in the case of greenfield and infill subdivision projects.
If they are to be included, it could inadvertently result in the creation of larger detached dwelling
lots that make inefficient use of land, infrastructure and public services and/or reduce the need to
incorporate other denser and more affordable housing forms (e.g. semis, townhomes and mid-
rise apartments) into new residential developments to meet minimum residential density
requirements. The concern is that ‘roughed in’ or ‘tenant ready’ additional dwelling units could be
incorporated into single detached dwellings in new development simply to facilitate the creation
of larger lots that ‘on paper’ appear to meet minimum density targets (e.g. due to additional,
unused units), without any intention that the additional units ever be occupied.
If additional dwelling units are intended to be secondary to the main dwelling unit/principle
residence (e.g. to provide housing options for elderly parents and/or live-in caregivers, rather than
long term, rental apartments), it may not be necessary or appropriate to include them in residential
density calculations, as they may have low average occupancies. However, if the Planning Act
provisions and proposed regulations have the effect of simply allowing for purpose built duplex
dwellings, converted dwellings and secondary rental units with typical dwelling unit occupancies
on a continuous long term basis, it would likely be appropriate to include them in the determination
of residential density. Such units would also have a similar impact on population density and
demand for and use of services as any other two unit dwelling type and, as such should not be
exempted from development charges.
For these reasons it is important municipalities be given the tools and authority to clearly
differentiate between units (e.g. suites) that are secondary to the main dwelling unit (e.g. similar
to the Planning Act provisions for garden suites) and purpose built duplex dwellings, converted
dwellings and permanent additional rental units, where they deem it necessary and appropriate
to do so.
Page 165 of 564
Page | 6
The County of Oxford recognizes additional units like converted houses, accessory
apartments, garden suites, and coach houses as desirable forms of housing that can increase
density in a manner that maintains neighbourhood character and considers the impacts of the
new units on existing infrastructure, operations, and public services. That said, we feel that the
Province should not unduly limit the approaches that municipalities may utilize to ensure that
additional units can be appropriately defined, located and regulated so that both Provincial and
local municipal objectives can be achieved (e.g. land use, servicing, affordable housing, and fiscal
sustainability).
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on these draft regulations. We welcome the
opportunity to discuss any questions or concerns you may have with this correspondence.
Questions should be directed to the undersigned or Amelia Sloan, Policy Planner at
asloan@oxfordcounty.ca or (519) 539-0015 x3205.
Yours Truly,
Paul Michiels
Manager of Planning Policy
Page 166 of 564
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Oxford County
21 Reeve Street, PO Box 1614
Woodstock, ON N4S 7Y3
519.539.9800, ext. 3001 1.800.755.0394
Our File: L11 Bill 108
August 21, 2019
John Ballantine, Manager
Municipal Finance Policy Branch
777 Bay Street
13th floor
Toronto, ON M5G 2E5
To Mr. Ballantine,
Re: Proposed Planning Act and Development Charges Act Regulations with respect to
the implementation of Bill 108, the More Homes, More Choice Act
EBR Postings 019-0184 & 019-0183
This letter comprises the County of Oxford’s formal comments with respect to the Ministry of
Municipal Affairs current phase of consultation on the proposed regulatory changes under the
Planning Act (new regulation) and Development Charges Act (O. Reg. 82/98), with respect to the
implementation of the community benefits authority and other matters presented through Bill 108.
These comments are primarily based on the limited information presented in the related postings
on the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO), ERO nos. 019-0183 and 019-0184. However,
many of the County’s comments with respect to the proposed regulatory changes also relate back
to the proposed changes to the provision of the Planning Act (PA) and Development Charges Act
(DCA). It is noted that the County did not previously comment on the proposed changes to these
Act provisions due to the short commenting window (e.g. 30 days) and lack of implementation
detail necessary to evaluate and comment on potential impacts.
Given the summer Council schedule and limited consultation period provided for the current
postings, the attached comments were prepared by staff on behalf of the County (i.e. have not
yet been reviewed with County Council). That said, if any revisions or additions should result
from subsequent review of these comments with County Council, they will be forwarded under
separate cover at a later date. Until such time, these comments should be considered the
County’s formal submission.
Following are the comments and concerns that the County feels should be specifically considered
and addressed by the Province as part of the current consultation process.
Report No. CP 2019-273 - Attachment No. 2 Page 167 of 564
2 | P a g e
General
The County is generally in agreement with the questions and concerns identified in the following
documents (see attached):
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., July 25th Memo to Development Charge Clients;
and
Submission on Regulatory Changes Implementing the More Homes, More Choice Act,
2019, Municipal Finance Officers’ Associated of Ontario, Aug. 19th, 2019.
That said, through our own review of the proposed changes, the County has also identified a
number of additional comments and concerns, which are outlined as follows.
To ensure legitimate consultation and informed decision making, a full draft of the
proposed regulation wording should be released for consultation by the Province;
Municipalities are generally in the best position to identify local impacts and considerations
and ultimately determine the most effective approach for achieving various Provincial
objectives in their jurisdictions (e.g. how to improve the supply of affordable housing). As
such, any new legislation and/or regulations should ensure municipalities maintain the
authority and flexibility (e.g. enabling vs. directing) to enable effective local implementation
and ensure any potential negative impacts (e.g. financial, land use etc.) can be avoided,
or acceptably mitigated.
That said, it appears that a number of the proposed changes (e.g. replacing Development
Charges regime with the Community Benefit Charge Regime for ‘soft services’, additional
dwelling units requirements etc.) could be more restricting than enabling for municipalities,
if not properly considered and implemented. This could result in increased administrative
burden and limit the ability of County and Area Municipalities to ensure effective and
fiscally sustainable delivery of important local services; and, avoid or mitigate potential
negative land use impacts, without resulting in any substantial improvement in the supply
and/or affordability of housing. Therefore, it will be important that municipal concerns in
this regard be closely considered and addressed.
Growth should pay for growth. Further, complete, vibrant communities supported by a full
range of services (including ‘soft’ services) are good for everyone, are more economically,
socially and environmentally sustainable and improve community wellbeing. Therefore, it
is crucial that municipalities have the flexibility necessary to determine what services are
required to support the development of such communities and the ability to fully recover
the costs of those services related to growth.
Improving the supply of affordable housing benefits the Province as a whole. Further,
access to and demand for affordable housing is not restricted to just the existing residents
of the municipality where such housing is being provided. For example, if one municipality
chooses to provide local funding for incentives and programs that substantially improve
housing affordability/supply in their communities, it could simply incent more in-
migration/demand from nearby municipalities where the same level of local funding and
programs are not provided (i.e. further increase the burden on the local tax
base/development fees of the municipalities that do provide such local funding and
programs). As such, any financing or subsidies directed at reducing the cost and/or
increasing the supply of affordable housing should come from Provincial funding sources,
as they are not specific to a particular geography and are more directly related to
Page 168 of 564
3 | P a g e
wealth/capacity to pay (e.g. sales tax and income tax) rather than local property taxes and
fees.
Land Planning Appeal Tribunal – The County supports the elimination of the two stage
appeal process and commitment of additional resources to the LPAT, however, we believe
the return to full cross examination and ‘de novo’ hearings (e.g. allowing for the submission
of new evidence) will lead to more confrontational, expensive and time consuming
hearings and eliminate the incentive to ensure municipalities have been presented with
full and complete information at the time of making their decision on a planning matter.
We believe this could negatively impact the ability of municipalities to ensure they are
making fully informed decisions on such matters.
Additional dwelling units - As previously expressed through our comments on ERO no.
019-0181, the County is generally supportive of additional dwelling units as a means of
increasing the supply of affordable housing, in appropriate locations and subject to
appropriate development standards. That said, it is crucial that municipalities retain the
ability to establish appropriate development criteria or standards to ensure that any
potential negative land use/community impacts from the establishment of such units can
be avoided or acceptably mitigated (e.g. minimum parking space requirements, unit size,
entrance locations, date of construction of building etc.). This is particularly important for
additional units in ancillary structures, new buildings and outside of fully serviced
settlement areas. Ensuring municipalities have the authority and flexibility to establish
appropriate development criteria and standards will help to improve municipal and broader
community acceptance of such units, thereby increasing the likelihood of more timely and
wide spread implementation of local provisions and programs to allow for and encourage
such units.
ERO no. 019-0183 – Community Benefits Authority under the Planning Act
Without additional implementation detail (e.g. draft regulations), it is very difficult to determine the
potential risks and benefits of implementing the CBC authority. However, based on the
information currently available, the County has significant concerns with the requirement for
municipalities to develop and implement the new Community Benefit Charge (CBC) approach if
they wish to continue to recover the growth related costs of ‘soft’ services from development.
The current Development Charge (DC) regime provides a robust, predictable, flexible and well
understood and tested process for recovering the growth related costs of most ‘soft’ services. In
contrast, based on review of the limited information available to date, there appear to be a number
of potential risks associated with shifting to the CBC regime to finance such services. These
include, but are not necessarily limited to, financial uncertainty (e.g. not being able to fully finance
growth related service costs and provide necessary services), additional administrative burden
(e.g. another process to administer in addition to DCs), time delays (e.g. associated with
appraisals and appeals) and the substantial time and resources that will be required to properly
develop and implement the new system. That said, it is also difficult to discern the potential
benefits of moving to the proposed CBC regime for the financing of ‘soft’ services in terms of
improving predictability (for municipalities and development), revenue neutrality and/or the supply
of affordable housing. In fact, it appears the change could have a negative impact on these
objectives, if not carefully considered and implemented.
Page 169 of 564
4 | P a g e
Following are a number of more specific points with respect to the proposed CBC:
The Province should consider the option of maintaining the ability for municipalities to
continue to utilize the existing PA parkland provisions and DCA provisions for ‘soft’
services and simply making the CBC an optional financing tool that municipalities could
chose to implement (e.g. similar to the current Community Planning Permit System
provisions, where municipalities have the flexibility to determine if that particular tool is
necessary or beneficial in their particular context).
Use of Land Value for CBC Cap – A fundamental issue and concern is how percentage of
land value is specifically intended to be utilized in the determination the CBC funding cap,
as this is key to understanding the potential impacts of implementing this new tool. Land
value is not directly related to the cost of providing most ‘soft’ services and is also volatile
and unpredictable (e.g. can quickly change due to factors such as market conditions, land
speculation, interest rates, economic factors and land use policies/approvals). Further,
the need for site specific appraisals to establish land value will likely result in increased
administrative demands, time delays and costs, particularly if disputed. Land value also
seems to be a more subjective, unpredictable and ad-hoc basis for determining the cap
for most ‘soft’ services than the current DCA regime, as well as being more prone to
dispute and ‘gaming’ of the system. As such, the appropriateness of using land value as
the basis for the CBC cap should be carefully considered as part of the consultation with
municipalities on the implementation details of this tool.
Exemptions from CBC – the rationale for and potential consequences of exempting a
number of the proposed development types (e.g. retirement homes, non-profit housing
and universities/colleges) requires more thorough consideration. Further, these exempted
use types should be further scoped and defined so that the potential impacts of providing
such exemptions can be properly assessed and to reduce the potential for unintended
consequences and/or ‘gaming’ of the system. Is the intent to exempt such uses from the
requirement to contribute toward the cost of all ‘soft’ services as well as parkland? It would
seem that a number of these uses could increase the demand for many ‘soft’ services
and/or parkland.
Excluded CBC services – The County agrees with the MFOA position that municipalities
should have the flexibility to determine what services are required to support growth (e.g.
no services should be specifically excluded) as well as the need to recover the associated
costs from development, provided appropriate justification is provided (e.g. as is currently
required by the DCA for eligible services).
Scope of services eligible for CBC – The CBC provisions indicate that it will allow
Council to impose a changes against land to pay for the capital costs of ‘facilities,
services and matters required because of development or redevelopment of an area
to which the by-law applies’. We would request further clarification with respect to the
scope of services that municipalities will have the ability to recover for through the
CBC (e.g. is it only ‘excluded services’ and services that continue to be covered by
the DCA that won’t be eligible under the CBC?). For example, would ‘soft’ services,
like arts and cultural facilities, social and health services and affordable housing be
eligible for funding under the CBC?
Further, will municipalities continue to have the ability to recover the cost of growth
related studies (e.g. secondary plans and servicing studies, comprehensive reviews
for settlement expansions, CBC strategies etc.) from new development under the
CBC regime? This is key concern, as these studies are often costly and typically
entirely, or almost entirely, required for growth, so should not be funded from taxation.
Page 170 of 564
5 | P a g e
Other implementation related comments/questions
To ease transition, increase certainty and reduce administrative burden, the Province
should consider simply adopting the current DCA regime for the determination of
charges for ‘soft’ services under the CBC, which would allow the Province and
municipalities to focus their efforts on how the charges for the other services to be
covered by the CBC will be determined (e.g. parkland, services provided in exchange
for height and density bonuses etc.). Alternatively, the Province could consider
expanding on the existing provisions of the DCA to ensure they address the full range
of municipal services that are intended to be covered under the CBC (e.g. parkland,
affordable housing etc.), so that two different processes are not required to be
undertaken.
Many municipalities currently use Section 37 (Bonus Zoning) to incent the provision
of a range of various facilities, services or matters including, but not limited to:
affordable housing, enhanced urban design features/open space, day care facilities,
preservation of built and/or natural heritage features, green infrastructure, arts and
cultural facilities etc. To understand the impacts of the proposed changes, more
detail is required with respect to the extent to which the proposed CBC regime will
provide the ability to continue to allow for increased height and/or density in exchange
for the provision of such facilities, services or matters.
Parkland requirements – Will the proposed CBC approach allow municipalities to
continue to require that land be conveyed for park or other public recreation purposes,
not just the ability to collect a charge? This authority to require conveyance of lands
is critical for municipalities to ensure land for park and public recreation facilities can
be obtained in appropriate locations at the time of development. Currently the only
reference in the CBC provisions of the PA seems to be to the ability for municipalities
to recognize in-kind contributions in lieu of cash. This wording would not seem to
provide the same level of authority to require the conveyance of land as the current
PA parkland provisions.
What is the rationale for excluding site plan approval from the list of
development/redevelopment that can trigger the CBC?
The PA states that the CBC maximum is the percentage of the value of the land the
day before the date the first building permit is issued. Will the CBC have a mechanism
to allow for additional charges to be applied if further development is proposed on the
same site in the future (e.g. may only require a minor planning approval such as a site
plan amendment, or just a building permit)? If so, would a new land value then be
established for the purposes of the cap?
Timeframe to transition to the CBC framework – Given the risks and complexity likely to
be associated with the development of the proposed CBC framework, the County does
not feel the January 1, 2021 date will provide sufficient time to properly evaluate
implementation approaches and impacts, carry out the necessary studies and undertake
adequate consultation.
Community Planning Permit System (CPPS) - Although there are currently no CPPS in
place in Oxford, some of Area Municipalities in the County may wish to consider
establishing such a system in the future. In this regard, further clarification/response from
the Province on the following questions and concerns would assist the County in
evaluating the potential impacts of the proposed changes to the CPPS and determining
Page 171 of 564
6 | P a g e
the potential benefits of, and process for, implementing such a system in the County in
the future:
Is the Province’s intention that any municipality would be able to request a Minister’s
order to adopt or establish a CPPS for any area in their municipality, if they deem it to
be appropriate? If not, what Provincial requirements/conditions would need to be
satisfied for a municipality to obtain such an order? Updated Provincial guidelines
outlining the new CPPS process and associated considerations would be of
assistance to municipalities considering potential implementation of this tool.
Other than by being a municipality ‘prescribed through regulation’, the establishment
of a CPPS appears to be the only way for municipalities to establish inclusionary
zoning outside of a major transit station area (Note that there are no such areas
currently in Oxford). As such, we would request further clarification on which, if any,
municipalities are expected to be prescribed through regulation and what factors the
Province would consider in making that determination. If expectation is that it would
generally only be permitted through a CPPS, that would be helpful to have clarified.
In conclusion, the County generally commends the Province for considering new and innovative
financing tools and sources that can assist municipalities in achieving Provincial and local
planning and community building objectives, including increasing the supply of affordable
housing. However, we have a number of concerns with respect to the mandatory nature of the
proposed CBC tool, the timelines for migration and the significant risks associated with improper
implementation that we hope can be addressed through this consultation process.
ERO no. 019-0184 – O. Reg. 82/98 under Development Charges Act
Types of development subject to DC deferral – Institutional, industrial and commercial
developments should not be eligible for automatic DC deferrals. DC deferrals for some of
the other proposed development types (e.g. non-profit housing, long term care homes, some
rental housing developments) warrants further consideration, but they should be further
scoped and defined to properly assess potential impacts and considerations. See Watson
and MFOA comments as previously referenced for more detail.
To simplify administration and avoid challenges associated with non-payment, the Province
should consider allowing municipalities to add DC deferrals to the tax roll and charge interest
in the same manner as unpaid taxes. Notwithstanding that authority would be a clear
deterrent at an interest rate of 1.25% per month or 18% per year, it would simplify
administration of upper and lower tier deferrals.
DC rate freeze – Again, municipalities have the best understanding of their local
circumstances, so should have the authority to determine when a rate freeze may be
appropriate. For example, not every zone change application should be considered sufficient
grounds to freeze rates (e.g. a ‘complete’ application for a site specific zone change
associated with a specific development, versus a more general amendment). If the freeze
provisions are to be maintained, an approved site plan (or at minimum complete application)
would be a more appropriate trigger, as it provides a more ‘concrete’ indication of commitment
to a particular development.
Additional dwelling units – We are concerned with the ‘mandatory’ DC exemptions for
additional dwelling units, particularly for those in new buildings (e.g. new dwellings and
Page 172 of 564
7 | P a g e
ancillary structures) and in larger apartment buildings (unless they are clearly affordable
housing units). If a significant number of such dwelling units were to be created in a particular
community (e.g. in existing dwellings and new builds), it could result in a substantial shortfall
in DC revenue in comparison to the cost of municipal services required for such growth. We
feel a more appropriate approach would simply be to ensure the DC charge established for
such units is reflective of their expected additional demand on services (e.g. if PPU/demand
on services is similar to a bachelor/one bedroom apartment unit, then apply a similar rate). If
the Province feels financial incentives are necessary to facilitate the creation of affordable
additional units, a Provincial rebate to homeowners (e.g. to offset some or all of the local DC
charge) would be a better alternative, as it would not compromise the ability of municipalities
to sustainably finance growth related services.
Increased administration – it appears that many of the proposed changes (e.g. multi-
installment payment plans, freezing development charges and the new appraisal process) will
increase the administrative burden on municipalities, without a clear benefit in terms of
increasing the supply or affordability of housing. Providing further detail on the property value
based approach to the CBC cap and leaving the CBC, multi-installment payment plans and
development charge freeze provisions as optional tools that could be implemented by
municipalities, if and when deemed appropriate, may help to address many of these concerns.
For the reasons noted above, the County would urge the Province not to proceed with
proclaiming/bringing into force the proposed amendments until such time as fulsome consultation
with municipalities on the full text of the draft regulations and implementation details of the CBC
has been undertaken and all significant concerns have been addressed.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on the draft regulations. We would be pleased to
discuss any of the contents of this correspondence with the Province in more detail, if that would
be of assistance.
If you have any questions or wish to discuss any of these comments further, please feel free to
contact me at pmichiels@oxfordcounty.ca or (519) 539-0015 ext. 3209.
Yours Truly,
Paul Michiels
Manager of Planning Policy
Page 173 of 564
Plaza Three
101-2000 Argentia Rd.
Mississauga, Ontario
L5N 1V9
Office: 905-272-3600
Fax: 905-272-3602
www.watsonecon.ca
H:\DCA-GEN\Bill 108\Bill 108 Regulations - July 25 2019 Letter to Province - Final.docx
July 25, 2019
To Our Development Charge Clients:
Re: Bill 108: Draft Regulations for the Development Charges Act and Planning Act
(Community Benefits Charge Related)
On behalf of our many municipal clients, we are continuing to provide the most up-to-
date information on the proposed changes to the Development Charges Act (D.C.A.) as
proposed by Bill 108. The Province has recently released draft Regulations related to
the D.C.A. and the community benefits charge (C.B.C.). These Regulations are posted
on the Environmental Registry of Ontario for public comment which is open until August
21, 2019. Comments may be made at the following websites:
• Development Charge Regulation – https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-0184; and
• Community Benefits Charge Regulation – https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-0183.
We would note that the Province has established a Technical Working Committee to
advise on the methodological approach for the development of a proposed formula to
be used in the C.B.C. calculation. Gary Scandlan has been invited and will participate
as a member of this committee.
This letter provides a review and commentary on the Regulations proposed for the
D.C.A. and the Planning Act (as they relate to the C.B.C.). These draft Regulations are
included in the attached Appendices. Note that some of the proposed changes are
provided directly in the draft Regulations while other comments were included in other
documents circulated by the Province.
Proposed D.C.A. Regulation Changes – ERO Number 019-0184
1. Transition of Discounted Soft Services
Provides for transition to the C.B.C. authority during the period of January 1, 2020 to
January 1, 2021.
• Confirm that all D.C.A. provisions of Bill 108 will be effective at the municipality’s
discretion during the transition period (i.e. by January 1, 2021), such that
development charge (D.C.) by-law amendments for collections and statutory
exemptions can take effect at the same time as transitioning soft services.
Page 174 of 564
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2
Bill 108 Regulations - July 25 2019 Letter to Province - Final.docx
2a). D.C. Deferral
Provides for the deferral of D.C.s for rental housing development, non-profit housing
development, institutional/industrial/commercial development until occupancy.
• This speaks to “until occupancy;” however, it is proposed to be collected during a
term (5 or 20 years) beyond occupancy. Clarify that this means period “from the
date of occupancy.”
• As the landowner may change during the period when payments are being
made, how will municipalities be able to track the changes in ownership? Is
there an ability to place a notice on title of the land?
• Can security be taken to ensure recovery of the payments?
2b). Deferral Definitions
“‘Non-profit housing development’ means the construction, erection or placing of one or
more buildings or structures for or the making of an addition or alteration to a building or
structure…”
• This appears to cover both new developments as well as redevelopment. Need
to consider how the application of D.C. credits would apply on redevelopments.
“‘Rental housing development’ means…four or more self-contained units that are
intended for use as rented residential premises.”
• Definition speaks to “intended.” What requirement is in place for these units to
remain a “rented residential premises” and over what period of time?
• Can municipalities impose requirements to maintain status over the term of
installments?
• How will this be substantiated at the time of occupancy?
“‘Non-profit housing development’ means…by a non-profit corporation.”
• Any requirement to remain a “non-profit corporation” for a period of time?
• Can municipalities impose requirements to maintain status over the term of
installments?
• How will this be substantiated at the time of occupancy?
“‘Institutional development’ means…long-term care homes; retirement homes;
universities and colleges; memorial homes; clubhouses; or athletic grounds of the Royal
Canadian Legion; and hospices.”
• Long-term care homes and retirement homes are considered in some
municipalities as residential developments with charges imposed based on
Page 175 of 564
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3
Bill 108 Regulations - July 25 2019 Letter to Province - Final.docx
number of dwelling units. Does this require these developments to be charged
as non-residential developments based on gross floor area of development?
• Does the phrase “universities and colleges” relate only to the academic space?
Many municipalities impose charges on the housing related to the institution.
“‘Commercial development’ means…office buildings as defined under subsection 11(3)
in Ontario Regulation 282/98 under the Assessment Act; and shopping centres as
defined under subsection 12(3) in Ontario Regulation 282/98 under the Assessment
Act.”
• This would appear to apply to a subset of commercial types of development. The
Assessment Act defines a shopping centre as:
o “i. a structure with at least three units that are used primarily to provide
goods or services directly to the public and that have different
occupants, or
o ii. a structure used primarily to provide goods or services directly to the
public if the structure is attached to a structure described in
subparagraph i on another parcel of land.”
o “‘Shopping centre’ does not include any part of an office building within the
meaning of subsection 11 (3).”
• Office includes:
o “(a) a building that is used primarily for offices,
o (b) the part of a building that, but for this section, would otherwise be
classified in the commercial property class if that part of the building is
used primarily for offices.”
• Confirm all other types of commercial will continue to be charged fully at the time
of building permit issuance.
• Will these definitions require D.C. background studies to further subdivide the
growth forecast projections between shopping centre, office and other
commercial development for cashflow calculation purposes?
Administration of deferral charges in two-tier jurisdiction.
• Regulation does not speak to policies for upper- and lower-tier municipalities.
Areas where variation could occur include collection of installments (e.g. who
monitors and collects installments), commonality for processing payment
defaults, interest rates, etc.
3. D.C. Freeze for Site Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment
The D.C. quantum would be frozen “until two years from the date the site plan
application is approved, or in the absence of the site plan application, two years from
the date the zoning application was approved.”
Page 176 of 564
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4
Bill 108 Regulations - July 25 2019 Letter to Province - Final.docx
• D.C.s are frozen from date of site plan or zoning by-law application up to a period
of 2 years after approval. In the situation where the planning application is
appealed by the applicant, would they still be entitled to the rates at the date of
planning application submission?
• This provision may provide for abuse where land owners may apply for minor
zoning changes in order to freeze the D.C. quantum for several years.
4. Maximum Interest Rates on D.C. Deferrals for Freeze
Minister is not proposing to prescribe a maximum interest rate that may be charged on
D.C. amounts that are deferred or on D.C.s that are frozen.
• Municipalities will need to consider what rates are to be used in this regard (e.g.
annual short-term borrowing rates, long-term debenture rates, maximum rates on
unpaid taxes, etc.).
• Should there be consistency between upper- and lower-tier municipalities?
• If interest rate selected is too high, would it discourage paying installments?
5. Additional Dwelling Units
It is proposed that the present exemption within existing dwellings be expanded to allow
“…the creation of an additional dwelling in prescribed classes of residential buildings
and ancillary structures does not trigger a D.C.” Further, in new single, semi and row
dwellings (including ancillary structures), one additional dwelling will be allowed without
a D.C. payment. Lastly, it is proposed that, “…within other existing residential buildings,
the creation of additional units comprising 1% of existing units” would be exempted.
• All the noted exemptions should be granted once, so as to not allow for multiple
exemptions in perpetuity.
• Need to define a “row dwelling.” Does this include other multiples such as
stacked and/or back-to-back townhouses?
C.B.C. – Proposed Planning Act Regulation - ERO Number 019-0183
1. Transition
The specified date for municipalities to transition to community benefits is January 1,
2021.
• While this seems like a long period of time, there are over 200 municipalities with
current D.C. by-laws. As it will take some time to evaluate the approach to these
studies, carry out the studies, undertake a public process and pass by-laws, the
time frame is limited and should be extended to at least 18 months.
Page 177 of 564
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5
Bill 108 Regulations - July 25 2019 Letter to Province - Final.docx
2. Reporting on Community Benefits
“Municipalities would be required annually to prepare a report for the preceding year
that would provide information about the amounts in the community benefits charge
special account, such as:
• Opening and closing balances of the special account
• A description of the services funded through the special account
• Details on amounts allocated during the year
• The amount of any money borrowed from the special account, and the purpose for
which it was borrowed
• The amount of interest accrued on money borrowed.”
• Confirm that “special account” and reserve fund have the same meaning.
• In regard to amounts allocated, within the context of the legislation where 60% of
funds must be spent or allocated annually, can amounts be allocated to a capital
account for future spending (e.g. recreation facility in year 5)?
• Similar to D.C. reserve funds, can the funds in the special account only be
borrowed for growth-related capital costs?
3. Reporting on Parkland
Prescribed reporting requirements for parkland, “Municipalities would be required
annually to prepare a report for the preceding year that would provide information about
the amounts in the special account, such as:
• Opening and closing balances of the special account
• A description of land and machinery acquired with funds from the special account
• Details on amounts allocated during the year
• The amount of any money borrowed from the special account, and the purpose for
which it was borrowed.”
• In regard to the amount of interest accrued on money borrowed, confirm that the
“special account” and reserve fund have the same meaning.
• This section of the Regulation is introduced to allow municipalities to continue
using the current basic parkland provisions of the Planning Act. However, in
contrast to the current reporting under s. 42 (15) which allows funds to be used
“for park or other public recreation purposes,” the scope in this Regulation is for
“land and machinery.” Confirm whether the scope of services has been limited.
4. Exemptions from Community Benefits
“The Minister is proposing that the following types of developments be exempt from
charges for community benefits under the Planning Act:
• Long-term care homes
• Retirement homes
• Universities and colleges
Page 178 of 564
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6
Bill 108 Regulations - July 25 2019 Letter to Province - Final.docx
• Memorial homes, clubhouses or athletic grounds of the Royal Canadian Legion
• Hospices
• Non-profit housing.”
• Confirm that for-profit developments (e.g. long-term care and retirement homes)
will be entitled to exemptions.
• Will Regulations prescribe that exemptions must be funded from non-C.B.C.
sources, similar to D.C.s?
• Does the phrase “universities and colleges” relate only to the academic space?
Many municipalities impose charges on the housing related to the institution.
• Does the phrase “universities and colleges” include private institutions? Should a
definition be provided to clarify this?
5. Community Benefits Formula
Provides the authority for municipalities to charge for community benefits at their
discretion, to fund a range of capital infrastructure for community services needed
because of new development.
• The Regulation notes that, “This capital infrastructure for community services
could include libraries, parkland, daycare facilities, and recreation facilities.” Is
the inclusion of libraries, parkland, daycare facilities, and recreation facilities as
capital infrastructure for community services intended to be exhaustive, or are all
other “soft” services (e.g. social and health services) eligible to be included as
community benefits?
• The C.B.C. payable could not exceed the amount determined by a formula
involving the application of a prescribed percentage to the value of the
development land. The value of land that is used is the value on the day before
the building permit is issued to account for the necessary zoning to
accommodate the development. Will a range of percentages be prescribed to
take into account varying values of land for different types of development or will
the C.B.C. strategy require a weighting of the land values within the calculations?
• Will the range of percentages account for geographic differences in land values
(e.g. municipal, county, regional, etc.)?
• Will they account for differences in land use or zoning?
• It is noted that, at present, municipalities may impose parkland dedication
requirements and D.C.s on non-residential lands. Will non-residential lands be
included as chargeable lands? If not, does this allow municipalities to place
100% of the servicing needs onto residential development?
• This Ministry is not providing prescribed percentages at this time. Can the
Province confirm that no prescribed percentages will be proclaimed during the
transition period?
Page 179 of 564
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7
Bill 108 Regulations - July 25 2019 Letter to Province - Final.docx
6. Appraisals for Community Benefits
It is proposed that,
• “If the owner of land is of the view that the amount of a community benefits charge
exceeds the amount legislatively permitted and pays the charge under protest, the
owner has 30 days to provide the municipality with an appraisal of the value of land.
• If the municipality disputes the value of the land in the appraisal provided by the
owner, the municipality has 45 days to provide the owner with an appraisal of the
value of the land.
• If the municipality’s appraisal differs by more than 5 percent from appraisal provided
by the owner of the land, the owner can select an appraiser from the municipal list
of appraisers, that appraiser’s appraisal must be provided within 60 days.”
• Is the third appraisal binding? Can this appraisal be appealed to L.P.A.T.?
• Can the costs for appraisals be included as eligible costs to be funded under the
C.B.C.?
• Do all municipalities across the Province have a sufficient inventory of land
appraisers (i.e. at least 3) to meet the demands and turnaround times specified
within the Regulations?
7. Excluded Services for Community Benefits
“The following facilities, services or matters are to be excluded from community
benefits:
• Cultural or entertainment facilities
• Tourism facilities
• Hospitals
• Landfill sites and services
• Facilities for the thermal treatment of waste
• Headquarters for the general administration of municipalities and local boards.”
• This would be consistent with the ineligible services list currently found under the
D.C.A. Is there a distinction between “the thermal treatment of waste” and
incineration?
• Will there be any limitation to capital costs for computer equipment or rolling
stock with less than 7 years’ useful life (present provision within the D.C.A.)?
• Will the definition of eligible capital costs be the same as the D.C.A.?
• Question this relative to the description of community services in item 5 above.
8. Community Planning Permit System
Amendments to the Planning Act will allow conditions requiring the provision of
specified community facilities or services, as part of the community planning permit
system (which combines and replaces the individual zoning, site plan and minor
variance processes). It is proposed, “that a community benefits charge by-law would
Page 180 of 564
Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.PAGE 8
Bill 108 Regulations - July 25 2019 Letter to Province - Final.docx
not be available for use in areas within a municipality where a community planning
permit system is in effect and specified community services are identified.”
•The above suggests different charges to different lands. It is unclear as to the
amount of recovery provided under the C.B.C. and that allowed under the
community planning permit system.
•Will the community planning permit system have the same percentage of land
value restrictions as the C.B.C.?
9.Other Matters
The following are questions arising from the new cost recovery approach which is not
clearly expressed in the draft legislation.
•If a land owner sells the property at a discounted value, does an appraisal of that
land relative to similar lands override the discounted value shown in the actual
sale?
•Will Counties and Regions be allowed to continue the collection of their soft
services? How will their percentage of the land value be allocated? If they are
required to provide an averaged percentage across their jurisdiction, how are
they to recover their costs if, say, their percentage of land value can be absorbed
within the urban municipalities but not absorbed within the rural municipalities?
•How are mixed uses to be handled? For example, exempt institutional uses are
planned for the first floor of a high-rise commercial/residential building.
•Will ownership vs. use impact on the ability to impose the charge?
Yours very truly,
WATSON & ASSOCIATES ECONOMISTS LTD.
Gary D. Scandlan, BA, PLE Andrew Grunda, MBA, CPA, CMA
Director Principal
Page 181 of 564
From: Peter Crockett <pcrockett@oxfordcounty.ca>
Date: October 22, 2019 at 5:01:08 PM EDT
To: Stephen Molnar <SMolnar@Tillsonburg.ca>,
Subject: Save the Date: Public Meeting - Proposed Norwich to Tillsonburg Trail
Warden Martin and Members of Council,
On Wednesday, November 6, Oxford County will be hosting a public meeting regarding the
development of a multi-use recreational trail along the former railway corridor extending from
Norwich to Tillsonburg.
WHEN: Wednesday, November 6
WHERE: Norwich Community Centre
53 Stover Street South, Norwich
TIME: 7:00 – 9:00 p.m.
The public meeting will outline the proposed plans to establish a trail partnership with the Oxford
County Trails Council, the Township of Norwich, and a local community group for the
development of approximately 15 kilometres of off-road trail, helping to provide further
connectivity to the Trans Canada Trail, the local trail network within Tillsonburg, and on-road
cycling routes. This will help to bolster our active transportation routes in Oxford.
The public meeting will include a brief presentation followed by a Q&A session.
We welcome you to share the details of the public consultation with your constituents. Further
information can be found at www.oxfordcounty.ca/newsroom.
Thanks
Peter
Peter M. Crockett, P.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
pcrockett@oxfordcounty.ca
21 Reeve St., PO Box 1614, Woodstock, ON, N4S 7Y3 | T 519-539-0015 /1-800-755-0394,
Ext 3000
This e-mail communication is CONFIDENTIAL AND LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the
intended recipient, use or disclosure of the contents or attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this communication in error, please notify the author by return e-mail and delete
this message and any copy of it immediately. Thank you.
Think about our environment. Print only if necessary.
Page 182 of 564
Report Title High Tech Manufacturing Action Plan
Report No. DCS 19-32
Author Cephas Panschow
Meeting Type Council Meeting
Council Date October 28, 2019
Attachments High Tech Manufacturing Action Plan
Page 1 / 7
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive Report DCS 19-32 High Tech Manufacturing Action Plan;
AND THAT the High Tech Manufacturing Action Plan be approved in principle to guide future
initiatives with respect to strengthening the local manufacturing base and attracting investment
to the Town of Tillsonburg.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is provide an overview of the High Tech Manufacturing Action Plan
and to seek approval in principle for the opportunities and next steps contained therein. If
approved, the study will be incorporated into future Departmental Business Plans.
BACKGROUND
The Economic Development Strategy identified the need to support the development of
manufacturing clusters in order to create the desired future state for manufacturing in the Town
of Tillsonburg.
The Economic Development and Marketing Department has undertaken a number of initiatives
to support the development of a manufacturing cluster in Tillsonburg; including most notably, the
attraction of the Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP), which resulted in the following
motion to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding being adopted by Council at their October
13, 2015 meeting:
“THAT Council receive Report DCS 15-45 Memorandum of Understanding –
Manufacturing Acceleration Program;
AND THAT a by-law be brought forward authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to execute the
Memorandum of Understanding between the Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg and
MAP (Manufacturing Acceleration Program) Program Canada.”
Page 183 of 564
Page 2 / 7
The creation of this pilot project resulted in the following actions over the past few years:
Regular meetings with local manufacturers of custom products to discuss needs and
opportunities;
2017 Mission to the world’s top trade show (Hannover Fair) for innovation, automation
and Industry 4.0 initiatives;
o Included Wellmaster Pipe & Supply/Wellmaster Carts and GWA Canada Business
Solutions
o Resulted in new business/trade
Application to the Ontario Rural Economic Development Program (OMAFRA) for
implementation funding of $32,500
o Total project of $65,000 with funding from the Town of Tillsonburg, MAP partners,
and manufacturers
Early in 2018, the Town was advised that the Tillsonburg Manufacturing Acceleration Program
Implementation project had been approved for funding by the Ontario Government and the Town
entered into a Contribution Agreement with the Province of Ontario on March 1, 2018.
The funding agreement was for the following activities:
High Tech Manufacturing Cluster Framework
o Manufacturing sector research, review of other cluster initiatives including the
Brainport Region in The Netherlands
o Review of Industry 4.0 principles
o Develop manufacturing cluster model suitable for area
o Identify linkages to post-secondary education institutions and other channel
partners
Capabilities Assessment -
o Assess manufacturing products, processes and capabilities
o Seven assessments of local manufacturers completed
Accelerated Business Growth Framework
o Review the Canada-Europe Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement
(CETA) and identify local products that have the highest chance of success in the
European market
o Coordinate initial distribution channels and representation in Europe/The
Netherlands
o Ten company and sector export marketing assessments completed
The implementation project ended on March 31, 2019 and all claims and funds have been
received from the Province of Ontario.
Page 184 of 564
Page 3 / 7
One of the key outcomes of that project was the development of the High Tech Manufacturing
Subcluster Action Plan, which is the focus of this report.
The methodology to develop the High Tech Manufacturing Subcluster Action Plan was:
Conduct a manufacturing sector analysis at the local and tri-county level (See Figure
1);
Review other cluster initiatives including the Brainport Region (Netherlands), the
Bluewater Wood Alliance, the recently announced Next Generation Manufacturing
Canada Supercluster, etc., and provide a summary of best practices;
Develop a manufacturing cluster/sub-cluster model suitable for area;
Review Industry 4.0 principles and adjust them to local market conditions;
Analyze and evaluate the Field Lab Model of education/collaboration and determine its
suitability for Tillsonburg’s cluster; and,
Identify linkages to related initiatives.
Figure 1 – Study Area (Tri-County Map)
Page 185 of 564
Page 4 / 7
Some of the key findings from the manufacturing sector analysis were:
In 2018, Tillsonburg had the highest proportion of resident labour force employed in the
manufacturing sector at 33% compared to 20% in the Tri-County and 9% in Ontario.
Over the past ten years, Tillsonburg’s manufacturing employment base grew by 48% (an
increase of 1,078 jobs), from 2,188 jobs in 2009 to 3,266 jobs in 2018.
A total of 45 businesses (4% of total businesses) were registered manufacturing
businesses in Tillsonburg in 2018. Of the 45 businesses, 26 relate to advanced
manufacturing.
As an export-oriented sector, the manufacturing industry accounted for 83% of total
exports from Tillsonburg in 2014.
Exports in the manufacturing sector saw growth of 19% from 2011 to 2014
Tillsonburg is a net importer of manufacturing sector workers. While Tillsonburg loses
875 residents to the manufacturing sector of other municipalities, it still attracts 1,815
people from other municipalities commuting to work in Tillsonburg's manufacturing sector.
Sub-sectors that import the majority of workers include the Transportation equipment
(auto and related), Machinery Manufacturing, and Food Processing.
In 2014, $514 million in total purchases were made by the manufacturing sector:
o $279 million {54%) were in-region purchases, meaning that the money was spent
within the region
o $234 million {46%) were out-region purchases, indicating money leaking out of the
region
21% (1,155 people} of Tillsonburg 's resident population 15 years and over have
manufacturing related degrees, which is comparable to Oxford County at 24% and the
province at 21%
The Study concludes that:
Tillsonburg is home to a critical mass of large, small and medium-sized enterprises;
It is well positioned to capitalise on and foster an industry-led consortium;
There is considerable support from post-secondary and research institutions, industry
partners and government;
The Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP) represents a good platform to support a
cluster model:
o As this effort matures a more developed field lab model should be pursued that
addresses strategic partnerships and industry collaboration;
Tillsonburg must leverage local and regional strengths to showcase its unique value
proposition for manufacturing
Page 186 of 564
Page 5 / 7
Historically, Tillsonburg’s value proposition has often been that of a low-cost and location
advantage with an available workforce that possesses a strong rural work ethic (that is, a
workforce that has characteristics that enable workers to thrive in the sometimes-challenging
environment of manufacturing). In moving beyond this messaging and addressing the future of
manufacturing in Ontario, Tillsonburg should focus resources on the creation of an innovative,
highly adaptable manufacturing location with programs and industry experts that support globally
competitive businesses and manufacturing operations
The study recommends that, should Tillsonburg proceed with fostering the creation of a cluster
model for Tillsonburg, the following steps would need to be considered:
Step I - Identify and Prioritize the Local Cluster
Step II - Determine the Level of Industry Support for the Cluster
Step III - Understand Cluster Opportunities
Step IV - Local Leadership Group
Step V - Establish the Vision, Mission and Outcomes of the Cluster
Step VI: Establish Cluster Partnerships
Based on the findings that Tillsonburg does indeed have what it takes to develop a
manufacturing sub-cluster initiative, staff is recommending that the report’s finding be supported
and that the recommendations be approved in principle subject to specific initiatives being
developed through the annual business plan and budget process.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
The High Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan was developed with significant input from
the manufacturing and the business community:
Stakeholder Interviews – Interviewed approximately 15 manufacturing sector and industry
partner stakeholders
Industry Workshop – Engaged 11 business and community stakeholders
The Action Plan was presented to the Economic Development Advisory Committee at their July
9, 2019 meeting.
An implementation committee has been created and they are working on the development of an
implementation plan. Members of the Manufacturing Action Plan Committee are:
Ian Barton, opid Technologies
Monica Clare Management Consultant
Nicolas Morganti, Morganti Marketing
Steve Spanjers, Triton Innovation*
Collette Takacs, Westburne*
*Member of the Town’s Economic Development Advisory Committee
Page 187 of 564
Page 6 / 7
A release event for the Action Plan is being scheduled for November. The purpose of this
release event will be to kick-off the action plan and engage the manufacturing community and
various agency stakeholders.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There are no financial impacts related to this report. If the report is approved, any financial
impacts related to implementation would be brought forward in future departmental Business
Plans and Budgets. It is anticipated that private sector companies would be key stakeholders in
moving this initiative forward.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
Theme 2.1 of the Community Strategic Plan identifies the need to Support new and existing
businesses and provide a variety of employment opportunities. The implementation of the High
Tech Manufacturing Action Plan will support the improved sustainability of local manufacturers
future proof the local economy.
1. Excellence in Local Government
☒ Demonstrate strong leadership in Town initiatives
☐ Streamline communication and effectively collaborate within local government
☐ Demonstrate accountability
2. Economic Sustainability
☒ Support new and existing businesses and provide a variety of employment opportunities
☐ Provide diverse retail services in the downtown core
☐ Provide appropriate education and training opportunities in line with Tillsonburg’s
economy
3. Demographic Balance
☒ Make Tillsonburg an attractive place to live for youth and young professionals
☐ Provide opportunities for families to thrive
☐ Support the aging population and an active senior citizenship
4. Culture and Community
☒ Promote Tillsonburg as a unique and welcoming community
☐ Provide a variety of leisure and cultural opportunities to suit all interests
☐ Improve mobility and promote environmentally sustainable living
Page 188 of 564
Page 7 / 7
Report Approval Details
Document Title: Report DCS 19-32 High Tech Manufacturing Action Plan.docx
Attachments: - Town of Tillsonburg-High Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan-
F(May2019).pdf
Final Approval Date: Oct 22, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Ron Shaw - Oct 22, 2019 - 8:52 AM
Page 189 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 1
Page 190 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 4
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 6
1.1 Study Objective ........................................................................................................................ 6
1.2 Study Process............................................................................................................................ 6
1.3 Study Area ................................................................................................................................ 7
1.4 Defining Tillsonburg’s Manufacturing Sector ........................................................................... 8
2. Research and Analysis................................................................................................... 9
2.1 Planning Context .................................................................................................................... 10
2.2 Industry 4.0 and Implications for Tillsonburg ......................................................................... 11
2.3 Sector Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 12
2.4 Sub-Cluster Model Review ..................................................................................................... 17
3. Consultation ............................................................................................................... 18
3.1 Stakeholder Interviews ........................................................................................................... 18
3.2 Stakeholder Workshop ........................................................................................................... 19
3.3 SWOT Assessment .................................................................................................................. 19
4. Value Proposition ....................................................................................................... 22
4.1 Low-Cost Operating Environment .......................................................................................... 22
4.2 Growing Employment Base .................................................................................................... 23
4.3 A Diverse Local Industry Base ................................................................................................. 23
4.4 A Strong Potential for Innovation ........................................................................................... 24
4.5 Supportive Local Government ................................................................................................ 24
5. Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Models ............................................................................. 24
5.1 Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP) ......................................................................... 24
5.2 Smart Industry Field Lab Model ............................................................................................. 25
5.3 Opportunity Identification...................................................................................................... 27
5.4 Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Model for Tillsonburg................................................................. 29
6. Action Planning/Recommendations ............................................................................ 31
Appendix I - Manufacturing Sector Analysis and Cluster Model Review Report ..................... 31
Page 191 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 3
About This Report
This High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan report concludes the results of the research and
consultation undertaken to provide the Town of Tillsonburg with a high-tech manufacturing cluster
framework. Section 3 and Section 4 of the report includes key insights garnered from the research and
analysis phase and the consultation phase. Section 5 details the value proposition for the Town as it
relates to the development of a cluster initiative. Section 6 provides an action plan and
recommendations that Tillsonburg can capitalise on to attract, support and grow investment in the
manufacturing sector.
Page 192 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 4
Executive Summary
Study Objective
This study was completed to provide the Town of Tillsonburg with a framework to support the growth
and development of a high-tech manufacturing sub-cluster. It provides a clear and accurate description
of the town’s current manufacturing subsectors and reflects input from local business, senior levels of
government and the stakeholder community to highlight a unique sub-cluster development opportunity
for the Town of Tillsonburg. The study includes a series of next steps to foster the sub-cluster and
recommendations to attract, support and grow investment in the manufacturing sector.
Study Process
This High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan started in November 2018 and had been
implemented in five phases, as seen below.
▪ Phase I – Project Initiation
▪ Phase II – Research & Analysis
▪ Phase III – Consultation
▪ Phase IV – Sub-Cluster Model Development
▪ Phase V – Sub-Cluster Action Plan & Reporting
The Planning Landscape
The Town of Tillsonburg has long recognised the importance of the manufacturing sector in growing the
local and regional economy. The 2008 Economic Strategy for the Town of Tillsonburg identified priority
recommendations for creating the desired future state for manufacturing in the Town of Tillsonburg.
This included support for the development of key economic clusters, particularly in high value-added
auto-related production. More recently, the Town partnered with Isah International B.V, to implement
the Manufacturing Accelerator Program (MAP) to support the development of a manufacturing cluster
through a series of pilot projects.
A Statistical Portrait of Tillsonburg’s Manufacturing Sector
The study examined the size, composition, and growth of Tillsonburg’s manufacturing sector labour
force, businesses and worker trends. Some highlights from the statistical analysis follow.
▪ In 2018, Tillsonburg had the highest proportion of resident labour force employed in the
manufacturing sector at 33% compared to 20% in the Tri-County and 9% in Ontario.
▪ Over the past ten years, Tillsonburg’s manufacturing employment base grew by 48% (an increase of
1,078 jobs), from 2,188 jobs in 2009 to 3,266 jobs in 2018.
▪ A total of 45 businesses (4% of total businesses) were registered manufacturing businesses in
Tillsonburg in 2018. Of the 45 businesses, 26 relate to advanced manufacturing.
▪ Tillsonburg’s high impact industries in the manufacturing sector are those with a high potential for
automation and include Transportation equipment manufacturing, Machinery manufacturing,
Page 193 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 5
Fabricated metal product manufacturing and Electrical equipment, appliance and component
manufacturing.
Sub-Cluster Model Review
A key element of the research for the High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan was a best
practice review to learn from existing cluster initiatives across North America and around the world.
The review identified that to ensure cluster success; the following factors need to be focussed on:
▪ Unique Industry Opportunity
▪ Partnerships
▪ Co-Opetition
▪ Long-Term Focus
▪ Community Champions
▪ Central Hub
Sector Consultation and SWOT Assessment
To gain community input and secure continued support for Tillsonburg’s manufacturing sector, a
consultation program with the business community and local stakeholders was conducted, which
included:
▪ Stakeholder Interviews – interviews with approximately 15 stakeholders in the sector as well as
industry partners
▪ Industry Workshop - with the business community and community stakeholders
To further inform the action plan and recommendations, a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats) assessment of the manufacturing sector was completed using insights from the sector
analysis and the consultation exercises that were completed.
Action Planning
The primary focus of the High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan was to build a strong body of
knowledge to inform subsequent research and the development of a high-tech manufacturing cluster
framework. In accordance with this, recommendations are provided to help advance the High-Tech
Manufacturing Sub-Cluster.
Page 194 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 6
1. Introduction
1.1 Study Objective
This study was completed to provide the Town of Tillsonburg with a framework to develop a high-tech
manufacturing sub-cluster. It provides a clear and accurate description of the town’s manufacturing
subsectors and reflects the input of business, senior levels of government and community stakeholders.
The study includes a series of next steps to foster the cluster and recommendations to attract, support
and grow investment in the manufacturing sector.
Specific goals of the study were to:
▪ examine the local and regional context as it relates to the development of a manufacturing
cluster/sub-cluster;
▪ provide a sector profile of the manufacturing sector that examined the growth and workforce
implications/challenges and skills;
▪ inform sub-cluster development by conducting a review of existing manufacturing clusters, the
policy framework for clusters, particularly, best practices that are applicable for Tillsonburg and
Southwestern Ontario;
▪ examine the suitability of the Town’s Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP) to support the
growth and development of the manufacturing sub-cluster;
▪ analyse and evaluate the Field Lab Model of education/collaboration and determine its suitability
for Tillsonburg’s sub-cluster development; and
▪ identify linkages to post-secondary education institutions and other partners and validate potential
involvement with this initiative.
1.2 Study Process
This study followed five interconnected phases, as illustrated below.
Phase I
Project Initiation
Phase II
Research &
Analysis
Phase III
Consultation
Phase IV
Sub-Cluster Model
Development
Phase V
Sub-Cluster Action
Plan & Reporting
Page 195 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 7
▪ Phase II – Research & Analysis. Includes a review of Town’s existing planning documents and
policies, manufacturing sector overview and review of existing cluster initiatives.
▪ Phase III – Consultation. Involved telephone interviews and an industry workshop with a range of
stakeholders including local businesses, community organizations, sector associations and other
industry partners.
The results of Phase II – Research & Analysis and Phase III – Consultation were used to inform the
subsequent phases of the study. The results were used to identify the strengths, weakness,
opportunities, and threats for Tillsonburg’s manufacturing sector. Furthermore, it provided a firm basis
of the resources available in the community and applicability to respond to Industry 4.0. Based on these
insights, the manufacturing cluster/sub-cluster model and subsequent action plans were developed.
▪ Phase IV – Sub-Cluster Model Development. Includes Tillsonburg’s value proposition as it relates to
the development of a manufacturing cluster, the best and most appropriate opportunities for the
development of the cluster and the steps required to develop an appropriate manufacturing cluster.
▪ Phase V – Sub-Cluster Action Plan & Reporting. Development of distinct action plans for
consideration based on research findings and stakeholder input.
Manufacturing Sector Analysis and Cluster Model Review Report
An interim Manufacturing Sector Analysis and Sub-Cluster Model Review Report was provided to the
Town of Tillsonburg in February 2019 containing the results of Phase II – Research & Analysis. This
report is provided in Appendix I.
1.3 Study Area
The Town of Tillsonburg with 15,872 residents and 1,194 registered businesses has a diverse economy
comprised of manufacturing, retail, health care, accommodation and food services and construction1.
The Town, located in Oxford County, is highly integrated into a regional tri-county economy of 309,627
people2 and is located at the convergence of Oxford, Elgin and Haldimand-Norfolk counties. Tillsonburg’s
geographic location at about 50 kilometres southeast of London, on Highway 3 at the junction of
Highway 19, with convenient access to Highways 401 and 403, positions it in the middle of one of the
most diverse and productive industrial regions in Southwestern Ontario. Due to longstanding efforts by
the Town and with support from both the Federal and Provincial Governments, the Town has
successfully transitioned its economy away from the Tobacco industry, and these combined efforts have
resulted in the Town being a regional leader in industry services.
1 Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population and 2018 Canadian Business Counts.
2 Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population.
Page 196 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 8
Figure 1: Town of Tillsonburg Location Map, 2018
Source: Town of Tillsonburg. Adapted by MDB Insight, 2019
1.4 Defining Tillsonburg’s Manufacturing Sector
Using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Canada 2012, the manufacturing sector
comprises establishments primarily engaged in the chemical, mechanical or physical transformation of
materials or substances into new products. Related activities, such as the assembly of the component
parts of manufactured goods; the blending of materials; and the finishing of manufactured products are
also treated as manufacturing activities. The sector is grouped under 21 sub-sectors ranging from metal
manufacturing to miscellaneous manufacturing such as medical equipment and office supplies.
Page 197 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 9
Manufacturing Subsectors
▪ Food manufacturing
▪ Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing
▪ Textile mills
▪ Textile product mills
▪ Clothing manufacturing
▪ Leather and allied product manufacturing
▪ Wood product manufacturing
▪ Paper manufacturing
▪ Printing and related support activities
▪ Petroleum and coal product manufacturing
▪ Chemical manufacturing
▪ Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
▪ Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing
▪ Primary metal manufacturing
▪ Fabricated metal product manufacturing
▪ Machinery manufacturing
▪ Computer and electronic product manufacturing
▪ Electrical equipment, appliance and component
manufacturing
▪ Transportation equipment manufacturing
▪ Furniture and related product manufacturing
▪ Miscellaneous manufacturing
Advanced Manufacturing
Advanced manufacturing is a subset of the overall manufacturing sector. However, there is no clear or
standardised definition to describe what it includes. It is generally accepted that advanced
manufacturing relates to establishments that use advanced processes in the production of goods as well
as establishments that produce complex goods, such as electronics and vehicles. The NAICs defined as
the advanced manufacturing subset in this report is thus related to both advanced processes and
advanced goods as they relate to Tillsonburg.
Advanced Manufacturing Subsectors
▪ Chemical manufacturing
▪ Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
▪ Fabricated metal product manufacturing
▪ Machinery manufacturing
▪ Computer and electronic product manufacturing
▪ Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing
▪ Transportation equipment manufacturing
▪ Medical equipment and supplies manufacturing
Note: The terms Advanced Manufacturing and High-Tech Manufacturing are the same and used
interchangeably in the report.
Page 198 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 10
2. Research and Analysis
2.1 Planning Context
A document review of relevant initiatives and municipal strategies was completed to provide a clear
picture of the larger planning context in Tillsonburg and the surrounding region as it relates to the
development of the High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan.
A full examination of the planning context is set out in Appendix I under Section I – Background Review
of the Sector Analysis and Cluster Model Review Report. Key insights that emerged from the review
include:
Support for the Manufacturing Sector
The 2008 Economic Strategy for the Town of Tillsonburg identified priority recommendations for
creating the desired future state for manufacturing in the Town of Tillsonburg. This included support for
the development of key economic clusters, particularly in high value-added auto-related production.
Tillsonburg has distinct advantages, including lower prices for serviced employment lands, no industrial
development charges, lower industrial property taxes and industrial development cost per sq. ft.
compared to the west GTAH (Greater Toronto Area, and Hamilton) and other municipalities, including
Milton, Guelph, Cambridge and Kitchener.
As part of the Town’s development efforts to support the expansion of its manufacturing cluster, the
Town partnered with Isah International B.V, to implement the Manufacturing Accelerator Program
(MAP). Isah business software was founded in 1987 and supports the manufacturing industry, from large
to small companies and from national organisations to international players. It provides intensive
collaboration and knowledge-sharing, continuous product development of the product and support for
export initiatives. As of 2018, one pilot program with a Tillsonburg manufacturer has been completed,
and the initiative is now being expanded to support a further ten local manufacturers. The extension of
the program is a critical objective of the Town’s 2019 Business Plan.
The 2019 Business Plan also recognises opportunities to increase the export readiness of local
manufacturers by leveraging trade relations in Europe. In keeping with this, the MAP program business
framework specifies the need to review the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and
identify those local products that have the highest chance of success in the European market.
Opportunities for Education and Training
Appropriate education and training opportunities in line with Tillsonburg’s economy through
partnerships with Glendale High School and Fanshawe College are highlighted in the 2014 Community
Strategy Plan. Currently, Fanshawe College provides occasional courses with support through the
Woodstock Satellite Campus in Tillsonburg.
Emphasis on the Local Economy
In addition to local initiatives, regional strategies including the 2015 Future Oxford Community
Sustainability Plan, 2017 Oxford County Action Plan & Strategy Alignment, 2015-2018 Strategic Plan for
Oxford County and the 2015 Future Oxford Community Sustainability Plan, all focus on growing the local
economy. The focus is placed on supporting local industry and entrepreneurship growth, increased
Page 199 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 11
collaboration, workforce alignment, strengthening community access, attracting skilled talent and
reducing barriers to employment.
2.2 Industry 4.0 and Implications for Tillsonburg
A key consideration in the development of a manufacturing cluster/sub-cluster in Tillsonburg is the
implications of technology on the continued transformation of manufacturing, and this can be
supported or enabled locally. The Fourth Industrial Revolution, also known as Industry 4.0 reflects the
integration of smart digital technologies such as robotics, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, IoT,
additive manufacturing, and advanced materials to make manufacturing more agile, flexible and
responsive to customers3. A ‘smart factory’ that uses advanced technologies allows manufacturers to
react more efficiently to changing market conditions, improve both their operational efficiency and
revenue forecasts, create customised products and aim for continual improvement. Industry 4.0 also
allows for a more connected supply chain whereby suppliers, customers, investors, and other third-party
experts can learn and adapt to new conditions and work together more effectively4.
The implications of Industry 4.0 also signify a shift in the type of work and the skills that employees will
be required to perform. The advent and rapid adoption of new technologies have resurfaced concerns
over technology eliminating jobs. However, new technologies help drive innovation and give rise to
entirely new industries and economic opportunities. As a result, in the long run, technology has often
helped to produce more jobs than it destroyed5.
When assessing the impact of Industry 4.0 and automation on manufacturing in Tillsonburg, it should be
noted that manufacturing is Tillsonburg’s dominant industry, employing approximately 33% of the
Town’s labour force6. The Brookfield Institute’s Automation Across the Nation report identifies that
communities such as Ingersoll, Woodstock and Tillsonburg are among the most susceptible CA’s for
automation risk7. Heavy reliance on a single industry means that small cities and towns have decreased
the ability to reabsorb displaced labour and are more prone to automation risk. Figure 2 shows the
susceptibility of Southern Ontario CMAs and CAs to Automation.
Businesses need to be aware of their current level of digital maturity, particularly as it relates to their
current and future competitiveness. Technology adoption can be done incrementally – businesses can
adopt technology on a small scale to build skills and digital maturity and realise the return on
investment. To ensure that businesses and the economy benefits from technology adoption, local and
senior levels of government need to develop policies and incentives that encourage investment and
innovation in a way that helps businesses increase productivity, upscale their product offerings and
improve access to markets. Innovative workforce strategies may also be required to help workers and
institutions adapt to the impact on employment. This includes developing programs that enable both
businesses and employees to work effectively in the current environment.
3 Industry 4.0: The New Industrial Revolution. Business Development Bank of Canada, 2017. Forces of change: Industry 4.0. A Deloitte series on
Industry 4.0. December 2017
4 ibid
5 Automation Across the Nation. Brookfield Institute, 2017.
6 EMSI Analyst, 2019.
7 The report estimates that a community who proportion of total employment in an industry exceeds 20% is susceptible to automation risk.
Page 200 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 12
Figure 2: Susceptibility of Southern Ontario CMAs and CAs to Automation
Source: Automation Across the Nation. Brookfield Institute, 2017.
2.3 Sector Analysis
An overview of the manufacturing sector with an emphasis on the sector’s performance in Tillsonburg is
presented to illustrate the current nature and composition of manufactured goods and services in the
community and contributions to economic growth.
The sector analysis employs a Location Quotient (LQ) analysis to determine the industry sub-sectors that
are highly concentrated in Tillsonburg relative to the Tri-County and the Province.
Location Quotient (LQ)
A Location Quotient (LQ) analysis provides information on the concentration of jobs or industries in a
community of interest relative to an over-arching area, usually the province or nation. It can reveal what
makes a particular region “unique”.
LQ’s Classifications:
▪ LQ greater than or equal to 1.25 – indicates that the community has a proportionately ‘high’
concentration of workers/industries than the larger comparison area employed in a specific
industry.
▪ LQ lower than 1.25 and higher than 1.0 – indicates that the community has an ‘above average’
concentration of workers/industries than the larger comparison area employed in a specific
industry.
Page 201 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 13
▪ LQ 1.0 – indicates employment/industry concentration in the community is ‘on par’ with the larger
comparison area employed in a specific industry.
▪ LQ lower than 1.0 and higher than 0.75 – indicates that the community has a ‘moderate’
concentration of workers/industries than the larger comparison area employed in a specific
industry.
▪ LQ lower than 0.75 - indicates that the community has a ‘low’ concentration of workers/industries
than the larger comparison area employed in a specific industry.
The key highlights of the sector analysis are presented as infographics in the following pages. Detailed
sector analysis is provided in Appendix I under Section II – Manufacturing Sector Analysis of the Sector
Analysis and Cluster Model Review Report.
Page 202 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 14
Page 203 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 15
Page 204 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 16
Page 205 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 17
2.4 Sub-Cluster Model Review
A best practices review was conducted to learn from select cluster initiatives across Canada, the United
States and Holland. A complete best practices review is provided in Appendix I under Section III – Sub-
Cluster Model Review of the Sector Analysis and Cluster Model Review Report. Key learnings for
Tillsonburg are presented here.
The concept of ‘industry clusters’ has gained recognition as a compelling framework for economies
looking to support and grow their economies. While firms and communities’ benefit from clustering
through agglomeration economies, a clear understanding of the cluster model is required to recognize
growth. Clusters in its simplest form are a ‘group of firms clustered together as a result of geographic
proximity and similar industry processes’. A Cluster usually consists of the following elements:
▪ Companies in the Same Sector or Industry: common raw material, common elements in
processes, and serve common and multiple sectors.
▪ Geographic Proximity: The rule of thumb for a cluster's size is between a one and two-hour driving
radius. This allows for ease of companies to meet with each other and participate in activities of the
cluster.
▪ Infrastructure Commonalities: This refers to things like skills, training, purchasing, supply chain,
service provision, logistics, etc.
▪ Collaboration among (Competing) Companies: the commitment of companies in the sector and
the region to collaborate on projects, share best practices they wish to share and see the
importance of the “big picture” for the growth.
Cluster development must be based on identified and validated industry opportunities. While the exact
factors that generate robust economies are not completely understood, the following factors are critical
in the development of clusters.
▪ Location: the co-location of firms, academic institutions and R&D establishments, venture
capitalists and government institutions allow for the attraction of skilled labour and foster
interactions and knowledge spillovers while keeping transaction costs at a minimum.
▪ Critical mass: the co-location of firms suggests that the supply chain is well developed, and firms
can produce economies of scale. Also, the productivity and overall quality of products as improved
and firms focus on continuous innovation to remain competitive.
▪ Linkages: clusters lead to “co-opetition”, by which firms recognise mutual benefits and develop
trust. Firms can actively collaborate on projects and improve their supply chain links and improve
market reach. It is understood that clustering enables firms to be more innovative than if they were
not located in a cluster.
Cluster Success Factor Notes
Unique Industry
Opportunity
▪ Focused industry opportunities are identified and understood.
▪ Investment is focused and measured.
Partnerships
▪ Public-Private partnerships are engaged
▪ Ideal partnerships are private sector driven
▪ Educational and government institutions play supportive roles
Page 206 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 18
Cluster Success Factor Notes
Co-opetition ▪ Clusters are collective initiatives; partners work collaboratively toward
mutually beneficial goals.
Long-Term Focus
▪ Clusters are developed with the ultimate goal of creating a strong business
ecosystem. Immediate job creation and profit are secondary.
▪ Includes initiatives such as strengthening the supply chain, securing funding
and partnering with academic institutions
Community Champions ▪ Clusters have the support of business leaders in the community, who are in
turn supported by government partners.
Central Hub
▪ Clusters need a central physical or digital space for businesses/entrepreneurs
to congregate.
▪ Sharing space leads to synergies and innovative idea sharing.
3. Consultation
A key consideration in the development of the High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan was the
need to engage with the local business representatives as well as key industry partners and
stakeholders. The primary research complemented the research and analysis phase and included
telephone interviews and an in-person workshop session.
The following business representatives and industry partners were consulted:
Tillsonburg Manufacturing Companies Industry Partners
▪ Autoneum Canada Limited
▪ Dyco Tool Inc
▪ Foldens Machine Works Ltd
▪ J/E Bearing & Machine
▪ Marwood International Inc
▪ Mil-Sim-Fx International Inc
▪ Systemair
▪ Titan Trailers Inc
▪ Triton Innovation
▪ Wellmaster Pipe & Supply Inc
▪ Additive Metal Manufacturing Inc
▪ Bluewater Wood Alliance
▪ Excellence in Manufacturing Consortium
▪ Isah Business Software
▪ Export Development Canada
▪ FarStar S.A.C. Consulting
▪ Manufacturing Accelerator Program
▪ Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation
and Trade
▪ Monica Clare Management Consultant
▪ Netherlands Field Lab Model
▪ SONAMI – Southern Ontario Network for
Advanced Manufacturing Innovation
▪ Town of Tillsonburg Multi-Service Centre
3.1 Stakeholder Interviews
A total of 15 telephone interviews were conducted with Tillsonburg manufacturing companies and
industry partners. The questions were intended to gain an understanding of the local manufacturing
sector and determine the opportunities, challenges, export readiness and support for the sector.
Page 207 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 19
3.2 Stakeholder Workshop
An in-person stakeholder workshop was conducted in Tillsonburg on March 6th, 2019. The following
questions were discussed:
▪ How do we make manufacturing (metal) more competitive in Tillsonburg/Ontario?
▪ What do you consider the unique selling points for Tillsonburg in metal manufacturing sub-cluster?
▪ What would you see as
the benefits of a cluster
model or some variation
to support the growth
and innovation within the
sector (e.g., R&D, skills
training, business support
and process
improvements)?
These questions were chosen
to gain a deeper
understanding of the
performance of local firms as
it relates to a range of factors
and to gauge the
opportunities for
collaboration among Tillsonburg’s manufacturers. The discussion also helped to build local knowledge
for the development of a manufacturing cluster targeting metal products and the associated supply
chain. The stakeholder interviews provided initial insights that were explored in detail through the
workshop.
3.3 SWOT Assessment
To further inform the action plan and recommendations, a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats) assessment of the manufacturing sector was completed using insights from the sector
analysis and input from the stakeholder consultations. While every effort was made to incorporate a
range of perspectives, responses should not be used to generalise the opinions of all employers or
industry partners within the sector.
The major themes of the SWOT assessment are summarised below.
3.3.1 Strengths
▪ Strategic Location: As part of the Oxford, Elgin and Haldimand-Norfolk Tri-county region,
Tillsonburg has direct access to Highways 3, 19, and 59 with convenient access to Highway 401 and
403. The town is also serviced by the Ontario Southland Railway with connections to CN/CP and air
service at the Tillsonburg Regional Airport.
Figure 3: Stakeholder Workshop held in the Town of Tillsonburg, 2019
Page 208 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 20
▪ Proximity to Major Centres: Tillsonburg’s central location allows for access to major centres of
industry throughout Southern Ontario including Woodstock, London, Kitchener/Waterloo, Hamilton,
Toronto as well as the US Industrial heartland and cities like Detroit and Chicago.
▪ Access to Supply Chain: Tillsonburg’s central location and proximity to major centres provide it
with the distinct advantage of access to supply chain and regional assets, including transportation
and labour.
▪ Diversified Economy: Tillsonburg has a diversified economy with strengths in manufacturing, retail
trade, health care and social assistance, accommodation and food services, construction and
transportation and warehousing.
▪ Manufacturing Labour force Growth: over the past ten years, Tillsonburg’s manufacturing
employment base grew by 48% (an increase of 1,078 jobs), from 2,188 jobs in 2009 to 3,266 jobs in
2018.
▪ Advanced Manufacturing: in 2018, approximately 58% of all manufacturing businesses in
Tillsonburg were in advanced manufacturing. Tillsonburg’s strengths in advanced manufacturing
include Transportation equipment manufacturing, machinery manufacturing, fabricated metal
product manufacturing and electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing.
▪ Low Overhead: Tillsonburg has low overhead costs compared to the GTHA municipalities, meaning
that businesses expend less on electricity, natural gas, water and other services. Low overhead
costs allow for businesses to spend less on utilities that do not directly generate revenue.
▪ Supportive Town Environment: in addition to the cost advantage for manufacturing businesses,
Tillsonburg has also invested in the manufacturing sector through planning and economic
development investments and initiatives, including its Community Improvement Plan which
provides for a variety of support programs including Grant in Lieu of Permit Fees Program and the
Brownfield Redevelopment Incentive Program.
3.3.2 Weakness
▪ Labour Market is Tightening: demand is high for technically skilled workers (CNC machinists,
electromechanical technicians, mechanics, electricians, welders, Programmable Logic Controllers,
etc.) highlighting a need for more ‘middle-skilled talent’ that has the right mix of education and
technical aptitude/training.
▪ Perceptions of the Sector: negative perceptions of the manufacturing sector as an ‘unattractive’
trade job, both by parents and students act as an impediment to the growth of the sector.
▪ Partnerships not Leveraged: While the Town has six public schools and one high school (Glendale)
plus other high schools in the area, Fanshawe College closed their local centre in 2014. With the
loss of this physical presence, Tillsonburg does not offer any significant post-secondary education or
training opportunities to local residents and workers. While these can be accessed at Fanshawe’s
satellite campuses in neighbouring communities (Simcoe, Woodstock, St Thomas) and the main
campus in London, the lack of local opportunities is impacting local employers and workers.
Partnerships to achieve local education/training opportunities are not fully leveraged.
Page 209 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 21
▪ Access to Funding and Business Financing: limited sources of funding for start-ups and small
business looking to grow. Businesses are not aware of the funding and program support that is
available and find it hard to navigate suitable funding. Businesses must stay on top of sales to
ensure profitability and thus do not have the time or labour resources to research funding
opportunities.
▪ Access to Business Support Networks: small businesses perceive that they have only a few “go-
to” organizations or networks to assist in terms of business support and information sharing. The
lack of established channels of communication between industry and business support networks
affects the viability of the sector.
▪ Transit Constraints: lack of inter-regional transit and/or limited options to employment areas limits
opportunities for businesses to access the regional labour pool and attract workers.
3.3.3 Opportunities
▪ Promote High-Tech Manufacturing: Tillsonburg’s strengths in high-tech metal manufacturing
should be promoted through stronger marketing and communication efforts. This will allow for
increased recognition on a regional, national and international scale.
▪ Opportunities to Diversify: local manufacturers need to be encouraged to innovate and diversify
production to other subsectors than automotive manufacturing. Research needs to be undertaken
to identify programs that can respond to the emerging market opportunities and diversification of
production to other subsectors to remain competitive.
▪ Technology and Innovation: Tillsonburg manufacturers have the potential to be competitive on a
global scale by focussing on adopting innovative technologies such as IOT, big data analytics, 3D
printing autonomous systems, and work augmentation. Innovative processes and adoption of
software allow for streamlined operations, with greater flexibility and customisation while staying
cost competitive.
▪ Competitiveness: to ensure competitiveness irrespective of the exchange rate, local businesses
need to focus on identifying a simplified class supply chain by leveraging new technology. Simplified
supply chain management allows for optimization of business processes, increased control over
inventory, reduction of operational costs, and improved customer satisfaction and retention.
▪ Expansion into European markets: The recent Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement
(CETA) has made it easier for businesses to explore European Markets. Local businesses can work
with industry partners such as Export Development Canada (EDC), Ministry of Economic
Development, Job Creation and Trade (MEDJCT) and European ‘middlemen’ partners to understand
European laws and regulations, tax systems, customer expectations and overcoming language
barriers.
▪ Play up the Closeness of the Market: Canadian manufacturers, in general, are competing with
low-cost international manufacturers in countries such as India and China. To ensure that Canadian
manufacturing is successful over low-cost manufacturing countries, it should focus on playing up the
advantage of location – Ontario it is significantly cheaper and offers time-saving for transporting
products from Canada to the United States compared to shipping from India and China. Also, the
Page 210 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 22
Canadian employment landscape has supportive immigration laws and easy access to international
talent and world-class research and development.
▪ Entrepreneurship Training and Support Programs: collaboration with post-secondary or
research institutions will enable manufacturers to innovate and realise ‘process improvements’ that
allow for enhanced competitiveness. Some local manufacturers already have in-house
apprenticeship programs that can be leveraged and promoted to answer the skill shortage.
▪ 3D Printing: Manufacturers are increasingly adopting 3D printing to lower the cost of production.
3D printing allows for the low volume production of customised parts and equipment to be
completed cost-effectively on-site, instead of offshoring to lower cost destinations. 3D printing will
increasingly become a critical component of the automotive and aerospace manufacturing
industries. Additive Metal Manufacturing Inc. is an example of an industry partner that could be
leveraged.
3.3.4 Threats
▪ Risk Averse: Research suggests that manufacturing operations in Canada generally lag compared to
Europe and China in innovation and adapting new technologies. This is generally attributed to the
fact that Canadian manufacturing for a long time has operated on cost location advantages and are
inclined to be more risk-averse.
▪ Limited Labour Pool: Skill shortages prevent businesses from improving production capacity. Skill
shortage in the manufacturing sector includes middle-skill operations such as welders and
mechanics and highly skilled employees able to operate automated processes.
▪ Trade Barriers: Businesses perceive that trade barriers limit their ability to enter European
markets. Trade barriers include policies and regulations such as tariffs, local content requirements,
legal entities, labelling requirements, lack of transparency, and restrictions on obtaining a licence.
Also, limited international visibility, lack of knowledge of these markets and set pricing affects
export capacity.
▪ Lack of Awareness: Businesses are unaware of programs providing financial support, incentives
and small business support including programs such as Scientific Research and Experimental
Development (SR&ED) and Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC), among others.
▪ Uncertain Political Landscape: The Brexit referendum vote and the status of the re-negotiated
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA, now renamed US Mexico Canada Agreement) will
continue to foster risk and uncertainty for manufacturers.
4. Value Proposition
Tillsonburg’s key competitive advantages are described below.
4.1 Low-Cost Operating Environment
The operating cost environment in a jurisdiction is an important factor in the attraction of ongoing
Page 211 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 23
competitiveness of manufacturing operations. Tillsonburg has the advantage of low overhead compared
to the GTHA municipalities, which means lower costs for businesses in the form of lower spending on
new buildings/expansions, taxes, labour, utilities, etc. Through consultations, local businesses identified
that Tillsonburg’s central location and proximity to major centres and 400 series highways allow firms to
run low-cost operations compared to other locations.
Tillsonburg’s Community Improvement Plan (CIP) is designed to stimulate and assist new development
and redevelopment in designated areas of the Town. Industries can invest in Tillsonburg without
incurring any industrial development charges. The Grant in Lieu of Permit Fees Program allows
commercial and industrial properties in the designated CIP area to rebate the cost of fees for building
permits. The Tax Increment Equivalent Grant Back Program is a grant to rebate increases in Town
property taxes resulting from improvements or redevelopment of industrial lands and buildings, for
properties in the CIP area. Also, Tillsonburg also has the Brownfield Redevelopment Incentive Program
that covers up to 50% of the cost of Environmental Site Assessment or risk assessment.
4.2 Growing Employment Base
Tillsonburg has the highest proportion of its resident labour force employed in the manufacturing and
advanced manufacturing subset when compared to Oxford County, Tri-County and the Province of
Ontario. In fact, Tillsonburg makes up 19% of Oxford County’s manufacturing sector employment. Over
the past ten years, Tillsonburg’s manufacturing employment base grew by 48% (an increase of 1,078
jobs), from 2,188 jobs in 2009 to 3,266 jobs in 2018 despite a downturn in the global economy. By
contrast, employment in all other industries saw growth of only 7% (an increase of 435 jobs) during the
same time period.
Tillsonburg’s manufacturing labour force is concentrated in transportation equipment manufacturing.
This includes motor vehicle and motor vehicle parts manufacturing, aerospace product and parts
manufacturing and other transportation equipment manufacturing. Other leading employment sub-
sectors include machinery manufacturing, food manufacturing and fabricated metal product
manufacturing.
Tillsonburg’s manufacturing labour force is engaged in a range of occupations characteristic of a strong
manufacturing sector. Occupations in demand include motor vehicle assemblers, inspectors and testers,
other metal products machine operators and metalworking and forging machine operators.
4.3 A Diverse Local Industry Base
Tillsonburg’s manufacturing sector is characterised by a diverse ecosystem of businesses and includes a
high proportion of entrepreneurs and small and medium firms. Tillsonburg is also home to large
manufacturing firms; as per the Canadian Business Counts Data, approximately eight manufacturing
industries employ at least 100 employees.
It is understood that small businesses are in the process of establishing themselves within a supply chain
and are often open to exploring new business models and process innovations while larger, more
established businesses are looking to expand to national and international markets and have the ability
and overhead to take advantage of opportunities requiring more investment. This diverse ecology of
industries further boosts Tillsonburg’s value proposition.
Page 212 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 24
4.4 A Strong Potential for Innovation
Tillsonburg has approximately 45 manufacturing businesses. The majority of these are in advanced
manufacturing with the potential for advanced technology integration and process/productivity
improvements. Tillsonburg has a higher proportion of advanced manufacturing businesses compared to
Oxford County, Tri-County and the province of Ontario. Tillsonburg’s strengths include Transportation
equipment manufacturing, machinery manufacturing, fabricated metal product manufacturing and
electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing. Tillsonburg’s diverse base of advanced
and traditional manufacturing industries suggests a strong market for technology innovation.
4.5 Supportive Local Government
The manufacturing sector benefits from a supportive government structure at the local, provincial and
federal levels. Locally this is evident in Tillsonburg’s planning and economic development efforts. This
has resulted in a strong base of manufacturers with strengths in advanced manufacturing.
The 2008 Economic Strategy for the Town of Tillsonburg identified priority recommendations for
creating the desired future state for manufacturing in the Town of Tillsonburg. This included support for
the development of key economic clusters, particularly in high value-added auto-related production.
Provincial and Federal agencies and industry associations including Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
(CME), Trillium Network for Advanced Manufacturing, Excellence in Manufacturing Consortium,
Enterprise Canada Network (ECN), Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC), Canada Business
Network, BizPaL, Export Development Canada, Southwestern Ontario Development Fund and Federal
Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev Ontario), among others are key partners
that support local manufacturers and promote the sector on a national and global scale.
More recently, the Advanced Manufacturing Supercluster Initiative, based in Ontario with focus on
Internet of Things (IoT), machine learning, cybersecurity and additive manufacturing (3D printing) will
enable next-generation manufacturing capabilities and support and nurture manufacturing companies.
5. Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Models
5.1 Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP)
In 2015, the Town of Tillsonburg partnered with Isah International B.V to launch the Manufacturing
Accelerator Program (MAP). The initial launch of the program focussed on introducing local firms to
Industry 4.0 concepts and the need to automate and innovate manufacturing processes to improve
competitiveness and productivity. Participants at this stage of the program’s implementation included
eight (8) manufacturing companies, Tillsonburg District Chamber of Commerce, Export Development
Canada and the three organising partners (Town/Isah Software/GWA). A second workshop, conducted
in 2016, provided local manufacturers with updates on Industry 4.0, Brexit/CETA and Blockchain
technology. An Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software demonstration was also delivered.
In 2017, the program expanded to include a workshop on export objectives and enable local
manufacturers to improve their readiness for exporting. As part of this effort, a trade mission to the
Page 213 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 25
Hannover Fair and the Brainport Region of The Netherlands was undertaken, attended by a
manufacturing company, GWA Business Solutions (Canadian MAP partner) and the Town. A 2018
Manufacturing Challenges Survey has also been completed to identify local manufacturing challenges.
The goal of the MAP is to have a competitive manufacturing base in Tillsonburg that adopts new
technology resulting in innovation and growth. The program currently focuses on the following three
initiatives:
▪ the development of a High-Tech Manufacturing Cluster Framework
▪ a Capabilities Assessment with ten area manufacturers
▪ an Accelerated Business Growth Framework to help local companies to explore European markets
Through the Capabilities Assessment, eight (8) companies underwent a valuation process that included
plant walk-throughs, business process discussions, prioritization of business improvements and
readiness review to identify those companies with the potential to participate in the Accelerated
Business Growth Framework and explore European markets. The Accelerated Business Growth
Framework identifies local products that have the highest chance of success under CETA, introduces
companies to the Federal Accelerated Business Growth Panel and coordinates representation and
distribution into Europe.
In assessing the viability of the Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP), it can be understood that
the Program has the potential to serve as an important platform to address long term sustainability of
the Town’s manufacturers and continued productivity improvements. It could be leveraged in the
creation of a cluster model for Tillsonburg given its current initiatives and more importantly in enabling
local manufactures to more effectively reach European markets. However, it was beyond the scope of
this project to assess the capabilities of the program or the uptake by local manufacturers.
To date, the program administrators have engaged with a growing number of local manufacturers,
specifically as it relates to export readiness and Industry 4.0 mandates. A proposed Accelerated Business
Growth Framework will identify those local products that have the highest chance of success in
European markets. However, it is important for the program administrators and the Town to understand
and communicate the level of readiness of local manufacturers as it relates to their entry into this
marketplace (e.g. the maturity level of local companies, the nature and level of support available
through industry partners and educational institutions as it relates to process and product
improvements, the skill level and training requirements of employees and the financing models that
may be needed).
Our initial review suggests that as a platform for economic growth, the MAP can help raise the
competitiveness and profitability of individual manufacturing companies through well-defined business
strategies and by capitalising on innovation in products, processes and markets. It can also support the
development of a strong and connected supply chain and a strong network among local manufacturers.
If Tillsonburg is committed to enabling an industry-led cluster, the MAP could act as a key early-stage
platform/partner to provide the tools and resources required by local manufacturers.
5.2 Smart Industry Field Lab Model
While a range of industry cluster models was reviewed, a critical objective of the High-Tech
Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan was to assess the Netherlands Field Lab Model of
Page 214 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 26
education/collaboration and determine its suitability for Tillsonburg’s cluster development. In examining
the relevance of the Field Labs model, it was determined that certain elements might benefit the growth
and development of manufacturing businesses in Tillsonburg, particularly those manufacturers involved
in fabricated metal product manufacturing.
Group of Firms: At its simplest form, Field Labs are consortia of organizations where smart industry
solutions are developed, tested, deployed, and where people can learn to apply it.
Initiators: Most Field Labs were initiated by existing networks with many private parties (e.g. Brainport
Industries and the Region of Smart Factories (ROSF)). The ROSF, for example, was built around two
major OEM companies in the region (Philips and Fokker). These firms recognised the importance of
capitalising on the resurgence of the manufacturing industry to encourage entrepreneurship and job
growth. Field Labs can also be initiated by educational institutions alone or a combination of industry
and educational institutions.
Specific Sector and Focus: Currently, 39 Smart Industry Field Labs operate in the Netherlands,
involving over 300 companies and several research institutes and governments. Each Field Lab has a
specific focus and a target industry sector. For example, 16 Field labs are in the manufacturing sector
with various technology specialisations, including 3D printing, big data, cyber security, robotics and
smart automation.
Support Ecosystem: Although most Field Labs are initiated by firms, they are strategic public-private
partnerships that provide start-ups and SMEs the chance to do experiments on a platform. The ROSF, for
example, was initiated by private firms and has grown into a group of 32 partners (large and small
companies, research organizations and educational institutions). The field lab partners focus on research
and development for the OEM plants, to make production processes more intelligent and allow for self-
learning through Artificial Intelligence.
Physical Location: Most of the Field Labs have an open and shared physical test location. They employ
a project-based approach to develop technologies and realise their activities.
Coordinating Partner: Every field lab has a coordinating partner, which is, in most cases, the initiator of
the field lab. This could be the firm, a network like Brainport Industries, a knowledge institute or a
regional development organisation.
Investment: The Field Labs were developed based on the Smart Industry (SI) policy initiative. It is a
triple helix model for agenda setting, building eco-systems and executing supportive, smart industry
actions. The funding model combines public funding from state and European regional development
budgets with financial and in-kind contributions from industry. Field Labs are well funded with over 165
million euros in investment, including nearly 70 million euros in private investment.
Financial Implications: The most important challenges that Field Labs face are financial. They must
“prove their added value” to attract private financing and compete with other Field Labs to secure
limited public funds. Another challenge mentioned by some Field Labs concerns the upscaling and
business model development.
International Dimension: Most Field Labs have an international dimension. Five Field Labs cooperate
with partners from other countries. Examples are cooperation in European projects (The Garden),
cooperation with foreign research institutes (Flexible Manufacturing) or the German Industrial Data
Space initiative (Smart Connected Supplier Network).
Page 215 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 27
5.3 Opportunity Identification
In addition to conceptualising the steps needed for an appropriate cluster model, it is important to
understand those opportunities that will shape a strategic approach for the Town of Tillsonburg as it
pursues opportunities in the high-tech manufacturing sector. Opportunity identification includes both
cluster development opportunity and cluster partnership opportunity.
5.3.1 Cluster Development Opportunity – High-Tech Manufacturing
One of the lessons learned from the research into the feasibility of a cluster model for Tillsonburg was
that a successful industrial cluster serves a targeted group of firms and enables collaboration and firm
competitiveness. Benefits of a cluster approach include: (a) productivity improvements through the
sharing of knowledge and best practices, access to markets, infrastructure and training and skills
development, (b)rapid innovation through facilitated access to technology, research and development
and public-private partnerships, (c) new business development and (d) access to funding and
partnerships.
For example, the Bluewater Wood Alliance (BWA), Ontario, Canada is an industry-led cluster focused
around wood manufacturing. The Alliance, as an intermediary for local businesses, liaises with the
government to forge partnerships and enable access to funding on a project by project basis. It provides
member firms with project development assistance, skills training, plant tours and networking events,
conducts trade missions and other export-related initiatives. Another example is that of the Region of
Smart Factories Field Lab (RoSF), the Netherlands. It is one of 35 Field Labs and was initiated by two
major OEM’s to develop smart products. The RoSF program is currently developing three pilot projects,
namely, (i): smart production lines, with applications at Philips, Fokker and Plantronics, (ii): design for
smart factory with applications at Centraal Staal, TenCate, in shipbuilding (NCG) and at Philips and (iii):
customized manufacturing of lenses (NKF and Opthec), coated textiles (TenCate) and the manufacture
of sails (Molenaar).
Research suggests that Tillsonburg has a high concentration of manufacturing companies employed in
fabricated metal product manufacturing, transportation equipment manufacturing and machinery
manufacturing. This includes a good cross section of small, medium and larger scale firms ranging from
machine shops to those involved in OEM supply chain manufacturing.
Tillsonburg is also home to several major automotive companies include Adient Seating Canada Ltd
(foam seating), Autoneum Canada Limited (noise insulation products), Fleetwood Metal Industries Inc
(stamped metal components), Martinrea International Inc, Marwood International (stamped metal
components), THK Rhythm Automotive Canada Ltd (linkages/steering components), etc. The highest
chance of success would be to work with Canadian owned and controlled companies.
Recent expansions and investment by local manufacturing position the community as a centre for metal
and high-tech manufacturing; thereby increasing the value proposition of the manufacturing cluster.
For example, in 2017, FedDev Ontario invested approximately $4.27 million in Marwood Metal
Fabrication; a metal stamp maker for the automotive sector. A further $1.5 million was contributed by
the provincial government and private funds. It is projected that this investment will boost the local
Page 216 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 28
economy and result in the creation of 70 new jobs8. The location of CAMI Automotive owned by
General Motors Canada in Ingersoll has also benefited the Town. Similarly, the $1.4 billion planned
expansion of Canadian operations by Toyota Motor Corp. in Cambridge and Woodstock will have a
positive impact on the economy of Tillsonburg9.
Tillsonburg should consider the supply chain implications that could result from this level of investment
and target business growth and attraction activity that further strengthens the local manufacturing
cluster. Business and community stakeholders that participated in the manufacturing workshop
conducted as part of this study suggest that local firms are interested in exploring the benefits of a
cluster initiative in Tillsonburg. There was a consensus that local manufacturers can offer a unique
competitive advantage for Tillsonburg by creating an environment where businesses share access to
different technologies and best practices in a collaborative environment. Plants tours and learning
events were examples that allow businesses can access each other’s shop floor, understand common
challenges and develop collaborative solutions to aid in continued growth. The current MAP could also
assist with advancing this level of activity until the municipality is assured of a critical mass of businesses
who are interested in advancing this effort.
5.3.2 Cluster Development Opportunity – Availability of Land and Space
The availability of serviceable industrial land in Tillsonburg is another consideration for the development
of the cluster. Tillsonburg offers a variety of development opportunities. The Town has three industrial
parks, namely,
▪ Forest Hill Industrial Park
▪ Van Norman Industrial Park
▪ Highway 3 Business Park
The Van Norman Innovation Park (VIP) is a 37-acre business park located on the south side of Highway 3,
at Clearview Drive. The park is pre-serviced and shovel-ready and is ideally suited for companies in the
advanced manufacturing, information technology and food processing sectors.
In addition to low land costs, Tillsonburg’s low industrial taxes and locally-owned hydro utility means
lower operating costs for tenants as well. The long-term availability of suitable vacant industrial land
should be monitored as it enables local companies to expand operations and attracts companies looking
to set up their facilities in Tillsonburg. Marketing these opportunities to businesses within and outside
the region can provide a significant competitive advantage for the cluster over time.
5.3.3 Cluster Partnership Opportunity – Educational Institutions and Industry
Partners
In addition to the partnership with the MAP to support cluster development, other strategic
partnerships are also essential to ensure a complete ecosystem of support for the cluster. These include
partnerships with educational institutions and industry partners. Having a strong support ecosystem of
cluster partners on a local, regional and institutional level allows industry clusters to grow and mature.
8 https://www.canadianmanufacturing.com/manufacturing/two-tillsonburg-ont-manufacturers-embark-
multimillion-dollar-expansions-186741/
9 https://www.thestar.com/business/2018/05/04/toyota-planning-14b-expansion-of-woodstock-cambridge-plants-report.html
Page 217 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 29
Some of the strategic partnerships that should be fostered between companies and support
organizations include:
▪ Opportunities with Southwest Ontario educational institutions and post-secondary research
institutions such as SONAMI
▪ Collaborations with Community Futures Oxford and Oxford County Small Business Centre
▪ Improved communication of support initiatives provided by Export Development Canada (EDC) and
Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade (MEDJCT)
In addition to developing strategic partnerships with industry partners, enabling partnerships between
existing businesses should also be fostered. These could include:
▪ Studying opportunities to monitor and adopt applicable innovative technologies
▪ Arranging and leading plant tours and networking events
▪ Creating a central hub of information on events and networking sessions
▪ Sharing labour/expertise between companies
▪ Identification of collaborative funding models
▪ Assessing export readiness/market opportunities beyond the US
5.4 Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Model for Tillsonburg
Recommendations for a Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Model for Tillsonburg were developed, taking into
consideration Tillsonburg’s capacity to foster and grow a successful cluster. An approach is proposed
based on the insights obtained through the research and consultation, the current Manufacturing
Acceleration Program (MAP) and the implications for a Field Lab Model of education/collaboration.
Tillsonburg is home to a critical mass of large, small and medium-sized enterprises. Thus, it is well
positioned to capitalise on and foster an industry-led consortium. There is also considerable support
that could be derived from post-secondary and research institutions, as well as industry partners and
government. The Town has also established the Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP) that is
intended to support manufacturing companies in their drive to become more competitive in global
markets. However, this effort is still in the early stages in terms of its work with local manufacturers.
Nonetheless, it represents a good platform to support a cluster model given the initiatives of the
program, as noted earlier. As this effort matures a more developed field lab model should be pursued
that addresses strategic partnerships and industry collaboration.
Tillsonburg must leverage local and regional strengths to showcase its unique value proposition for
manufacturing – one that differentiates it from other municipalities in Southwestern Ontario.
Traditionally, Tillsonburg’s value proposition has been that of a low-cost and location advantage and an
available workforce with a strong rural work ethic (that is, a workforce that has characteristics that
enable workers to thrive in the sometimes-challenging environment of manufacturing). In moving
beyond this messaging and addressing the future of manufacturing in Ontario, Tillsonburg should focus
resources on the creation of an innovative, highly adaptable manufacturing location with programs and
industry experts that support globally competitive businesses and manufacturing operations. If
Tillsonburg is to proceed with fostering the creation of a cluster model for Tillsonburg, the following
steps need to be considered:
Page 218 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 30
Step I: Identify and Prioritize the Local Cluster
This step has been completed through this High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan, whereby
the local economy was analysed, and areas of strengths were determined. Tillsonburg has a high
concentration of manufacturing companies in fabricated metal product manufacturing, transportation
equipment manufacturing and machinery manufacturing. This should be showcased in a way that
resonates with businesses who may be interested in the community from a supply chain perspective or
to gain economies of scale.
Step II: Determine the Level of Industry Support for the Cluster
This step has been completed in part through the consultation phase of this High-Tech Manufacturing
Sub-Cluster Action Plan. However, the town needs to survey the complete business supply chain that
includes both core manufacturing and related support businesses to understand the scope of support
and interest for a cluster approach. Consultation efforts to date suggest that local businesses are
interested in understanding the advantages of a local cluster initiative. Businesses also suggested
opportunities for increased collaboration around shared interests and business needs. These
opportunities need to be explored further and shared locally to support growth and attraction
manufacturing operations.
Step III: Understand Cluster Opportunities
Having determined the scope of support for a cluster initiative, the next step is to understand cluster
opportunities. Tillsonburg’s Economic Development Office needs to assess the quality of linkages across
the cluster and the extent to which the local manufacturers are willing to collaborate and share
information. More detailed research on the future of manufacturing in Canada together with a business
survey of local and regional manufacturers would help to identify cluster opportunities and determine
what type of programming and support may be required. This, in turn, would identify the partnerships
that may be needed to support the growth of the cluster.
Step IV: Local Leadership Group
Tillsonburg’s Economic Development Office will need to play a facilitator role and identify local industry
leaders who are prepared to champion the cluster initiative. Local leadership can start as an informal
group and evolve over time. However, it should consist of stakeholders from key firms in the priority
sub-sectors. Five to eight representatives are appropriate. These stakeholders should be able to work
together, represent the interests of the cluster and help define the vision, mission and outcomes of the
cluster model as it evolves. Consultation efforts suggest that local businesses are interested in
undertaking plant tours, learning about issues and problems faced by local businesses and working
collaboratively to find solutions.
Step V: Establish the Vision, Mission and Outcomes of the Cluster
Having identified key roles and responsibilities for both the facilitator and the leadership group, the
vision, mission and outcomes of the cluster initiative should be defined. Consultation efforts, for
example, suggest that firms are interested in adopting 3D printing to improve productivity and enhance
their competitive advantage. However, the cost and resources required to set up a 3D printing system
by individual businesses may be too high to be realized. A cluster of firms could collaborate on and
adopt 3D printing in a cost-effective way. Another interest on the part of businesses engaged in the
consultation effort was to understand how to approach the exporting of goods to the European Union. It
Page 219 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 31
is worth noting that the main objectives of the MAP include these types of initiatives.
Step VI: Establish Cluster Partnerships
Having confirmed the structure of the cluster initiative, together with the vision, mission and outcomes
of the cluster defined, external partnerships also need to be forged. Local manufacturers have access to
a range of post-secondary partners through the Southern Ontario Network for Advanced Manufacturing
Innovation (SONAMI). SONAMI, through its partnership network, offers local manufacturers, primarily in
Southwest Ontario, to realise and test process improvements and overcome a range of innovation
challenges. SONAMI provides funding, facilities and expertise to small and medium-sized enterprises
(SME’s) to undertake research and development that may otherwise not be possible. Funding is
provided by FedDev through SONAMI and firms retain all intellectual property rights upon project
completion.
During the initial phases of the cluster development, the facilitator can invite institutional partners and
local government representatives to plant tours and meet with the leadership group. Provincial and
federal government representatives also need to be identified and engaged around the needs and
programming support required by local firms. In addition to partnerships with organizations,
consideration of a ‘bricks and mortar’ location should also be assessed. A shared low-cost physical space
can promote inter-firm business networks and encourage learning and technology sharing among firms.
The sub-cluster models review identified that a central physical or digital space for businesses/leads to
synergies and innovative idea sharing.
6. Action Planning/Recommendations
The following recommendations are set to help advance the High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster.
▪ Focus on supporting and growing the recommended priority cluster, namely, high-tech
manufacturing. Place emphasis on fabricated metal product manufacturing, transportation
equipment manufacturing and machinery manufacturing as it relates to supplying original
equipment manufacturers (OEM’s).
▪ Conduct a survey of local businesses to determine the level and type of support for a cluster
initiative. The survey will enable the Town to gauge collaboration opportunities, programming
needs and growth and expansion challenges.
▪ The Town should continue to engage directly with key local industries and forge long-term
relationships.
▪ Conduct interviews with core businesses to gain detailed information of their business and
supply chain requirements and identify opportunities and challenges that could be addressed by
the cluster initiative
▪ Engage OEM’s that drive the growth of the local supply chain to understand their expectations
for innovation and productivity
▪ Seek out local champions that are prepared to ‘sell’ the concept of an industry cluster. An industry-
led initiative will better enable the municipality to attract investment, post-secondary support while
strengthening the capabilities of local manufacturers.
Page 220 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 32
▪ Town representatives and local industry champions should seek out formal cluster training events to
understand the principles of cluster development better.
▪ Collaborate with workforce development organizations and post-secondary research institutions to
identify cluster-related research and development opportunities, skills development opportunities
and the promotion of the sector.
▪ Connect SONAMI with local manufacturers to identify applied research and commercialization
opportunities
▪ Identify and connect businesses to workforce development organizations to support skills
development
▪ Research opportunities with the local high school to provide ‘Career days’ and conduct plant
tours to promote the manufacturing sector as an attractive career option
▪ The Town, as a facilitator, should promote and improve partnerships between local manufacturers
and industry support organizations.
▪ Create and host events that allow businesses to engage with resources and partners that
strengthen and grow the sector
▪ The export readiness of local businesses can be improved by leveraging partnerships with export
support systems including Export Development Canada (EDC), Ministry of Economic
Development, Job Creation and Trade (MEDJCT)
▪ Explore opportunities for funding and business financing for all type of businesses including
small and medium-sized enterprises
▪ Enhance Tillsonburg’s High Tech Manufacturing Cluster through promotion and marketing
campaigns. It is recommended that industry campaigns that highlight the cluster, associated
opportunities, advantages of clusters and Tillsonburg’s value proposition should be explored.
▪ Develop a standalone website that brands and promotes the value proposition for the High-Tech
Manufacturing Cluster in Tillsonburg.
▪ Create a central hub of information on the labour force profile, events and networking sessions,
funding opportunities, partner information, existing business profiles, business support services
and research and development opportunities
▪ Explore the feasibility of a central space for businesses to convene and collaborate to share best
practices and identify solutions. A metal lab is a feasible option for Tillsonburg with provisions for
3D printing, training programs and skills development.
Page 221 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 33
Page 222 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – Manufacturing Sector Analysis and Cluster Model Review Report Page i
Table of Contents
About This Report ................................................................................................................. 2
1. Background Review ...................................................................................................... 3
1.1 Local Initiatives ......................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 Regional Initiatives ................................................................................................................... 4
2. Manufacturing Sector Analysis ...................................................................................... 6
2.1 Sector Definition ....................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 National and Provincial Context ............................................................................................... 8
2.3 Tillsonburg Manufacturing Sector .......................................................................................... 10
2.4 Staffing Patterns and Projections ........................................................................................... 17
2.5 Education Profile and Talent Supply ...................................................................................... 18
2.6 Manufacturing Industries ....................................................................................................... 20
2.7 Top Employers ........................................................................................................................ 24
2.8 Export Information ................................................................................................................. 25
2.9 Multipliers .............................................................................................................................. 26
2.10 Supply Chain Analysis ............................................................................................................. 27
2.11 Commuting Patterns .............................................................................................................. 28
3. Sub-Cluster Model Review .......................................................................................... 31
3.1 Smart Industry Field Labs, the Netherlands ........................................................................... 31
3.2 Bluewater Wood Alliance, Ontario, Canada ........................................................................... 32
3.3 Advanced Manufacturing Supercluster, Canada .................................................................... 33
3.4 Conexus, Advanced Manufacturing Cluster, Indiana, USA ..................................................... 34
3.5 Additive Manufacturing Cluster, Northeast Ohio, USA .......................................................... 35
3.6 Luxinnovation, Luxembourg Materials and Manufacturing Cluster, Luxembourg ................ 35
Page 223 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 2
About This Report
The evolution of Tillsonburg’s economy over the last few decades is an indicator of the larger structural
shift that is occurring in communities across Canada. Economies are in transition as traditional industries
undergo restructuring and are increasingly driven by technology-led development.
In recognition of this transition, The Town of Tillsonburg is seeking to develop a high-tech manufacturing
sub-cluster initiative with companies from the Tillsonburg area. This report is preliminary findings that
profile the current state of manufacturing in Tillsonburg. A review of select existing manufacturing
sector clusters from around the world was also completed to provide key learnings for the Town.
This report assesses the current state of the manufacturing sector in Tillsonburg and determines the
level of Town support for the sector. The competitive positioning of the sector in Tillsonburg as it relates
to the regional economy is also studied.
The key findings and insights that emerge from this exercise will help inform subsequent consultations
with local stakeholders including business representatives in the sector, organizations and local
educational institutions and provide evidence for the applicability of the development of a
manufacturing cluster/sub-cluster in Tillsonburg.
The approach employed in the completion of this report involved the following sections:
▪ Section I – Background Review
▪ A review of the Town’s existing planning documents and policies to determine the level of
support and strategies relevant to sector growth and cluster development
▪ Section II – Manufacturing Sector Analysis
▪ A sector overview and baseline analysis including an assessment of current labour force,
employment, and business trends in Tillsonburg, the Tri-county region and Ontario to identify
existing and emerging areas of economic opportunity
▪ Section III – Sub-Cluster Model Review
▪ The best practices review to learn from existing cluster initiatives across North America and
around the world.
Page 224 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 3
1. Background Review
A document review of relevant initiatives and municipal strategies was completed to provide a clear
picture of the larger planning context in Tillsonburg and the surrounding region as it relates to the
development of the high-tech manufacturing sub-cluster study.
The following local and regional initiatives were examined for this report:
▪ Town of Tillsonburg Business Plan, 2019
▪ Town of Tillsonburg Community Strategic Plan, 2014
▪ Town of Tillsonburg Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP), 2015
▪ An Economic Strategy for the Town of Tillsonburg, 2008
▪ Town of Tillsonburg Situation Analysis, 2008
▪ Oxford County Action Plan & Strategy Alignment, 2017
▪ Oxford County Strategic Plan, 2015-2018
▪ Future Oxford Community Sustainability Plan, 2015
▪ Oxford County Population Household and Employment Forecasts and Employment Lands Study,
2014
▪ County of Oxford Labour Force Development Strategy, 2011
▪ Southwestern Ontario Development Fund
1.1 Local Initiatives
The 2008 Economic Strategy for the Town of Tillsonburg identified priority recommendations for
creating the desired future state for manufacturing in the Town of Tillsonburg. It included support for
the development of key economic clusters, particularly in plastics and high value-added auto-related
production. The strategy defined clusters as a “network of independent firms involved in buyer/supplier
relationships, knowledge-producing agent and bridging agents liked in value-added production chain”.
The strategy also stated that the manufacturing sector had been reinforced with new infrastructure
including serviced industrial land and the availability of highly educated labour force.
Collaborative initiatives were identified in the strategy, including taking an inventory of community
training programs to foster collaboration in skills training and meet employer needs. The strategy also
suggested the expanded effort to collaborate with local employers and educational institutions to
provide knowledge to students about the advantages of careers in the trades. Also, the need for a
Knowledge Transfer Task Force is identified to ensure knowledge transfer between current business
owners and young entrepreneur
The 2014 Community Strategy Plan was developed based on community ideas and aspirations and
established a vision with four broad themes or strategic objectives, namely, excellence in local
government, economic sustainability, demographic balance and culture and community. While the plan
does not specifically indicate the manufacturing sector, the economic sustainability theme calls for
supporting new and existing businesses and providing a variety of employment opportunities. The plan
Page 225 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 4
also stipulates the need to provide appropriate education and training opportunities in line with
Tillsonburg’s economy including partnerships with Glendale High School’s to offer high school trades
programs and with the local Fanshawe College campus to match education and training with local
industry needs.
As part of the Town’s development efforts to nurture and grow a manufacturing cluster, the Town
partnered with Isah International B.V, to implement the Manufacturing Accelerator Program (MAP). The
program facilitates growth by raising the competitiveness and profitability of individual manufacturing
companies through well-defined business strategies and capitalising on innovation in products,
processes and markets. Some of the actions developed by this program included:
▪ The promotion of MAP to local companies to provide practical service, improve productivity and
streamline processes
▪ Facilitate knowledge transfer between companies, organizations and international best practices
▪ Facilitate participating companies to benefit from grants, incentives and funding opportunities
The 2015-2018 memorandum of understanding between Isah and the Town specifies the creation of a
manufacturing cluster with at least 15-20 local companies within Tillsonburg. As of 2018, a pilot program
with a Tillsonburg manufacturer has been completed, and the initiative is now being expanded to
support ten local manufacturers. The extension of the program is a critical objective of the Town’s 2019
Business Plan.
The 2019 Business Plan also recognises opportunities to increase the export readiness of local
manufacturers by leveraging trade relations in Europe are also recognised. In keeping with this, the MAP
program business framework specifies the need to review the Comprehensive Economic and Trade
Agreement (CETA) and identify local products that have the highest chance of success in the European
market.
1.2 Regional Initiatives
In addition to local efforts, regional support for the sector was analysed to determine support for the
sector within the regional economy.
The 2017 Oxford County Action Plan & Strategy Alignment is evidence that Oxford County is focused on
sustainable community development and resolve challenges that the County is facing. Four action areas
are defined in the plan to help the County overcome existing challenges and attract and retain a skilled
workforce. These include actions for increased collaboration, workforce alignment, attracting skilled
talent and reducing barriers to employment.
The 2015-2018 Strategic Plan for Oxford County puts forward a vision for a vibrant community
committed to the prosperity of its people and to the principle of partnership that ties together Oxford’s
eight municipalities. While the plan does not specifically indicate the manufacturing sector, strategic
directions in the plan identify the need to strengthen and diversify the economic base, support local
industry and business growth and encourage entrepreneurship. The need to strengthen community
access and internet connectivity is also identified.
A critical goal of the 2015 Future Oxford Community Sustainability Plan is the Economy. Specific actions
of the plan include the need to encourage high-tech manufacturing in Oxford, support local business
expansion and retention and enhance collaboration between all local and regional economic
Page 226 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 5
development officers and agencies.
The 2014 Oxford County Population Household and Employment Forecasts and Employment Lands
Study served as an economic analysis for Oxford County, to guide decision making and policy
development specifically related to planning and growth management, urban land needs, master plans
and municipal finance at the County-wide and area municipal levels. Key highlights of the study include:
▪ Employment forecasts show that approximately 88% of the County-wide employment growth will
occur in Oxford County’s Urban Centres (Woodstock, Ingersoll and Tillsonburg) over the 2011-2041
period.
▪ Tillsonburg has a relatively healthy supply of vacant designated employment lands to accommodate
future industrial growth
▪ The servicing of the Forest Hill Industrial Parklands to the south of Highway 3, and the development
of the Highway 3 Business Park would greatly improve the supply and market choice of employment
lands in the community
The report also illustrates that municipalities in Oxford County, including Tillsonburg, show significantly
lower prices for serviced employment lands, industrial development charges, industrial property taxes
and industrial development cost per sq. ft. compared to the west GTHA (i.e. Milton and Hamilton) and
other GGH municipalities, including Guelph, Cambridge and Kitchener.
The County of Oxford Labour Force Development Strategy was developed in 2011 as a comprehensive
labour force strategy to prepare Oxford County to accommodate the labour force needs of the future.
The strategy identified that the decline in manufacturing jobs is of concern for Oxford County,
particularly the communities of Woodstock, Ingersoll and Tillsonburg. However, it identifies
opportunities for manufacturing businesses to take advantage of new investments in emerging
innovative industries such as biotechnology, composites manufacturing, and medical device
manufacturing, as well as green and renewable energy and advanced technologies. Also, opportunities
to provide for re-training and skill enhancement, increasing research and development, and increased
flexibility are also identified. Priorities and Actions identified in this strategy highlight synergies with
existing programming to ensure a collaborative workforce, connected education and training programs,
entrepreneur support and youth retention and attraction.
In addition to the local and regional initiatives, the Southwestern Ontario Development Fund (SWODF)
has supported businesses investment in Tillsonburg. With support from the Southwestern Ontario
Development Fund, four manufacturing companies, namely, Marwood Metal, Inovata Foods, Voth Sales
& Service and Fleetwood Metal, invested in Tillsonburg in 2017. The establishments of these companies
helped create 198 new jobs and retain 753 positions in Tillsonburg10.
10 https://news.ontario.ca/sb/en/2017/09/ontario-supporting-economic-growth-in-tillsonburg.html
Page 227 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 6
2. Manufacturing Sector Analysis
This section of the report provides an overview of the manufacturing sector with an emphasis on the
sector’s performance in Tillsonburg. The manufacturing sector analysis is intended as an educative piece
for the Town, to illustrate the current nature and composition of manufactured goods and services in
the community and contributions to economic growth.
Manufacturing sector jobs, employment growth and industry composition are studied to understand the
current state of the sector. The educational profile is also examined to determine the skill level and
talent supply of the workforce. Industry information such as the supply chain analysis, multipliers,
staffing patterns and future growth projections are also provided. The performance of the sector in
Tillsonburg is also compared to the Tri-County (Oxford County, Elgin County and Haldimand-Norfolk) and
the province, to accurately establish the areas of strengths, opportunities and gaps in the sector.
Location Quotient (LQ)
A Location Quotient (LQ) analysis provides information on the concentration of jobs or industries in a
community of interest relative to an over-arching area, usually the province or nation. It can reveal what
makes a particular region “unique”.
LQ’s Classifications:
▪ LQ greater than or equal to 1.25 – indicates that the community has proportionately ‘high’
concentration of workers/industries than the larger comparison area employed in a specific
industry.
▪ LQ lower than 1.25 and higher than 1.0 – indicates that the community has an ‘above average’
concentration of workers/industries than the larger comparison area employed in a specific
industry.
▪ LQ 1.0 – indicates employment/industry concentration in the community is ‘on par’ with the larger
comparison area employed in a specific industry.
▪ LQ lower than 1.0 and higher than 0.75 – indicates that the community has a ‘moderate’
concentration of workers/industries than the larger comparison area employed in a specific
industry.
▪ LQ lower than 0.75 - indicates that the community has a ‘low’ concentration of workers/industries
than the larger comparison area employed in a specific industry.
Shift-Share Analysis
Shift-share is a standard regional analysis method that attempts to determine how much of regional job
growth can be attributed to national trends and how much is due to unique regional factors. The shift-
share analysis helps answer why employment is growing or declining in the regional industry.
To conduct shift-share analysis, regional job growth is split into three components: (1) industrial mix
effect, (2) national growth effect, and (3) regional competitive effect. In addition, a time frame (start
year and end year) is required to perform shift-share analysis, since shift share deals with job growth
over time.
Page 228 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 7
2.1 Sector Definition
As per the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Canada 2012, the manufacturing
sector comprises establishments primarily engaged in the chemical, mechanical or physical
transformation of materials or substances into new products. Related activities, such as the assembly of
the component parts of manufactured goods; the blending of materials; and the finishing of
manufactured products are also treated as manufacturing activities. The sector is grouped under 21 sub-
sectors ranging from metal manufacturing to miscellaneous manufacturing such as medical equipment
and office supplies. Figure 4 lists the structure and definitions of the manufacturing sub-sector.
Figure 4: Manufacturing Sub-sectors NAICS
NAICS Description
311 Food manufacturing
312 Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing
313 Textile mills
314 Textile product mills
315 Clothing manufacturing
316 Leather and allied product manufacturing
321 Wood product manufacturing
322 Paper manufacturing
323 Printing and related support activities
324 Petroleum and coal product manufacturing
325 Chemical manufacturing
326 Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
327 Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing
331 Primary metal manufacturing
332 Fabricated metal product manufacturing
333 Machinery manufacturing
334 Computer and electronic product manufacturing
335 Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing
336 Transportation equipment manufacturing
337 Furniture and related product manufacturing
339 Miscellaneous manufacturing
Advanced Manufacturing
Advanced manufacturing is a subset of the overall manufacturing sector. However, there is no clear or
standardised definition to describe what it entails. It is generally accepted that advanced manufacturing
relates to establishments that use advanced processes in the production of goods as well as
establishments that produce complex goods, such as electronics and vehicles. The NAICs defined as the
advanced manufacturing subset in this report is thus related to both advanced processes and advanced
goods as they relate to Tillsonburg.
Page 229 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 8
Figure 5: Advanced Manufacturing Sub-sector NAICS
NAICS Description
325 Chemical manufacturing
326 Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
332 Fabricated metal product manufacturing
333 Machinery manufacturing
334 Computer and electronic product manufacturing
335 Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing
336 Transportation equipment manufacturing
3391 Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Note: The terms Advanced Manufacturing and High-Tech Manufacturing are the same and used
interchangeably in the report.
2.2 National and Provincial Context
Historically, manufacturing has been an economic driver for the province of Ontario and Canada.
Although the sector has undergone significant shifts over the last 40 years, the sector is still a significant
contributor to economic growth. In 2017, the sector accounted for 21% ($176 billion) of Foreign Direct
Investment (FDI) in Canada.
In 2017, the Canadian manufacturing sector, with contributions of $199.61 billion, accounted for 11% of
the nation’s total GDP. The economy and the manufacturing sector has rebounded since the 2008/2009
global economic downturn, increasing from $176.31 billion in 2010 to $199.61 billion in 2017.
Ontario’s economy has also reflected the nation’s performance, with GDP contributions recovering
slowing since the downturn. In 2017, Ontario’s manufacturing sector with GDP contributions of $88.03
billion accounted for 12% of total GDP. Ontario is the largest output contributor to total manufacturing
GDP in Canada, accounting for approximately 44% of the national manufacturing GDP in 2017.
Figure 6: Manufacturing Sector Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Ontario and Canada, 2006-2017
Source: Statistics Canada. Table 36-10-0402-01
In 2017, the Canadian manufacturing sector accounted for 1,601,204 jobs (8% of total employment) in
$-
$50.00
$100.00
$150.00
$200.00
$250.00
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017GDP Chained (2012) $ BillionsOntario Canada
Page 230 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 9
Canada. The province of Ontario accounted for the majority of this employment (44% of total Canadian
manufacturing employment). Ontario has a higher share of its employment in manufacturing than any
other jurisdiction in North America except Indiana and Wisconsin11. Ontario’s manufacturing sector
contributed 709,688 jobs (8% of total provincial employment) in 2018.
Figure 7: Manufacturing Sector Share of Employment (%), Ontario and Canada, 2018
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
While the economy has shifted from a manufacturing focus to one that is powered strongly by services,
employment in the manufacturing sector is witnessing resurgence. While employment in the
manufacturing sector declined by 7,529 jobs (1.1%) between 2009 to 2016, the past two years have
witnessed a significant increase in jobs. From 2016 to 2018, approximately 16,820 manufacturing jobs
(2.4% growth) were created in the Province.
Approximately 3% of all industries in both the nation and province were manufacturing industries in
2018. Fabricated metal product manufacturing was the top manufacturing industries in both the
province and Canada.
11 Toward 2025: Assessing Ontario’s Long-Term Outlook’
9%
91%
8%
92%
Employment in Manufacturing
Employment in all other Industries
Inside Circle – Ontario
Outside Circle – Canada
Page 231 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 10
Figure 8: Manufacturing Industries (%), Ontario and Canada, 2018
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
2.3 Tillsonburg Manufacturing Sector
Analysing the employment base of Tillsonburg, it can be understood that the manufacturing sector is an
economic driver for the Town, accounting for 33% of the Town’s total employment. Manufacturing is
primarily an export-based sector, and the growth of the local economy is dependent on the
competitiveness of the local and regional export-based economy. Community-based industries such as
health care and retail services are other economic drivers for the Town.
2.3.1 Sector Employment
Tillsonburg has the highest proportion of resident labour force employed in the manufacturing sector as
well as the advanced manufacturing subset compared to other regions (Figure 9). Tillsonburg makes up
for 19% of Oxford County’s manufacturing sector employment.
Figure 9: Manufacturing Employment by Region, 2018
Employment (2018) Tillsonburg Oxford
County
Tri-
County Ontario
Total Employment (All Industries) 9,876 63,598 142,102 7,554,653
Manufacturing Sector Employment 3,266 17,588 28,083 709,688
Manufacturing Employment (%) Total Employment 33% 28% 20% 9%
Advanced Manufacturing 2,663 13,652 19,961 420,676
Advanced Manufacturing (%) Total Manufacturing Employment 82% 78% 71% 59%
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
Studying employment at the sub-sector level (Figure 10), it was determined that transportation
equipment manufacturing accounted for the majority of employment.
In 2018, approximately 1,756 jobs were employed in this sub-sector. People employed in this sector
work in establishments that manufacture equipment for transporting people and goods. This includes
3%
97%
3%
97%
Manufacturing Industries
All other Industries
Inside Circle – Ontario
Outside Circle – Canada
Page 232 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 11
motor vehicle and motor vehicle parts manufacturing, aerospace product and parts manufacturing and
other transportation equipment manufacturing. Other leading employment sub-sectors include
machinery manufacturing (378 jobs), food manufacturing (314 jobs) and fabricated metal product
manufacturing (259 jobs).
Figure 10: Manufacturing Share of Employment by Sub-sector (%), Tillsonburg, 2018
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018. Indicates Advanced Manufacturing Sectors
2.3.2 Employment Growth
Over the past ten years, Tillsonburg’s manufacturing employment base grew by 48% (an increase of
1,078 jobs), from 2,188 jobs in 2009 to 3,266 jobs in 2018. By contrast, employment in all other
industries saw growth of only 7% (an increase of 435 jobs) for the same period. While a ten-year
timeline was adopted to determine a long-term trend in employment change, it should be noted that
the baseline year was during the global recession. Employment numbers were higher before the 2009
recession as the town accounted for approximately 4,003 manufacturing jobs in 2001. Similar to
0.4%
0.4%
0.7%
1.3%
1.4%
2.1%
2.3%
9.6%
0.7%
2.0%
2.3%
3.4%
7.9%
11.6%
53.8%
Printing and related support activities
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing
Paper manufacturing
Miscellaneous manufacturing
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing
Wood product manufacturing
Furniture and related product manufacturing
Food manufacturing
Computer and electronic product manufacturing
Chemical manufacturing
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
Electrical equipment, appliance and component
manufacturing
Fabricated metal product manufacturing
Machinery manufacturing
Transportation equipment manufacturing
Employment (%)
Page 233 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 12
provincial trends, manufacturing jobs have seen a resurgence in Tillsonburg, evidenced by the 2009-
2018 growth trend.
Manufacturing sub-sectors which saw the largest growth in jobs are transportation equipment
manufacturing, machinery manufacturing and fabricated metal product manufacturing. The Plastics and
rubber products manufacturing sector which accounts for 2.3% of total manufacturing employment in
Tillsonburg saw a loss of 84 jobs from 2009 to 2018.
Figure 11: Manufacturing Jobs by Sub-sector, Tillsonburg, 2009 & 2018
Industry (NAICS) Jobs by Year 2009-2018 Job Change
2009 2018 Absolute Change % Change
Transportation equipment manufacturing 1,164 1,756 592 51%
Machinery manufacturing 126 378 252 200%
Food manufacturing 297 314 17 6%
Fabricated metal product manufacturing 200 259 59 30%
Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing 65 110 45 69%
Furniture and related product manufacturing 24 76 52 217%
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 158 74 -84 -53%
Wood product manufacturing 46 67 21 46%
Chemical manufacturing 16 64 48 300%
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing 55 46 -9 -16%
Miscellaneous manufacturing 16 44 28 175%
Paper manufacturing <10 22
Computer and electronic product manufacturing <10 22
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing <10 13
Printing and related support activities <10 12
Total Manufacturing Jobs 2,188 3,266 1,078 49%
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018. Note: Data figures under ten (<10) are not available
2.3.3 Comparative Employment Location Quotient (LQ)
When compared to the Tri-County, Tillsonburg has a high concentration of employees working in the
manufacturing sector with an LQ of 1.67. Specific sectors with a high employment concentration include
electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing, computer and electronic product
manufacturing and chemical manufacturing. Manufacturing sectors that have low employment
compared to the tri-county include printing and related support activities, non-metallic mineral product
manufacturing and plastics and rubber products manufacturing. Tillsonburg has an above average
concentration (a similar, if slightly higher) concentration of employment in advanced manufacturing
when compared to the Tri County.
When compared to the province, Tillsonburg has a high concentration of employees working in the
manufacturing sector with an LQ of 3.52. Specific sectors with a high employment concentration include
transportation equipment manufacturing, electrical equipment, appliance and component
manufacturing and machinery manufacturing. Employment in the printing and related support activities,
beverage and tobacco product manufacturing and computer and electronic product manufacturing is
Page 234 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 13
low in Tillsonburg compared to Ontario. Tillsonburg has a high concentration of employment in
advanced manufacturing compared to the province, principally due to its strengths in machinery
manufacturing and fabricated metal product manufacturing.
While the 2008 Economic Strategy for the Town of Tillsonburg identified plastics manufacturing as a key
economic cluster, the decline in employment in this sector should be considered when considering
development opportunities.
Figure 12: Tillsonburg Manufacturing Employment Concentration Compared to Tri-County and Ontario, 2018
Industry (NAICS) Tri-County Ontario
LQ Classification LQ Classification
Transportation equipment manufacturing 1.18 Above Average 2.90 High
Machinery manufacturing 1.24 Above Average 1.28 High
Food manufacturing 0.95 Moderate 0.83 Average
Fabricated metal product manufacturing 0.93 Moderate 0.81 Average
Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing 2.94 High 1.48 High
Furniture and related product manufacturing 1.06 On Par 0.49 Low
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 0.57 Low 0.31 Low
Wood product manufacturing 1.06 On Par 0.80 Moderate
Chemical manufacturing 1.28 High 0.29 Low
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing 0.40 Low 0.50 Low
Miscellaneous manufacturing 0.62 Low 0.30 Low
Paper manufacturing 1.21 Above Average 0.28 Low
Computer and electronic product manufacturing 1.46 High 0.17 Low
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 0.74 Low 0.15 Low
Printing and related support activities 0.35 Low 0.09 Low
Manufacturing Total 1.67 High 3.52 High
Advanced Manufacturing Total 1.15 Above Average 1.38 High
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018.
The proportion of manufacturing employment change from 2009-2018 and their corresponding Location
Quotients (LQ’s) were compared to manufacturing employment change in Ingersoll and Woodstock. The
results of this analysis are illustrated in Figure 13. The X-axis shows the percentage of manufacturing
employment change from 2009-2018 in Tillsonburg and comparator communities. The Y-axis shows the
employment LQ’s for these communities in 2018. The bubble size is a pictorial representation of the
number of manufacturing sector jobs in 2018 (size equals number of jobs). Key insights of this analysis
include:
▪ Woodstock leads among comparator regions in terms of manufacturing sector job growth from
2009-2018 at 56%, followed by Tillsonburg at 49% and Ingersoll at 23%
▪ All three comparator communities have high employment LQ’s compared to the province, indicating
manufacturing employment as a sector of competitive strength
Page 235 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 14
Figure 13: Concentration and Percent Change in Manufacturing Sector Jobs, 2009-2018
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018.
2.3.4 Local Economic Drivers
Though the relative concentration of employment and growth trends can shed some light on likely
sources of business and employment growth, it is also useful to examine whether Tillsonburg is
experiencing an increase or decrease in its competitive share of employment relative to Ontario’s
economy.
By performing a shift-share analysis, the leading and lagging sectors in the local economy can be
identified and thus determine the high-impact industries specific to a community. The regional
competitive effect explains how much of the change in a given industry is due to some unique
competitive advantage that the region possesses because the growth cannot be explained by national
trends in that industry or the economy. The results of this analysis are shown in Figure 14.
Tillsonburg’s high impact industries in the manufacturing sector are those with a high potential for
automation and include:
▪ Transportation equipment manufacturing
▪ Machinery manufacturing
▪ Fabricated metal product manufacturing
▪ Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing
These sectors also show a high location quotient relative to the province, indicating a strong regional
presence.
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%LQ 2018Employment Change 2009-2018 (%)
Tillsonburg
Ingersoll
Woodstock
Page 236 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 15
Figure 14: Regional Competitive Share of Employment, Tillsonburg, 2009-2018
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018.
2.3.5 Employment Projections
Employment in Tillsonburg’s manufacturing sector in is projected to grow by 12% (an increase of 383
jobs) from 2018 to 2024 compared to 3% in Ontario and 2% in Canada.
Figure 15 shows the industry sub-sectors that are projected to show job growth through to 2024 and
those sectors that show a decline by job numbers. Keeping in tandem with current rates, employment in
transportation equipment manufacturing, machinery manufacturing and fabricated metal product
manufacturing is projected to increase while employment in plastics and rubber products manufacturing
sector is projected to decline further.
-94
-10
-1
0
0
0
0
4
6
8
10
21
22
23
26
45
52
53
58
241
390
-200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing
Primary metal manufacturing
Textile mills
Clothing manufacturing
Leather and allied product manufacturing
Petroleum and coal product manufacturing
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing
Textile product mills
Printing and related support activities
Food manufacturing
Computer and electronic product manufacturing
Paper manufacturing
Wood product manufacturing
Miscellaneous manufacturing
Chemical manufacturing
Furniture and related product manufacturing
Electrical equipment, appliance and component…
Fabricated metal product manufacturing
Machinery manufacturing
Transportation equipment manufacturing
Employment Number
Page 237 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 16
Figure 15: Manufacturing Sector Job Change, Tillsonburg, 2018 -2024
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
The proportion of projected manufacturing employment change from 2018-2024 and their
corresponding Location Quotients (LQ’s) were compared to manufacturing employment change in
Ingersoll and Woodstock. The results of this analysis are illustrated in Figure 16. The X-axis shows the
percentage of manufacturing employment change from 2018-2024 in Tillsonburg and comparator
communities. The Y-axis shows the employment LQ’s for these communities in 2024. The bubble size is a
pictorial representation of the number of manufacturing sector jobs in 2024 (size equals number of
jobs). Key insights of this analysis include:
▪ Tillsonburg leads among comparator regions in terms of manufacturing sector projected job growth
from 2018-2024 at 12%, followed by Woodstock at 11% and Ingersoll at 7%
▪ All three comparator communities have high employment LQ’s compared to the province, indicating
that employment in the manufacturing sector will continue to be a sector of competitive strength
-29
1
2
3
3
7
11
16
17
38
63
82
170
-50 0 50 100 150 200
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
Computer and electronic product manufacturing
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing
Electrical equipment, appliance and component
manufacturing
Paper manufacturing
Chemical manufacturing
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing
Wood product manufacturing
Furniture and related product manufacturing
Fabricated metal product manufacturing
Food manufacturing
Machinery manufacturing
Transportation equipment manufacturing
Employment Change (2018-2024)
Page 238 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 17
Figure 16: Concentration and Percent Change in Manufacturing Sector Jobs, 2018-2024
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
2.4 Staffing Patterns and Projections
Staffing patterns provide information on the in-demand occupations specific to an industry.
Understanding staffing patterns can help determine those skills that are central to industry growth and
enable workforce planning. In 2018, the top occupations in the manufacturing sectors were:
▪ Motor vehicle assemblers, inspectors and testers – 347 occupations (12.6% of total occupations)
▪ Other metal products machine operators – 274 occupations (10.0% of total occupations)
▪ Metalworking and forging machine operators – 174 occupations (6.3% of total occupations)
▪ Welders and related machine operators – 131 occupations (4.8% of total occupations)
▪ Construction millwrights and industrial mechanics – 127 occupations (4.6% of total occupations)
▪ Material handlers – 124 occupations (4.5% of total occupations)
▪ Process control and machine operators, food and beverage processing – 118 occupations (4.3% of
total occupations)
▪ Manufacturing managers – 87 occupations (3.2% of total occupations)
▪ Machinists and machining and tooling inspectors – 84 occupations (3.1% of total occupations)
▪ Other products assemblers, finishers and inspectors – 79 occupations (2.9% of total occupations)
▪ Machining tool operators – 78 occupations ( 2.8% of total occupations)
The staffing patterns were studied up to 2024, to identify the occupations that are projected to grow or
decline. This analysis enables the identification of occupations that will be in demand in the future and
relevant to the economic performance of the sector. Identifying these occupations will allow the
community to develop initiatives and skills training to ensure the labour pool have the relevant skills.
The proportion of projected manufacturing occupation change from 2018-2024 and their corresponding
Location Quotients (LQ’s) were compared to manufacturing occupation change in Ingersoll and
Woodstock. The results of this analysis are illustrated in Figure 17. The X-axis shows the percentage of
manufacturing occupation change from 2018-2024 in Tillsonburg and comparator communities. The Y-
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%LQ 2024Employment Change 2018-2024 (%)
Tillsonburg
Ingersoll
Woodstock
Page 239 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 18
axis shows the occupation LQ’s for these communities in 2024. The bubble size is a pictorial
representation of the number of manufacturing sector occupations in 2024 (size equals number of
occupations). Key insights of this analysis include:
▪ The occupations projected to be in demand in 2024 are similar to the occupations in demand
currently. Motor vehicle assemblers, inspectors and testers, other metal products machine
operators and metalworking and forging machine operators are the top occupations in 2024
▪ Process control and machine operators, food and beverage processing and other metal products
machine operators are projected to be high growth occupations.
Figure 17: Proportion of Manufacturing-Related Occupations in 2024 and Projected Change, 2018 -2024
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
2.5 Education Profile and Talent Supply
Note about Data: The data for the Education Profile and Talent Supply was studied at the 2-digit code
of the Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) 2016. Due to the standardised data classification
system and overlaps between the definitions of the classifications, it is best to interpret this data as a
trend rather than drawing conclusions based on absolute numbers. The Classification of Instructional
Programs (CIP) studied here represent those fields that are closely related to the manufacturing sector
and are not an exhaustive list.
Analysing the education profile of Tillsonburg’s population aged 15 years and over, it was determined
that approximately 5,475 residents aged 15 years and over had a postsecondary certificate, diploma or
degree. 21% (1,155 people) of this population had a postsecondary certificate, diploma or degree
degrees related to the manufacturing sector. The proportion of the population in Tillsonburg with
manufacturing-related degrees at 21% is comparable to Oxford County at 24% and the province at 21%,
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
-15%-5%5%15%25%35%45%Total occupations in 2024 (%)Occupation Change 2018-2024 (%)
Motor vehicle assemblers, inspectors and
testers
Other metal products machine operators
Metalworking and forging machine
operators
Process control and machine operators,
food and beverage processing
Welders and related machine operators
Construction millwrights and industrial
mechanics
Material handlers
Manufacturing managers
Machining tool operators
Machinists and machining and tooling
inspectors
Page 240 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 19
respectively.
Studying individual fields of study, Tillsonburg has a higher proportion of the population with Mechanic
and repair technologies/technicians related degrees compared to County and Ontario. These degrees
prepare individuals to apply technical knowledge and skills in the adjustment, maintenance, part
replacement, and repair of tools, equipment, and machines. Relating this back to the staffing patterns, it
can be understood that Tillsonburg does seem to have a good proportion of talent supply, capable of
participating in the workforce.
Figure 18: Manufacturing-Related Field of Study, aged 15 years and over, 2016
Manufacturing related field of study -
(CIP) 2016
Tillsonburg Oxford County Ontario
Population % Population % Population %
Mechanic and repair
technologies/technicians 390 34% 2,815 29% 225,860 19%
Engineering technologies and
engineering-related fields 295 26% 2,250 23% 237,775 20%
Construction trades 205 18% 2,000 21% 198,790 17%
Precision production 155 13% 1,645 17% 124,515 11%
Engineering 85 7% 720 7% 334,085 28%
Architecture and related services 25 2% 195 2% 51,845 4%
Total 1,155 100% 9,625 100% 1,172,870 100%
Source: Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population.
Figure 19 shows the percentage of age groups with educational degrees related to the manufacturing
sector. It is understood that the largest group of the population with manufacturing sector degrees are
65 years and over. This compares to only 3% of the incoming labour force between the ages of 15 to 24
years. The core labour force (25 to 44 years) makes up 29% of the population, while the mature labour
force (45 to 64 years) makes up 38% of the population.
Figure 19: Population Age, postsecondary certificate, diploma or degree in manufacturing related studies, 2016
Source: Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population.
3%
11%
18%19%19%
31%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
15 to 24 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 64 years 65 years and over
Page 241 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 20
Analyzing the current talent available to participate in the workforce (Figure 19), it is identified that
Tillsonburg might face a skills gap in the future. The incoming labour force may not be adequate to meet
the future demand and fill vacant jobs that arise as the mature labour force starts exiting the workforce.
2.6 Manufacturing Industries
The manufacturing industries in Tillsonburg were studied using the Canadian Business Counts and
complemented with the Town’s business directory.
Statistics Canada’s Canadian Business Counts provides a record of business establishments by industry
and size, collected from the Canada Revenue Agency. The data collected includes all local businesses
that meet at least one of the three criteria:
▪ Have an employee workforce for which they submit payroll remittances to CRA; or
▪ Have a minimum of $30,000 in annual sales revenue; or
▪ Are incorporated under a federal or provincial act and have filed a federal corporate income tax
form within the past three years
According to Canadian Business Counts data, 1,194 business establishments were registered in
Tillsonburg in 2018. Of these 45 businesses (4%) were businesses related to the manufacturing sector.
Of the 45 industries, 26 industries are related to advanced manufacturing. The proportion of advanced
manufacturing industries in Tillsonburg is higher than the county and provincial rates (Figure 20).
Figure 20: Manufacturing Industries, Tillsonburg, 2018
Industries (2018) Tillsonburg Oxford
County
Tri-
County Ontario
Total Industries 1,194 10,334 27,159 1,367,11
8
Manufacturing Industries 45 366 938 36,939
Manufacturing Industries (%) total Industries 4% 4% 3% 3%
Advanced Manufacturing Industries 26 198 387 16,682
Advanced Manufacturing (%) total Manufacturing
Industries 58% 54% 41% 45%
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
The proportion of manufacturing industries by individual sub-sectors in Tillsonburg is shown in Figure
21. The majority of manufacturing industries are involved in fabricated metal product manufacturing.
These establishments are primarily engaged in processes resulting in the production of ferrous and non-
ferrous metal products ranging from cutlery and hand tools to architectural and structural metal
products, boilers, tanks and shipping containers.
Other major manufacturing industries in Tillsonburg include transportation equipment manufacturing,
non-metallic mineral product manufacturing and machinery manufacturing.
Page 242 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 21
Figure 21: Manufacturing Industries by Sub-sectors, Tillsonburg, 2018
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
2.6.1 Comparative Industries Location Quotient (LQ)
Figure 22 shows the manufacturing industries concentration compared to Tri-County and Ontario in
2018.
When compared to the Tri-County, Tillsonburg has manufacturing industries on par with establishments
in the Tri-County with an LQ of 1.09. Although specific sub-sectors such as computer and electronic
product manufacturing industry shows a high concentration, Tillsonburg has one establishment in this
sector employing from 1 to 4 employees.
When compared to the province, Tillsonburg has a high concentration of manufacturing industries with
an LQ of 1.39. Specific sectors with a high concentration of businesses include fabricated metal product
manufacturing, transportation equipment manufacturing and electrical equipment, appliance and
component manufacturing and machinery manufacturing.
Tillsonburg has a high concentration of advanced manufacturing industries compared to both the Tri-
County and the province. The high LQ of manufacturing industries in Tillsonburg indicates that the
industry can be classified as an exporter.
10
6
4
43
3
2
2
2
2
2
2 1 1 1
Fabricated metal product manufacturing
Transportation equipment manufacturing
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing
Machinery manufacturing
Textile product mills
Wood product manufacturing
Food manufacturing
Printing and related support activities
Chemical manufacturing
Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing
Furniture and related product manufacturing
Miscellaneous manufacturing
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
Computer and electronic product manufacturing
Page 243 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 22
Figure 22: Tillsonburg Manufacturing Industries Concentration Compared to the Tri-County and Ontario, 2018
Manufacturing Industries Tri-County Ontario
LQ Classification LQ Classification
Fabricated metal product manufacturing 0.85 Moderate 1.54 High
Transportation equipment manufacturing 0.46 Low 3.23 High
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing 0.10 Low 2.74 High
Machinery manufacturing 0.13 Low 0.89 Moderate
Textile product mills 0.63 Low 5.61 High
Wood product manufacturing 0.04 Low 1.30 High
Food manufacturing 0.77 Moderate 0.46 Low
Printing and related support activities 0.05 Low 0.53 Low
Furniture and related product manufacturing 0.59 Low 0.58 Low
Miscellaneous manufacturing 0.02 Low 0.34 Low
Chemical manufacturing 1.03 On Par 1.23 Above
Average
Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing 0.76 Moderate 1.51 High
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 1.97 High 1.00 On Par
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 0.45 Low 0.63 Low
Computer and electronic product manufacturing 4.42 High 0.57 Low
Manufacturing Total 1.09 On Par 1.39 High
Advanced Manufacturing Total 1.40 High 1.28 High
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
The proportion of Tillsonburg’s manufacturing industries and their corresponding Location Quotients
(LQ’s) were compared to manufacturing industries in Ingersoll and Woodstock. The results of this
analysis are illustrated in Figure 23. The X-axis shows the percentage of manufacturing businesses in
Tillsonburg and comparator communities. The Y-axis shows the LQ’s for these communities in 2018. The
bubble size is a pictorial representation of the number of manufacturing industries in 2018 (size equals
number of businesses). Key insights of this analysis include:
▪ Tillsonburg leads among comparator regions in terms of manufacturing industries at 3.8%
▪ All three comparator communities have a high concentration of industries compared to the
province, indicating that business in the manufacturing sector are spaces of competitive strength
Page 244 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 23
Figure 23: Concentration and Percent of Manufacturing Industries, 2018
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
2.6.2 Town’s Business Directory
The Town’s business directory, specific to the manufacturing industries, is summarised in Figure 25 and
Figure 24. Manufacturing industries in Tillsonburg were also profiled by employee type, size of
establishment and sub-sector. The data was then compared to the Canadian Business Counts (CBC).
The directory shows a total of 64 businesses in the Town, specific to the sector. These are businesses in
Tillsonburg and do not include the surrounding region. The directory shows ten sole-proprietorships. Of
the 54 industries with employees, the majority employ 1-4 employees.
The CBC shows that of the 45 manufacturing industries, 11 establishments are sole-proprietorships. Of
the 34 establishments with employees, the majority employ 50-99 employees.
Figure 24: Manufacturing Business by Employee Type and Size of Establishment, 2018
Manufacturing
Businesses Total Without
Employees
With Employees
1-4 5-9 10-19 20-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500+
Canadian
Business Counts
Number
45 11 6 3 4 5 8 3 5 0
% of Total 100% 24% 13% 7% 9% 11% 18% 7% 11% 0%
Town’s Business
Directory Number 64 10 13 4 11 12 5 4 5 0
% of Total 100% 16% 20% 6% 17% 19% 8% 6% 8% 0%
Source: Town’s business directory, 2018 & EMSI Analyst, 2018
A discrepancy between Canadian Business Counts (CBC) and the business directory is identified with the
directory reporting a higher number than the Business Counts. However, in terms of percentages, the
businesses identified through both sources are similar. Fabricated metal product manufacturing and
transportation equipment manufacturing is identified as the top industries in both the CBC and the town
directory. These figures are useful as they provide a snapshot of local firms that operate in the public
1.30
1.32
1.34
1.36
1.38
1.40
1.42
3.5%3.6%3.6%3.7%3.7%3.8%3.8%3.9%LQ 2018Manufacturing Industries (%)
Tillsonburg
Ingersoll
Woodstock
Page 245 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 24
realm. Local businesses provide voluntary responses to Towns surveys that request registration of their
business with the Town.
Figure 25: Manufacturing Industries, Tillsonburg, CBC 2018 & Town Directory
Manufacturing Industries
Canadian Business
Counts
Town’s Business
Directory
Number % Number %
Fabricated metal product manufacturing 10 22% 18 28%
Transportation equipment manufacturing 6 13% 8 13%
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing 4 9% 2 3%
Machinery manufacturing 4 9% 6 9%
Textile product mills 3 7% 4 6%
Wood product manufacturing 3 7% 5 8%
Food manufacturing 2 4% 3 5%
Printing and related support activities 2 4% 3 5%
Chemical manufacturing 2 4% 3 5%
Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing 2 4% 1 2%
Furniture and related product manufacturing 2 4% 3 5%
Miscellaneous manufacturing 2 4% 3 5%
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 1 2% 0 0%
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 1 2% 2 3%
Computer and electronic product manufacturing 1 2% 0 0%
Textile mills 0 0% 0 0%
Clothing manufacturing 0 0% 1 2%
Leather and allied product manufacturing 0 0% 0 0%
Paper manufacturing 0 0% 1 2%
Petroleum and coal product manufacturing 0 0% 0 0%
Primary metal manufacturing 0 0% 1 2%
Total 45 100% 64 100%
Source: Town’s business directory, 2018 & EMSI Analyst, 2018
2.7 Top Employers
The top employers in Tillsonburg by employee number in the manufacturing sector are shown below.
Figure 26: Top Employers, Tillsonburg, 2018
Company Description of Activities Total Employees
THK Rhythm Automotive Canada, Ltd Automotive parts manufacturer 400
Marwood International Inc - Plant 2 Metal fabrication 450
Autoneum Canada Limited -
Tillsonburg Automotive parts manufacturing 340
Inovata Foods Corp Frozen food entrees 259
Page 246 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 25
Company Description of Activities Total Employees
Fleetwood Metal Industries Inc Metal stamping and welding technologies 200
Adient Seating Canada LP Manufacturing of Automotive Foam Seating 180
Titan Trailers Inc Custom tractor-trailer manufacturing 155
Townsend Lumber Inc Sawmill and logging company 150
Electrical Components International Manufacturer of electrical equipment 150
Freudenberg-NOK Sealing
Technologies
Manufacturer of elastomer, silicone and rubber
components 135
Source: Town’s business directory, 2018
2.8 Export Information
As an export-oriented sector, the manufacturing industry accounted for 83% of total exports in
Tillsonburg with $1.9 billion in 2014. Exports in the manufacturing sector saw a growth of 19% from
2011 to 2014. Exports are important to count because they measure money coming into the region from
outside, as opposed to money circulating within the economy.
Transportation equipment manufacturing accounted for the majority of exports with $1.3 billion
followed by machinery manufacturing with exports of $188 million and plastics and rubber products
manufacturing with exports of $103 million. Exports in the plastics and rubber products manufacturing
sector have increased by 22% from 2011 to 2014. However, employment in this sector is declining.
While growth in exports indicates that local manufacturers are becoming increasingly competitive in
foreign markets, it does not necessarily contribute to sector employment growth.
Figure 27: Export, Manufacturing Industry, 2014
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
71.5%
6.2%
5.4%
4.9%
3.7%2.9%
2.7%0.9%
0.4%
0.3%
0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.2%
0.03%
Transportation equipment manufacturing
Machinery manufacturing
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
Food manufacturing
Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing
Chemical manufacturing
Fabricated metal product manufacturing
Miscellaneous manufacturing
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing
Furniture and related product manufacturing
Computer and electronic product manufacturing
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing
Textile product mills
Wood product manufacturing
Paper manufacturing
Printing and related support activities
Page 247 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 26
2.9 Multipliers
Multipliers help us understand which industries would impact the economy most by their growth or
decline. Multipliers can be studied in terms of sales, jobs and wages.
2.9.1 Sales Multipliers
Sales multipliers enable the identification of a highly-developed cluster in a community. A high sales
multiplier indicates an established industry as every dollar fed into the cluster from the outside has a
high ripple effect, propagating through the regional economy for some time before it leaks out. Food
manufacturing, fabricated metal product manufacturing, transportation equipment manufacturing,
chemical manufacturing and machinery manufacturing show high sales multiplier. For example, every $1
of sales coming into the food manufacturing sector results in a total of $11.72 in sales.
2.9.2 Jobs Multipliers
A jobs multiplier indicates how important a specific industry is for job creation. A high job multiplier
indicates a high impact industry. Food manufacturing, fabricated metal product manufacturing, chemical
manufacturing, machinery manufacturing are the top high impact industries in Tillsonburg. For example,
fabricated metal product manufacturing with a job multiplier of 8.32 means that for one job added to
the industry, seven more jobs are created elsewhere in the economy.
2.9.3 Earnings Multipliers
Industry earnings are the total amount of employee compensation paid out by employers in the
industry. Food manufacturing and fabricated metal product manufacturing are sectors with high sales
multiplier. An earnings multiplier of 12.04 in the food manufacturing sector means that every dollar of
compensation, an additional $12.04 is paid out in wages, salaries, and other compensation throughout
the economy.
Figure 28: Manufacturing Industry Multipliers, 2014
Manufacturing Industries Total Sales Total Jobs Total Wages
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 2.53 3.74 3.25
Chemical manufacturing 7.87 7.89 7.08
Clothing manufacturing 3.00 0.00 0.00
Computer and electronic product manufacturing 6.13 1.21 1.20
Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing 4.04 1.09 1.08
Fabricated metal product manufacturing 9.95 8.32 8.14
Food manufacturing 11.72 13.16 12.04
Furniture and related product manufacturing 3.39 2.50 2.44
Leather and allied product manufacturing 3.00 0.00 0.00
Machinery manufacturing 7.79 7.88 7.15
Miscellaneous manufacturing 2.07 1.18 1.12
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing 5.49 3.12 2.75
Paper manufacturing 2.74 3.52 3.29
Page 248 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 27
Manufacturing Industries Total Sales Total Jobs Total Wages
Petroleum and coal product manufacturing 1.00 0.00 0.00
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 2.50 2.64 2.49
Primary metal manufacturing 5.00 0.00 0.00
Printing and related support activities 1.45 1.34 1.32
Textile mills 3.00 0.00 0.00
Textile product mills 2.26 2.53 2.30
Transportation equipment manufacturing 8.01 6.95 5.98
Wood product manufacturing 4.12 3.92 4.21
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018
2.10 Supply Chain Analysis
The Supply chain analysis can be used to find leakage in the economy, or where the money is leaving the
region that might otherwise be captured. It can also be used as an exploratory tool for deciding what
businesses might be a good fit for the community.
In 2014, $514 million was made in purchases from the manufacturing sector in Tillsonburg. $279 million
(54%) were in-region purchases, meaning that the money was spent within Tillsonburg. $234 million
(46%) were out-region purchases, indicating money leaking out of Tillsonburg.
Figure 29 shows the industry supply chain for the input-output year 2014. The in-region and imported
purchases represent the percentage of dollars flowing from one sector to another sector.
The transportation equipment manufacturing with $232 million accounts for 45% of total purchases in
the manufacturing sector. 98% of purchases made by this sector are within the region, meaning the
supply chain for this sector is well defined and adequate for the sustained growth of the sector.
Primary metal manufacturing with $95 million accounts for 19% of total purchases in the manufacturing
sector. Data shows that 100% of the money in this sector is spent outside the region, indicating a wide
gap in the sector’s supply chain. This represents $95 million in losses for the region.
Machinery manufacturing with $17 million in purchases shows that 59% of purchases are in-region
purchases. Opportunities exist for the sector to expand businesses in the region as in-purchase dollars
account for at least 50% of total purchases. It is generally understood that sectors that can account for
at least 50% of total purchases in-region have identified a supply chain that can be further leveraged and
improved upon to increase the in-region purchases and thus reduce the dependence on imports to
ensure businesses growth.
Figure 29: Manufacturing Industry Supply Chain Analysis, 2018
Purchases from Total
Purchases
In-region Purchases Imported Purchases
$ % $ %
Transportation equipment manufacturing $232,960,087 $228,277,051 98% $4,683,036 2%
Primary metal manufacturing $95,957,334 $0 0% $95,957,334 100%
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing $42,746,349 $15,363,605 36% $27,382,744 64%
Chemical manufacturing $32,888,417 $6,446,540 20% $26,441,877 80%
Page 249 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 28
Purchases from Total
Purchases
In-region Purchases Imported Purchases
$ % $ %
Fabricated metal product manufacturing $29,713,021 $6,241,898 21% $23,471,123 79%
Machinery manufacturing $17,144,638 $10,088,755 59% $7,055,883 41%
Food manufacturing $12,155,117 $5,106,943 42% $7,048,174 58%
Computer and electronic product
manufacturing $11,982,251 $635,904 5% $11,346,347 95%
Electrical equipment, appliance and
component manufacturing $8,924,830 $3,592,857 40% $5,331,973 60%
Paper manufacturing $5,745,280 $603,569 11% $5,141,711 90%
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing $5,647,458 $719,163 13% $4,928,295 87%
Miscellaneous manufacturing $4,674,397 $962,823 21% $3,711,574 79%
Petroleum and coal product manufacturing $3,420,457 $0 0% $3,420,457 100%
Textile product mills $2,888,655 $442,833 15% $2,445,822 85%
Textile mills $2,442,745 $0 0% $2,442,745 100%
Wood product manufacturing $2,066,025 $570,015 28% $1,496,011 72%
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing $1,291,086 $296,142 23% $994,943 77%
Printing and related support activities $971,382 $39,172 4% $932,210 96%
Furniture and related product manufacturing $386,100 $191,562 50% $194,538 50%
Clothing manufacturing $224,956 $0 0% $224,956 100%
Leather and allied product manufacturing $34,609 $0 0% $34,609 100%
Total Manufacturing Purchases $514,265,194 $279,578,832 54% $234,686,362 46%
Source: EMSI Analyst, 2018. Note: These include purchases made only by the Manufacturing sector and
do not account for all industry sectors that represent the full supply chain of the sector.
2.11 Commuting Patterns
Note about Data: The data for Commuting Patterns was studied using the Statistics Canada, 2016
Census of Population, Commuting flow, Geography of residence and Geography of Work data. Because
of the difference in year and differences in the collection and assimilation of data, the results of this
analysis should not be directly compared to the EMSI Analyst jobs data. Due to these discrepancies, it is
best to interpret this data to understand the commuting flow of workers and if the community of
interest is an importer or exporter of workers.
The labour flow of the workforce provides a representation of the movement of labour in and out of a
community. It compares the number of jobs held by residents of a community to the number of jobs
held by people working in the community. The residents of the community may work in the same
community or travel outside the community to work. Similarly, the people working in the community
may be its residents or people living outside the community but still commute to work in the
community. Figure 30 shows the data for the residents of Tillsonburg and those employed in Tillsonburg
in the manufacturing sector.
▪ Residents of Tillsonburg - Approximately 1,725 residents of Tillsonburg may be employed in the
manufacturing sector. These include Tillsonburg’s resident population who work in Tillsonburg’s
Page 250 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 29
manufacturing sector (850 people), and Tillsonburg’s resident population who travel outside
Tillsonburg to work in the manufacturing sector of other municipalities (875 people).
▪ Employed in Tillsonburg - Approximately 2,665 people are employed in Tillsonburg’s manufacturing
sector. These include Tillsonburg residents who work in Tillsonburg’s manufacturing sector (850
people) and residents from other municipalities commuting to work in Tillsonburg’s manufacturing
sector (1,815 people).
Figure 30 showcases that Tillsonburg is a net importer of manufacturing sector workers. Net import
indicates that a community has a surplus of jobs that employs its residents and attracts workers from
nearby communities. While Tillsonburg loses 875 residents to the manufacturing sector of other
municipalities, it still attracts 1,815 people from other municipalities commuting to work in Tillsonburg’s
manufacturing sector. Thus, taking into consideration the Net Import (+)/Net Export (-), Tillsonburg
imports 940 workers to work in its manufacturing sector.
Figure 30: Labour Flow for the Manufacturing Sector, Tillsonburg, 2016
Manufacturing Sector Resident of
Tillsonburg
Employed in
Tillsonburg
Net Import (+)/Net
Export (-)
Total Manufacturing Sector Jobs 1,725 2,665 940 (+)
Source: Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population.
Studying the commuting patterns by specific industry sub-sectors (Figure 31) shows that Tillsonburg
imports most workers to work in transportation equipment manufacturing, machinery manufacturing
and food manufacturing. Tillsonburg has a lower proportion of its resident workforce employed in these
sectors.
Figure 31: Net Export (-)/Net Import (+) of Labour by Manufacturing Industry Subsectors, 2016
Manufacturing Sector Resident of
Tillsonburg
Employed in
Tillsonburg
Net Import
(+)/Net Export
(-)
Transportation equipment manufacturing 1,005 1,545 540
Machinery manufacturing 135 290 155
Food manufacturing 95 240 145
Electrical equipment, appliance and component manufacturing 10 80 70
Fabricated metal product manufacturing 135 195 60
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 40 70 30
Chemical manufacturing 10 35 25
Furniture and related product manufacturing 45 60 15
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing 30 40 10
Wood product manufacturing 75 50 -25
Primary metal manufacturing 20 0 -20
Miscellaneous manufacturing 50 35 -15
Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 20 10 -10
Textile product mills 20 10 -10
Textile mills 0 0 0
Page 251 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 30
Manufacturing Sector Resident of
Tillsonburg
Employed in
Tillsonburg
Net Import
(+)/Net Export
(-)
Clothing manufacturing 0 0 0
Leather and allied product manufacturing 0 0 0
Paper manufacturing 10 10 0
Printing and related support activities 10 10 0
Petroleum and coal product manufacturing 0 0 0
Computer and electronic product manufacturing 20 20 0
Source: Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population. Note about Data: The Net Import (+)/Net Export (-) data by
subsectors show that Tillsonburg imports 970 workers.
As illustrated in Figure 32, Tillsonburg imports most of its manufacturing sector workers from Norfolk
County (580 workers) and the Municipality of Bayham (270 workers). Tillsonburg loses most of its
manufacturing sector workers to the Town of Ingersoll (180 workers) and the Town of Woodstock (90
workers).
Figure 32: Net Export (-)/Net Import (+) of Labour by Communities, 2016
Source: Statistics Canada, 2016 Census of Population
-180
-90
-15
-15
-15
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-5
0
0
10
10
15
45
55
65
85
90
105
270
580
-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Ingersoll
Brantford
Stratford
Guelph
Kitchener
Southwold
Haldimand County
Central Elgin
Temagami
Aylmer
South-West Oxford
Norwich
Bayham
Net Import (+)/Net Export (-) of Labour
Page 252 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 31
3. Sub-Cluster Model Review
A best practices review was conducted to learn from existing cluster initiatives across North America
and around the world.
Industry clusters are increasingly gaining recognition as compelling frameworks for economies looking to
support and grow their economies. While firms and communities’ benefit from clustering through
agglomeration economies, a clear understanding of the cluster model is required to recognise growth.
Clusters in its simplest form are a ‘group of firms clustered together as a result of geographic proximity
and similar industry processes’.
The sub-cluster model review identified the following case studies to help inform this report.
▪ Smart Industry Field Labs, the Netherlands
▪ Bluewater Wood Alliance, Ontario, Canada
▪ Advanced Manufacturing Supercluster, Canada
▪ Additive Manufacturing Cluster, Northeast Ohio, USA
▪ Conexus, Advanced Manufacturing Cluster, Indiana, USA
▪ Luxinnovation, Luxembourg Materials and Manufacturing Cluster, Luxembourg
3.1 Smart Industry Field Labs, the Netherlands
The Smart Industry Field Labs were initiated in 2014 as a result of the Smart Industry Action Agenda, which
stipulates the use of ICT opportunities to make the industry more competitive. Field Labs are practical
environments in which companies and knowledge institutions develop, test and implement effective
Smart Industry solutions12.
The field labs are funded by both public and private partnerships, including business networks and
educational institutions. In terms of decision making, partners are involved through consultations to meet
the mandates of the Field Lab13. Some of these labs have a regional focus, while others have a national or
European focus. The central idea of these programs is to accelerate research and innovate. Field labs
strengthen connections with research, education and policy on a specific industry theme or research.
Goals include creating conditions for long-term business success for their partners, including the support
of SMEs and start-ups in their innovation activities14.
There is not one single reason behind the creation of a Field Lab. These programs are founded for many
reasons depending on the needs of the initiators. In general, the main motivations to start a Field Lab
include the fact that some technological advances are easier to achieve through the collaboration of
various firms rather that one alone.
12 https://smartindustry.nl/fieldlabs/
13 Claire Stolwijk, Matthijs Punter. Going Digital: Field labs to accelerate the digitization of the Dutch Industry. May
31, 2018
14 Claire Stolwijk, Matthijs Punter. Going Digital: Field labs to accelerate the digitization of the Dutch Industry. May
31, 2018
Page 253 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 32
Currently, there are 32 Smart Industry field labs active in the Netherland which address various Smart
Industry subjects and technologies such as flexible manufacturing, 3D printing, robotics etc. Figure 33
shows the examples of Field Labs related to manufacturing, the motivations behind their creation and the
stakeholders involved in their creation.
Figure 33: Creation of Manufacturing Field Labs in the Netherlands
Field Labs Reason to create the Field Labs Stakeholders involved in the
creation
Region of Smart
Factories
The Field Lab was initiated to develop the Northern
Netherlands into the home of Smart Factories,
thereby laying the foundations for strong
manufacturing industry. The RoSF consortium was
established around the main two original equipment
manufacturing companies; Philips, and Fokker, but
has since grown into a group of 32 partners (SMEs,
knowledge institutes and education institutions).
The Field Lab was initiated by the
NOM (the Northern regional
development organization). This
is a public organization.
Smart Bending
Factory
Based on the wish to significantly increase
productivity with robot support through direct CAD
coupling, smart (vision) technology, more flexible
production systems and human-robot collaboration a
Field Lab was created to be able to test these
technologies with the involved partners
Brain port Industries (the global
open supply network for High-
Tech companies, located in the
South of the Netherlands) is the
initiator of the Field Lab.
Multi-material 3D
Printing
The wish to have a demonstration platform as a
future factory for 3D printing to facilitate and
transfer the technology and knowledge to the
industry motivated the creation of the Field Lab.
The Field Labs was initiated by 2
knowledge institutes. The TU
Eindhoven and TNO.
Ultra-Personalized
Products and
Services
The creative industry had the wish to apply the
added value of the creative sector in the
manufacturing sector by the development of radical
new product propositions for the manufacturing
industry (e.g. ultra-personalized products and
services such as the development of a specific foot
brace). The Field Lab was created to test and
experiment with these product propositions in a test
facility.
ClickNL Is the initiator of the Field
Lab. ClickNL is a top Dutch
consortium of knowledge and
innovation (TKI) that makes a link
between researchers and
creative professionals
Source: Claire Stolwijk, Matthijs Punter. Going Digital: Field labs to accelerate the digitization of the Dutch Industry. P. 20
3.2 Bluewater Wood Alliance, Ontario, Canada
The Bluewater Wood Alliance was created to coordinate and facilitate the needs of the advanced wood
manufacturing in southern Ontario. The primary mission of this organization is ‘to increase our
members’ competitiveness by improving their know-how, raising their powers of innovation and
increasing internationalization’15.
The organization works as a not-for-profit corporation, governed by a board of directors, made up
15 https://bluewaterwoodalliance.com/about-us/
Page 254 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 33
entirely of member firms. The alliance is funded by a combination of membership fees plus federal and
provincial partners on a project basis. It acts as an intermediary and works with the government to
articulate clusters objectives and secure funding on a project basis.
The Bluewater Wood Alliance offers the following benefits to members:
▪ Learning, Plant Tour & Networking Events: these events allow members to network and develop
strategic industry relationships.
▪ Export Development Initiatives: the alliance explores export opportunities for members and engages
in accessing government support to allow members to attend trade missions
▪ Collaborative Project Funding: the alliance actively engages with government partners to support
and fund projects
▪ New Technology: technology adaptability is a key focus area of the alliance and thus continuously
monitors and shares technological advancements in wood processing and wood-related IT with its
members.
▪ Training & Skills Development: the alliance works with community colleges, high schools and
independent providers in the region in creating programs for training and skills development.
▪ Connectivity: the alliance fosters an environment of communication and collaboration among its
members to gain access to information on events, collaborative projects, programs and training
sessions.
The alliance established in 2011 in Midwestern Ontario, has over 80 member organizations, including
manufacturers and suppliers. The alliance recently secured the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food
and Rural Affairs – Rural Economic Development (OMAFRA – RED) project funding to help companies
innovate and improve product development processes. The initial funding of $500,000 leveraged over
$3 million in member project investment over the past two years. The alliance has also enabled
members to target new markets such as the Index show in Dubai, UAE, and the High Point Market in
High Point, North Carolina16.
The Bluewater Wood Alliance is one of the five winning bidders of the $950 million federal funding
awarded by the federal government for the ‘superclusters’ initiative17.
3.3 Advanced Manufacturing Supercluster, Canada
In 2018, the Canadian Federal Government launched Canada’s New Supercluster Initiative to grow the
economy, create new jobs, improve competitiveness and turn Canada into a leader of innovation18. The
main idea behind this initiative is that companies of all sizes, academic institutions and non-for-profit
organization come together to create new ideas and innovate in their respective industries. The goal is
that Canadians benefit from more jobs, pioneering research and innovation.
According to Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, the Advanced Manufacturing
Supercluster was created with the purpose of build-up manufacturing capabilities; introduce new
16 http://www.woodworkingcanada.com/r5/showkiosk.asp?listing_id=5191202
17 http://www.woodworkingcanada.com/r5/showkiosk.asp?listing_id=5537494
18 Government of Canada. Next Generation Manufacturing Supercluster kicks into high gear. November 13, 2018
Page 255 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 34
technologies such as robotics and 3D printing. The initiative has a special focus on training and technology
implementation. Although the program is still in its initial stages, it is expected to allow for the creation
of more than 50,000 jobs and increase Canada’s GDP by more than $50 billion over the next ten years.
Some of the sample activities of the program include19:
▪ Technology leadership by developing research and technology-based projects in areas such as product
and process design
▪ Partnerships for scale by facilitating technology acquisition, demonstration and scale-up
▪ Diverse and skilled talent pools by supporting training, research centres and work-integrated
programs
▪ Access to innovation by facilitating access to technology and expertise while providing solutions
concierge service for manufacturers and tech firms.
▪ Global advantage by improving supplier capacities in international supply chains while attracting
talent and investment to Canada.
This Advanced Manufacturing Supercluster initiative is currently being managed by Next Generation
Manufacturing Canada, an industry-led not-for-profit organization governed by an independent board of
directors and a team of executive managers who work for the various partners of the organization20.
Industries of all sizes can apply for a free membership by agreeing with the terms of the program.
Memberships are also open for industry networks and groups, government agencies, education
institutions and researchers.
3.4 Conexus, Advanced Manufacturing Cluster, Indiana, USA
Conexus Indiana is an advanced manufacturing cluster in Indiana that promotes the advanced
manufacturing and logistics economy through partnerships and innovative collaborations between
industries, academic and public-sector partners.
Conexus Indiana is an initiative by a CEO-led “holding company”, Central Indiana Corporate Partnership
(CICP). The company houses six distinct economic development initiatives and included cluster initiatives
such as Conexus, BioCrossroads (life-sciences) and AgriNovus (agriculture biosciences). Conexus Indiana
was formed in 2007 with the following focus:
▪ Amplify awareness and understanding of the impact and opportunity of advanced manufacturing
and logistics
▪ Inspire talent to learn about advanced manufacturing and gain skills and build careers
▪ Forge collaborations with advanced manufacturing and logistics companies to leverage
opportunities and drive continued growth
▪ Anticipate emerging trends and thought leadership in the advanced manufacturing and logistics
19 Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. Retrieved from
<https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/093.nsf/eng/00010.html>
20 Next Generation Manufacturing Canada. Retrieved form <https://www.ngen.ca/who-we-are>
Page 256 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 35
Conexus Indiana has over 300 members and is led by industry councils, to ensure the continued growth
of the aerospace and defence, logistics and automotive industry clusters. It has developed industry-
specific curriculum and educational pathways for high school and post-secondary institutions and actively
collaborates with Indiana’s industry, academic and public-sector partners to ensure sustained industry
growth. Recent successes of the program include the INvets program that matches companies with
veterans to answer skills shortage and the securing of $2 billion per year in funding for the state to address
infrastructure needs21.
3.5 Additive Manufacturing Cluster, Northeast Ohio, USA
The Additive Manufacturing Cluster is a membership-based organization created to accelerate the use
and adoption of 3D printing technologies among member companies.
This cluster was created in 2016 after a study that identified the increasing demand for 3D printing. The
study concluded that Northeast Ohio had many supply chain strengths and is placed well to support its
strong manufacturing base to adopt the use of 3D printing to gain a competitive advantage in the
market.
The main goals of this cluster are22:
▪ Form a regional innovation cluster that relies heavily on focused engagement with America Makes
and that establishes northeast Ohio as the nexus of AM in the Midwest.
▪ Drive expanded applications of AM for tooling, fixtures, and enhanced manufacturing productivity
by making investments in technical support, capital equipment, workforce development, and
industry-based educational programs.
▪ Use formal education and workforce training initiatives to boost the adoption of advanced
manufacturing and place a strong emphasis on the development and retention of design and
engineering talent.
▪ Build out supply chain strengths in the key market verticals of the automotive, biomedical and
aerospace industries, including an attraction strategy for key gaps in the existing supply chains.
▪ Establish a framework that will foster entrepreneurship and commercialization of AM supply chain
technologies, as well as the northeast Ohio “maker” community.
Today the cluster brings together 57 companies and has promoted the industry sector through several
events. The cluster also was awarded $66,000 from Jobs Ohio and $75,000 from the Burton D. Morgan
Foundation to continue cluster development.
3.6 Luxinnovation, Luxembourg Materials and Manufacturing
Cluster, Luxembourg
This cluster is managed by Luxembourg’s economic development and investment organization. The
purpose of this initiative is to foster innovation, business development, and cross-sector cooperation.
21 https://www.conexusindiana.com/stakeholders/
22 Northeast Ohio Additive Manufacturing Cluster. Retrieved from <https://neohioamcluster.org/what-is-the-
cluster/>
Page 257 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 36
This cluster focuses on composite materials, bio-sourced materials, nanomaterials and industry 4.0
(which includes automation and robotics).
This cluster also works as a member-based organization. Some of the support services provided by this
cluster include business development, research and development, funding, technology transfer and
partner search.
The main objectives of the initiatives are23:
▪ Contribute to the implementation of new technologies and the creation of high added value in the
industry ecosystem (with a special focus on industry 4.0, additive manufacturing, automation and
robotics)
▪ Promote the Luxembourg industry in the Greater Region and at the international level to foster the
local economy
▪ Stimulate innovation and business development through public-private partnerships and cross-
sector flagship projects.
3.7 Key Learnings for Tillsonburg
Cluster development must be based on identified and validated industry opportunities. While the exact
factors that generate robust agglomeration economies are not completely understood, the following
factors are critical in the development of clusters.
▪ Location: the co-location of firms, academic institutions and R&D establishments, venture
capitalists and government institutions allow for the attraction of skilled labour and foster
interactions and knowledge spillovers while keeping transaction costs at a minimum
▪ Critical mass: the co-location of firm entails that the supply chain is well developed, and firms can
produce economies of scale. Also, the productivity and overall quality of products as improved and
firms focus on continuous innovation to remain competitive
▪ Linkages: clusters lead to “co-opetition”, by which firms recognise mutual benefits and develop
trust. Firms can actively collaborate on projects and improve their supply chain links and improve
market reach. It is understood that clustering allows for firms to be more innovative than their peers
not located in clusters
Cluster Success Factor Notes
Unique Industry Opportunity
▪ Focused industry opportunities are identified and understood.
▪ Investment is focused and measured.
23 Luxinnovation. Retrieved from < https://www.luxinnovation.lu/cluster/luxembourg-manufacturing-cluster/>
Page 258 of 564
MDB Insight – Town of Tillsonburg – High-Tech Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Action Plan Page 37
Cluster Success Factor Notes
Partnerships
▪ Public-Private partnerships are engaged
▪ Ideal partnerships are private-sector driven
▪ Educational and government institutions play supportive roles
Co-Opetition ▪ Clusters are collective initiatives; partners work collaboratively
toward mutually beneficial goals.
Long-Term Focus
▪ Clusters are developed with the ultimate goal of creating a
strong business ecosystem. Immediate job creation and profit
are secondary.
▪ Includes initiatives such as strengthening the supply chain,
securing funding and partnering with academic institutions
Community Champions
▪ Clusters have the support of business leaders in the
community, who are in term given support by government
partners.
Central Hub
▪ Clusters need a central physical or digital space for
businesses/entrepreneurs to congregate.
▪ Sharing space leads to synergies and innovative idea sharing.
Page 259 of 564
Tillsonburg High
Tech Mfg Action
Plan
Economic Development & Marketing
Page 260 of 564
2
Outline
•Action Plan Implementation Committee
•Study Area
•High Tech Manufacturing – A Definition
•Tillsonburg Manufacturing Sector Overview
•Industry 4.0 Implications for Tillsonburg
•Industry Cluster – A Definition
•Manufacturing Sub-Cluster model
•What are we trying to accomplish?
•Next Steps
Page 261 of 564
3
Manufacturing Action Plan Committee
•Ian Barton, opid Technologies
•Monica Clare Management Consultant
•Nicolas Morganti, Morganti Marketing
•Steve Spanjers, Triton Innovation*
•Collette Takacs, Westburne*
*Member of the Town’s Economic Development Advisory Committee
Page 262 of 564
4
Study Area - Tri-County
Page 263 of 564
5
High Tech Manufacturing – A Definition
•The terms Advanced Manufacturing and High-Tech
Manufacturing are the same and used interchangeably
•Advanced Manufacturing Subsectors:
•Chemical manufacturing
•Plastics and rubber products manufacturing
•Fabricated metal product manufacturing
•Machinery manufacturing
•Computer and electronic product manufacturing
•Electrical equipment, appliance and component
manufacturing
•Transportation equipment manufacturing
•Medical equipment and supplies manufacturing
Page 264 of 564
6
Tillsonburg Manufacturing Sector Overview
Page 265 of 564
7
Tillsonburg Manufacturing Sector Overview
Page 266 of 564
8
Presentation Title | Section
Page 267 of 564
9
Tillsonburg’s Manufacturing Sector
•As an export-oriented sector, the manufacturing
industry accounted for 83% of total exports from
Tillsonburg in 2014.
•Exports in the manufacturing sector saw growth of
19% from 2011 to 2014
Page 268 of 564
10
Tillsonburg’s Manufacturing Sector
•Tillsonburg is a net importer of manufacturing
sector workers.
•While Tillsonburg loses 875 residents to the
manufacturing sector of other municipalities, it still
attracts 1,815 people from other municipalities
•Sub-sectors that import the majority of workers include
the Transportation equipment (auto and related),
Machinery Manufacturing, and Food Processing.
Page 269 of 564
11
Tillsonburg’s Manufacturing Sector
•Supply Chain Analysis:
•In 2014, $514 million in total purchases were made by
the manufacturing sector
•$279 million {54%) were in-region purchases, meaning that the
money was spent within the region
•$234 million {46%) were out-region purchases, indicating
money leaking out of the region
Page 270 of 564
12
Industry 4.0 Implications for Tillsonburg
•Implications of technology on the continued
transformation of manufacturing
•Fourth Industrial Revolution
•Also known as Industry 4.0
•Reflects the integration of smart digital technologies such as
robotics, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, IoT,
additive manufacturing, and advanced materials to make manufacturing more agile, flexible and responsive to customers
•A ‘smart factory’ uses advanced technologies allowing
manufacturers to react more efficiently to changing market
conditions, improve both their operational efficiency and
revenue forecasts, create customised products and aim for
continual improvement.
•Industry 4.0 also allows for a more connected supply chain
whereby suppliers, customers, investors, and other third-party
experts can learn and adapt to new conditions and work
together more effectively
Page 271 of 564
13
Industry 4.0 Implications for Tillsonburg
•A shift in the type of work and the skills that
employees need
•Advent and rapid adoption of new technologies have
resurfaced concerns over technology eliminating jobs.
However, new technologies help drive innovation and
give rise to entirely new industries and economic
opportunities.
•In the long run, technology has often helped to produce
more jobs than has destroyed
Page 272 of 564
14
Industry 4.0 Implications for Tillsonburg
•Businesses need to be aware of their current level
of digital maturity
•Technology adoption can be done incrementally
Page 273 of 564
15
Industry 4.0 Implications for Tillsonburg
•To ensure that businesses and the economy
benefits from technology adoption, local and
senior levels of government need to develop
policies and incentives that encourage
investment and innovation
•Help businesses increase productivity
•Upscale their product offerings
•Improve access to markets
Page 274 of 564
16
Industry 4.0 Implications for Tillsonburg
•Innovative workforce strategies may also be
required to help workers and institutions adapt to
the impact on employment.
•Includes developing programs that enable both
businesses and employees to work effectively in
the current environment
Page 275 of 564
17
Industry Cluster – A Definition
•The concept of ‘industry clusters’ has gained
recognition as a compelling framework for
economies looking to support and grow their
economies
•Clusters are a ‘group of firms clustered together as
a result of geographic proximity and similar
industry processes’. A Cluster usually consists of the
following elements:
Page 276 of 564
18
Industry Cluster - Definition
•A Cluster usually consists of the following elements:
•Companies in the Same Sector or Industry
•Common raw materials, common elements in processes
•Serve common/multiple sectors
•Geographic Proximity
•Infrastructure Commonalities (skills, training,
purchasing, supply chain, service provision, logistics, etc)
•Collaboration among (Competing) Companies
•Collaborate on projects
•Share best practices they wish to share
•See the importance of the “big picture”
Page 277 of 564
19
Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Model
•Tillsonburg is home to a critical mass of large, small and
medium-sized enterprises.
•Well positioned to capitalise on and foster an industry-
led consortium. T
•Support from post-secondary and research institutions,
industry partners and government.
•Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP) represents
a good platform to support a cluster model
•As this effort matures a more developed field lab model
should be pursued that addresses strategic
partnerships and industry collaboration
Page 278 of 564
20
Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Model
•Tillsonburg is home to a critical mass of large, small and
medium-sized enterprises.
•Well positioned to capitalise on and foster an industry-
led consortium.
•Support from post-secondary and research institutions,
industry partners and government.
•Manufacturing Acceleration Program (MAP) represents
a good platform to support a cluster model
•As this effort matures a more developed field lab model
should be pursued that addresses strategic
partnerships and industry collaboration
Page 279 of 564
21
Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Model
•Tillsonburg must leverage local and regional strengths to
showcase its unique value proposition for manufacturing
•Tillsonburg’s value proposition has been:
•Low-cost
•Location
•Available workforce with a strong rural work ethic (that is, a
workforce that has characteristics that enable workers to thrive in
the sometimes-challenging environment of manufacturing)
•Tillsonburg should focus on the creation of an innovative,
highly adaptable manufacturing location with programs
and industry experts that support globally competitive
businesses and manufacturing operations
Page 280 of 564
22
Manufacturing Sub-Cluster Model
•Cluster Development:
•Step I - Identify and Prioritize the Local Cluster
•Step II - Determine the Level of Industry Support for the
Cluster
•Step III - Understand Cluster Opportunities
•Step IV - Local Leadership Group
•Step V - Establish the Vision, Mission and Outcomes of
the Cluster
•Step VI: Establish Cluster Partnerships
Page 281 of 564
23
What are we trying to accomplish?
•Build resilience in both company processes and
people
•Move away from a branch plant type economy
•Creating factories of the future/future proof local
manufacturing operations
•Bottom Line…Compete and excel in the global
economy!
Page 282 of 564
24
Next Steps
•Recommendation that:
•The study’s finding be supported
•The recommendations be approved in principle
•Subject to specific initiatives being developed
through the annual business plan and budget
process
Page 283 of 564
25
Next Steps
•Committee to continue with development of
implementation plan
•Support and grow target sectors
•Fabricated metal product manufacturing,
•Transportation equipment manufacturing
•Machinery manufacturing
•Engage manufacturers
•Expand knowledge of cluster development
•Develop activities program (quarterly)
•The Town should facilitate partnerships between
manufacturers and industry support organizations
•Explore the feasibility of a centralized space for
businesses to convene and collaborate to share best
practices and identify solutions (metal lab???)
Page 284 of 564
26
Q&A
Page 285 of 564
Report Title Traffic Pre-emption Release from Liability Agreement
Report No. Fire 19-08
Author Fire Chief Terry Saelens
Meeting Type Council Meeting
Council Date October 28, 2019
Attachments Release From Liability Agreement
Page 1 / 3 1343972093,,,FIR 19-08 Traffic Pre-emption Release from Liability Agreement
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Report Fire 19-08 Traffic Pre-Emption Release from Liability Agreement be received;
AND THAT a By-Law to authorize the agreement of Release of the Liability Indemnification
Waiver of Claims Assumption of Risks between the Town of Tillsonburg and the County of
Oxford be brought forward for Council’s consideration.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
To obtain Council approval for the agreement of Release of the Liability Indemnification Waiver
of Claims Assumption of Risks between the Town of Tillsonburg and the County of Oxford.
BACKGROUND
The agreement will release the County from liability and allow for the installation of the additional
Traffic Pre-exemption (Opticom System) at three intersections within the Town of Tillsonburg.
The Traffic Pre-emption System is GPS based to allow Fire apparatus in an emergency to
activate the stoplight at an intersection to go green to proceed safely. The request for the system
was the second phase outlined in the 2014 Business Plan and approved and purchased in the
2015 Capital Budget. The intersections scheduled in this program are Tillson Ave. and
Concession St., Tillson Ave. and Brock St., and Tillson Ave. and Oxford St.
As of September 2019, the final step is the review and approval by Council to enter into the
agreement with the County.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
The agreement has been reviewed by the Town Insurer Frank Cowan Company and the Town
Solicitor Patrick Kramer of Duncan, Linton LLP.
The Town solicitor recommended a few word changes but made no further comments regarding
the content of the document. Their comments are as follows:
Page 286 of 564
Page 2 / 3 CAO
1. recital para 1 – capitalize “The” in “The Corporation of the Town …”; inserted “The
Corporation of the County of Oxford…”; This was corrected as the County is not
incorporated.
2. para 3 – inserted “…shall commence on the date of execution of this Agreement noted
below…”;
3. para 3 – inserted “As between the parties, the Town hereby assumes …” [Note: this is a
very important limitation, the Town should not assume blanket risk; only to the extent to
protect the County as this statement now achieves];
4. para 14 – removed “non-exclusive” and replaced with “exclusive jurisdiction of the
Province of Ontario” [any dispute will be determined in Ontario according to Ontario law
(obviously)]; and,
5. signature lines – updated the names of the parties as described in 1. above.
The Town Insurer Frank Cowan Company provided the following comments. In summary there
were no issues identified with liability and risk.
Section 5 – the Town must indemnify the County for any claims etc. that arise due to the
Towns negligence – I have no issue with this. The Towns liability is limited to the
installation and operation/failure of only the pre-emption device.
Section 6 - the Town must maintain GL $2mill/occurrence, name the County as AI – again,
no issue.
Section 7 – I am not sure why this is here, they may want their lawyer to review…However, it
is not very broad, so I am not very concerned.
Section 8 and 9 – I am ok with the assumption of risks.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There will be costs associated with the installation of the equipment, estimated at approximately
$3,000; however those costs are not confirmed at this time. The installation costs will be
covered from the 2019 Fire operating budget.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT
1. Excellence in Local Government
☒Demonstrate strong leadership in Town initiatives
☒Streamline communication and effectively collaborate within local government
☒ Demonstrate accountability
Page 287 of 564
Page 3 / 3 CAO
Report Approval Details
Document Title: FIR 19-08 Traffic Pre-emption Release from Liability Agreement
.docx
Attachments: - FIR 19-08 Pre Emption Agree.doc
Final Approval Date: Oct 22, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Ron Shaw - Oct 22, 2019 - 8:36 AM
Page 288 of 564
RELEASE FROM LIABILITY
INDEMNIFICATION
WAIVER OF CLAIMS
ASSUMPTION OF RISKS
WHEREAS the Fire Department of The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg (the
“Town”) intends to install and operate traffic signal pre-emption apparatus to control
traffic light signals (the “Traffic Control Apparatus”) on highways, property and
equipment owned by The Corporation of the County of Oxford (the “County”);
AND WHEREAS the County has requested certain assurances regarding the
installation and operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus;
NOW THEREFORE, THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that for good and valuable
consideration, including the acceptance of the Traffic Control Apparatus on property
owned or operated by the County, the sufficiency and receipt of which consideration are
hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. Installation and Operation Permitted. The County agrees to permit the
installation and operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus on certain highways, property
and equipment owned by the County subject to the terms of this Agreement and the
prior written approval of the County of the location of such installation and operation.
Any and all Traffic Control Apparatus shall be installed, maintained, coordinated and
operated by qualified personnel as contracted by the Town and approved by the
County.
2. Definitions. As per Ontario Traffic Manual Book 12 Traffic Signals, as amended.
Traffic Control Signal: Any power operated traffic control device, whether manually,
electrically, or mechanically operated, by which traffic is alternately directed to stop and
permitted to proceed. Traffic Signal: 1) When used in general discussion, a traffic signal
is a complete installation including signal heads, wiring, controller, poles and other
appurtenances. 2) When used specifically, the term traffic signals refers to the signal
head that conveys a message to the observer.
Pre-Emption: The transfer of the normal control of signals to a special signal control
mode for the purpose of servicing railway crossings, emergency vehicle passage, transit
vehicle passage, and other special tasks, the control of which require terminating
normal traffic control to provide priority needs of the special task.
Pre-Emptor: A device or program/routine which provides pre-emption.
Page 289 of 564
- 2 -
3. Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date of execution of
this Agreement noted below and run for a period of ten (10) years (the “Term”) unless
terminated earlier pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.
4. Renewal. The Town shall have the option to renew the Agreement for a further
Term upon sixty (60) days written notice to the County prior to the expiration of the initial
Term of this Agreement provided the Town is not in default of any of the provisions of
this Agreement.
5. Release and Indemnification. The Town releases and indemnifies the County,
its officers, agents, employees, contractors, affiliates and representatives (collectively,
the “Releasees”), from any and all liability that they or any of them may have, for any
personal injury, death, property damage or other loss, sustained by any persons in
connection with, or as a result of, the installation and operation of the Traffic Control
Apparatus, due to the negligence of the Town, its officers, agents, employees,
contractors, affiliates and representatives.
6. Insurance. The Town shall, at its sole expense, obtain and keep in force,
insurance satisfactory to the County including General Liability insurance on an
occurrence basis for third party bodily injury, personal injury and property damage to an
inclusive limit of not less than $2 million per occurrence. This policy shall include the
County as additional insured with respect to liability arising in connection with this
Agreement and shall include a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation, termination
or material change.
7. Waiver of Claims. The Town waives any and all claims it may now and in the
future have against the Releasees, or any of them, and it agrees not to sue the
Releasees, or any of them, for any personal injury, death, property damage or other
loss, sustained by any person in connection with, or as a result of, the installation and
operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus, due to any cause not within the control of the
Releasees.
8. Acknowledgement of Risk. The Town acknowledges that there are certain
risks involved in its installation and operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus, in
addition to the usual risks and dangers inherent in the use of highways and control of
traffic signal equipment, including without limitation, damage to or malfunction of
equipment or facilities, vehicular collisions and physical contact or injury to pedestrians,
cyclists and other users of the highways.
9. Assumption of Risks. As between the parties, the Town hereby assumes and
accepts all of the dangers and risks connected with, or related in any way to, the
installation and operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus, and the possibility of
personal injury, death, property damage or loss resulting from any of the foregoing.
10. No Representation. In entering into this Agreement, the Town confirms that it is
not relying on any representation or statement made by the County or any of the
Page 290 of 564
- 3 -
Releasees, whether oral or in writing, to induce it to install or operate the Traffic Control
Apparatus.
11. Amendment. This Agreement may not be modified unless agreed to in writing
by the parties.
12. Notices. All notices in this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to
have been given if delivered by hand or mailed by ordinary mail, postage prepaid,
addressed to the person to whom such notice is intended to be given at the following
addressed:
For the Town:
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
ATTENTION: Donna Wilson, Town Clerk
200 Broadway, Suite 204
Tillsonburg ON N4G 5A7
Fax: 519-842-9431
Email: dewilson@tillsonburg.ca
For the County:
County of Oxford
ATTENTION: Peter M. Crockett, CAO
21 Reeve Street
PO BOX 1614
Woodstock ON N4S 7Y3
Fax: 519-537-1053
pcrockett@oxfordcounty.ca
If mailed, such notices must also be given by facsimile transmission or email
transmission on the date it was so mailed. If so given, such notices shall be
deemed to have been received on the first business day following the date it was
delivered or marked mailed out.
13. Binding Agreement. This Agreement constitutes a legally binding obligation
enforceable in accordance with its terms, and that it shall be binding upon and enure to
the benefit of the heirs, executors, legal personal representatives, administrators,
successors and assigns (as the case may be) of the parties hereto.
14. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the Province
of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein and each of the parties hereby
submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Province of Ontario in connection with this
Agreement.
Page 291 of 564
- 4 -
DATED this _______ day of , 2019.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement.
The Corporation of the Town of
Tillsonburg
_________________________________
Stephen Molnar
Mayor
_________________________________
Donna Wilson
Town Clerk
We have authority to bind The
Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg.
County of Oxford
_________________________________
Peter M. Crockett, P. Eng.
CAO
_________________________________
Director of Public Works
We have authority to bind The
Corporation of the County of Oxford.
Page 292 of 564
Report Title Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Enhanced Inspection
Report No. OPS 19-44
Author Kevin De Leebeeck, P.Eng., Director of Operations
Meeting Type Council Meeting
Council Date October 28, 2019
Attachments Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Evaluation Report
Page 1 / 11
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-44 Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Enhanced Inspection;
AND THAT G. Douglas Vallee Limited continued to be retained to complete the Municipal
Class Environmental Assessment;
AND FURTHER THAT the associated engineering costs in the amount of $12,100 be funded
by the remaining project budget.
BACKGROUND
The Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge is located on Veterans Memorial Walkway, 170m west of
Rolph St. The structure is an old railway girder bridge constructed in approximately 1910
subsequently converted to a pedestrian bridge approximately 20 (+/-) years ago, with 9 spans
and has total length of 107.5m.
Through Report OPS 19-14 G. Douglas Vallee Limited was retained by the Town to complete
an Enhanced OSIM Inspection of the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge including a load limit analysis
and evaluation of rehabilitation options.
SUMMARY
Enhanced OSIM Inspection
On June 18, 20 and 21, 2019 each element of the bridge was thoroughly inspected, including
inaccessible elements through the use of a drone-mounted camera and certified rope access
technicians. Steel sections were cleaned with a wire-brush and caliper measured to determine
corrosion section loss, wood ties were tapped with a hammer to test for soundness and
concrete areas were tested for soundness with the use of a hammer and Delam 2000 tool.
Results of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection are summarized below:
Concrete Abutments
There are no records that indicate the abutments or piers have undergone any
rehabilitation work since originally constructed. Minor cracking and delamination of the
abutment walls was noted. Deterioration of the mortar was also evident with an
average of approximately 30% mortar loss in the joints. Approximately 60% of the
abutments are in good condition, 30% are in fair condition and 10% in poor condition.
Page 293 of 564
Page 2 / 11
Maintenance to repair mortar joints of the abutments is recommended to be completed
within 2 years.
Piers
The majority of the piers have mortar loss ranging from 15% - 50%. Overall the pier
condition is approximately 63% good condition, 31% fair condition, and 6% poor
condition. Maintenance to reinstate the mortar joints of the pier base walls is
recommended to be completed within 2 years.
The pier caps are concrete block pedestals located at the foot of each steel column at
the top of the block piers. Three (3) pier caps were noted to have large cracks that
spanned in the east-west direction. The steel strapping around the pier caps have
moderate to severe corrosion with one pier cap missing the steel strapping. The pier
caps are summarized as 56% good condition, 25% fair condition and 19% poor
condition. It is recommended that the concrete pier caps be rehabilitated in 1-5 years
with the missing steel strap replaced as soon as possible.
Steel Columns
The columns are comprised of two (2) steel channels, one (1) steel plate on the exterior
side, and steel braces on the interior. The columns were observed to have a wide
range of light to severe corrosion, flacking and delamination. The steel braces on the
interior side were noted to be severely corroded with localized areas of failed sections.
The columns were found to be 69% fair condition and 31% poor condition. The
columns are recommended to be rehabilitated in 1-5 years.
Bearing Seats and Pads
There are two (2) bearings at each abutment and two at each pier. In 2010 the timber
bearing seats at each abutment were replaced. The bearing at each of the piers are
steel plates with light to severe corrosion. Overall the bearings are 95% fair condition
and 5% poor condition with rehabilitation recommended in 1-5 years.
Deck Girders and Diaphragms
The deck girders are arranged in two rows along the length of the bridge, with
diaphragm cross-braces throughout to maintain alignment and stability. These girders
are the main structural components that carry the deck load to the piers and abutments.
Light to severe corrosion, flaking of delaminated steel and heavily deteriorated rivet
connections are evident throughout the girders. Overall the girders were observed to be
in 80% fair condition and 20% poor condition. The girders are recommended to be
rehabilitated in 1-5 years.
The diaphragm cross-braces are generally in fair to poor condition with severe corrosion
and flaking of delaminated steel causing section loss. The diaphragms are
recommended to be replaced in 1-5 years.
Wood Deck Ties
The wood deck ties were rehabilitated in 2010 and display no significant signs of
deterioration. Overall the wood deck ties are 80% good condition and 20% fair
condition. There is no recommended work for the wood deck ties.
Bridge Barrier
Page 294 of 564
Page 3 / 11
The current barrier is a steel chain-link fence with medium corrosion of the chain-link
and anchor plates. A loose wire was also noted at the bottom of the fence that requires
maintenance. Overall the chain-link fence barrier is in fair condition.
Deck Wearing Surface
The existing wearing surface is comprised of longitudinal wood planks attached directly
to the wood deck ties beneath without any air gap. The deck wearing surface was
observed to be in 75% good condition, 24% fair condition and 1% poor condition.
Maintenance to remove and replace wood deck planks will be an ongoing task.
The construction method of attaching the longitudinal wood planks directly to the wood
deck ties without an air gap will cause premature deterioration of the wood deck ties.
The deck surface has also been identified as a safety concern due to slippery conditions
in cold or wet weather. Alternative deck surface options should be explored as part of
future rehabilitation work.
Based on the results of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection a major rehabilitation of the Kinsmen
Pedestrian Bridge should be planned to occur in less than five (5) years due to the current
condition of major structural elements. Delaying the rehabilitation work beyond this timeframe
may incur a level of deterioration that is no longer feasible to repair such that the bridge will
need to be closed and/or replacement will need to be considered within 10 years.
Load Limit Analysis
A load limit analysis identifies the load carrying capacity of the bridge based on the calculation
methods prescribed in the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC). The evaluation
process applies factored Ultimate Limit State (ULS) load combinations and compares the
factored load applied to the bridge against the calculated factored strength or resistance of the
bridge to determine a structural factor of safety. The factored load combinations are applied to
the structure elements following the load path of the structure in a top-down manner. The load
path is the route in which an applied factored load or force travels through a structure until it
meets the ground. In the case of the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge the load path follows the
structure elements listed below:
Chain link fence barrier
Wood deck ties
Steel girders
o Typical girders
o Centre-span girders
Steel columns
Concrete foundations, piers and abutments
These elements of the structure were subjected to two (2) ULS load combinations:
Combination 1: Dead Loading + Pedestrian Live Loading
Combination 2: Dead Loading + Snow Loading + Sidewalk Snow Clearing Machine
It should be noted that the probability of the maximum pedestrian live load and the maximum
snow load occurring simultaneously is negligible.
Based on the results of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection the section loss of each structural
member was quantified and used in the evaluation to determine the structures current factored
Page 295 of 564
Page 4 / 11
resistance/strength. The ratio of the structures factored resistance over the factored load
yields the structural factor of safety of each element.
The analysis revealed that the current state of the main structural components of the bridge
are adequate to support pedestrian loading, but that the wood deck ties are inadequate to
support a sidewalk snow clearing machine. The analysis also found that the chain link fence
barrier is not adequate to support lateral loads from pedestrians, cyclists, or a sidewalk snow
clearing machine.
The load limit analysis recommends that the chain link fence barrier by monitored on a more
regular basis and be replaced with a more suitable barrier in conjunction with bridge
rehabilitation work within the next five (5) years. In order to maintain the structural integrity of
the main load-carrying members a major rehabilitation of structural steel throughout the bridge
is required within the next five (5) years.
The load limit analysis also identified a serviceability issue associated with the longitudinal
wood deck planks being slippery during cold and wet weather conditions and recommended
that deck also be replaced with a non-slip surface as part of the rehabilitation work.
Options Evaluation
Based on the current structure condition established by the enhanced inspection and the load
limit analysis completed in accordance with the CHBDC it has been determined that the
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge requires major repair and rehabilitation work to meet current
standards and to extend its useful life.
While the bridge is not listed as a protected structure under the Ontario Heritage Act, if a
Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report was completed it would likely score high enough to be
eligible for designation. The Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge not only has the potential of an
attractive cultural heritage piece, but it also provides an important link to the downtown core for
residents west of the Stoney Creek Valley. With this in mind four options were evaluated:
Do nothing;
Close the bridge;
Repair the bridge; and
Replace the bridge.
Do Nothing
To ‘do nothing’ does not address the advance state of structure deterioration, compliance
with CHBDC standards, or deck serviceability issues. Neglecting to complete the
necessary rehabilitation work will likely result in bridge closure within 10 years. The bridge
will continue to deteriorate and will progress beyond the point for a cost effective
rehabilitation.
To ‘do nothing’ will not incur any short term construction costs, but will require another
Enhanced OSIM Inspection by 2025 in accordance with O.Reg. 104/97 - Standards for
Bridges at an estimated cost of $80,000.
Close Bridge
Page 296 of 564
Page 5 / 11
Closing the bridge would address the deck serviceability issue, but would create a new
problem of pedestrian access across Stoney Creek Valley. The benefit of this option is the
low cost and protection of public safety, but the bridge would still require regular
inspections until demolished. At this time the bridge does not require closure, however if
‘Do Nothing’ is selected closing the bridge would be the first stage in the process with
demolition thereafter. This option would require modest work in order to close the bridge to
pedestrian traffic and subsequently require consideration of the eventual decision to
demolish or replace the structure. A high level estimated cost of each stage is provided
below:
Stage 1 (Closure) - $18,750
Stage 2 (Demolition) - $300,000
Total - $318,750
Repair Bridge
Two (2) deck rehabilitation options were considered, one is a wood deck repair option while
the other is an option that considers the removal and replacement of the wood deck ties
and planks with a new steel grate system. Both options require a new pedestrian barrier
and rehabilitation of the supporting structural steel and concrete components. Each option
can be completed at one time or in two stages to ease the financial burden. However there
are two extremely important items to note: (1) that phasing the work will result in an overall
higher cost upon completion, and (2) deck replacement should not be considered if the
rehabilitation of the supporting structure is delayed more than a few years or neglected
entirely. Without the rehabilitation of the supporting structure, the bridge will require
closure regardless of the deck condition on top.
Repair Option – Wood Deck Replacement
This option would replace the existing wood deck planks with a new wood deck system
that is less prone to slippery conditions in wet or cold weather and would allow for air
flow between the wood deck ties and new wood deck system to increase the lifespan of
the wood.
Advantages Disadvantages
Requires minimal work to rehabilitate
the deck
Least costly repair
Bridge remains open
Lifespan of deck increased by 30 years
(+/- 10yr) until next major deck rehab.
Lifespan of overall structure increased
by 50 years
Aesthetics are improved with new
attractive and effective barrier
Integrity of heritage value is protected
with sympathetic modifications
Even though a least costly
rehabilitation option, it is still an
expensive project
The wood deck will still require
maintenance and repairs on a 10
year cycle
Snow removal must still be done by
hand
Slippery deck conditions would be
improved, but not eliminated in wet or
cold weather
Stage 1 (Steel Deck) - $400,000
Stage 2 (Structure Rehab) - $2,500,000
Total - $2,900,000
Repair Option – Steel Deck Replacement
Page 297 of 564
Page 6 / 11
This option would remove the wood deck ties and planks and install a new open grate
deck system similar to that on the Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge. The grated deck system
would significantly reduce slippery conditions in cold or wet weather and eliminate the
need for snow removal maintenance.
Advantages Disadvantages
Bridge remains open
Lifespan of deck increased by 40 years
(+/- 10 yrs) until next major deck rehab.
Lifespan of overall structure increased
by 50 years
Aesthetics are improved with new
attractive and effective barrier
Steel grate deck system significantly
improves slip resistance
Steel grate deck system more durable
Steel grate deck system requires less
maintenance and repair
Steel grate deck system eliminates
need for snow removal maintenance
Integrity of heritage value is protected
with sympathetic modifications
More expensive rehabilitation option
Some pedestrians may feel
uncomfortable seeing through the
steel grate deck
Removal of wood deck ties will have
an aesthetic effect on the former
railway bridge
Stage 1 (Steel Deck) - $675,000
Stage 2 (Structure Rehab) - $2,500,000
Total - $3,175,000
Replace Bridge
Three (3) bridge replacement options were considered:
a ‘Like-for-Like” railway bridge replacement,
a modern High Elevation pedestrian bridge, and
a ‘Valley Path’ replacement that incorporates a smaller pedestrian bridge along a
path on the valley floor.
Replace Option – ‘Like-for-Like’
This option would require full removal of the existing structure and replacement with a
structure designed to resemble the existing bridge retaining the aesthetic appeal of a
former railway bridge that meets current code requirements. The bridge deck would be
at the same elevation as the current bridge so the existing pedestrian path would not be
impacted.
Advantages Disadvantages
Page 298 of 564
Page 7 / 11
Keeps pedestrian path at the same
elevation
Bridge can be designed to carry
vehicles for maintenance purposes
Lifespan significantly increased to 80 yr
Aesthetics can be designed to mimic
existing railway bridge.
Most expensive option
Heritage value of the existing railway
bridge would be lost.
Stage 1 (Demolition) - $300,000
Stage 2 (Construction) - $4,075,000
Total - $4,375,000
Replace Option – High Elevation Bridge
This option would require full removal of the existing structure and replacement with a
modern pedestrian bridge that meets current code requirements. The bridge deck
would be at the same elevation as the current bridge so the existing pedestrian path
would not be impacted.
Advantages Disadvantages
Keeps pedestrian path at the same
elevation
Bridge can be designed to carry
vehicles for maintenance purposes
Lifespan significantly increased to 80 yr
Aesthetics can be designed to suit
desired look
Not the least expensive option, but
not the most expensive either
Heritage value of the existing railway
bridge would be lost.
Stage 1 (Demolition) - $300,000
Stage 2 (Construction) - $1,950,000
Total - $2,250,000
Replace Option – ‘Valley Path’
This option would require at least partial removal of the existing structure. A new valley
path would be constructed with a more modest pedestrian bridge constructed over the
waterway on the valley floor. The path would continue to the existing embankments
where a series of switchback sections would be constructed up the embankments.
Advantages Disadvantages
Pedestrian link is maintained
Lowest cost replacement option
Bridge can be designed to carry
vehicles for maintenance purposes
Lifespan significantly increased to 60 yr
Aesthetics can be designed to suit
desired look
The valley path would be difficult for
individuals with mobility issues to
traverse the switchback paths on the
embankments
Heritage value of the existing railway
bridge would be diminished
Stage 1 (Demolition) - $300,000
Stage 2 (Construction) - $950,000
Total - $1,250,000
Page 299 of 564
Page 8 / 11
Each of the options were evaluated using a set of weighted criteria to provide a consistent
systematic process to identify the most desirable solution. The criteria used are identified
below and summarized in the following chart:
Accessibility & Functionality: /20
How accessible is the option being considered? Does it present additional challenges or does it
remove barriers to the path of travel? Lower challenges and barriers to the path of travel result in
better functionality and a higher score.
Aesthetics & Heritage: /15
Does the option have aesthetic appeal? Is the visual appearance sympathetic to the heritage
value of the existing structure? Better visual appeal and lower impacts to heritage aesthetics
result in a higher score.
Durability & Lifespan: /20
Does the option have durable materials that do not require periodic repair and replacement?
Assuming that needed repairs and maintenance is carried out, does the option have a short,
medium, or long term life expectancy? More durable options that require less maintenance and
have a long lifespan result in a higher score.
Safety & Liability: /15
It is assumed that regulatory requirements (ie CHBDC, etc.) will be met, but are there hazards
that may pose a liability to the Town? Lower risks result in a higher score.
Construction Cost: /30
How does the cost of construction compare to the other considered options? Lower costs result
in a higher score.
TOTAL: /100
The sum of all evaluation categories represents a total score out of 100 points. The highest
score being the more desirable option using the weighted criteria considered.
Page 300 of 564
Page 9 / 11
The evaluation chart above indicates:
Most preferred - High Elevation Pedestrian Replacement, Steel Deck Rehabilitation
Less preferred - Valley Path Replacement, Like-for-Like Replacement, Wood Deck
Rehabilitation
Least preferred - Close the Bridge, Do Nothing
It should be noted that if no work is undertaken within five (5) years, the rehabilitation options
would no longer be feasible.
Page 301 of 564
Page 10 / 11
Next Steps
The Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge is at a critical decision point. To ‘Do Nothing’ will limit the
feasibility of available options; as each year passes the cost and viability of rehabilitation options
diminishes.
The identified preferred solution is a replacement with a High Elevation Pedestrian Bridge
followed by a Steel Deck Rehabilitation. Regardless of which preferred solution is selected the
project will require a Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Municipal Class EA). Given
the importance of this structure in terms of history and pedestrian linkage to the downtown staff
are recommending that G. Douglas Vallee Limited continued to be retained to complete the
Class EA including public consultation with results brought back to Council for confirmation of
the preferred solution for the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
In accordance with the Town Public Engagement Policy Strategy 3 – Involve, Consult,
Collaborate and as part of the Municipal Class EA process a 30 day public comment period and
public information center will be conducted to present the results of the above identified
alternative solutions and solicit public feedback.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The attached Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Evaluation Report, in particular the Options Evaluation
Section are reflective of the options that would be considered as part of a Municipal Class EA
process i.e. a majority of the work required for a Municipal Class EA Schedule ‘B’ project has
already been completed with the exception of preparing a formal project file, completing an
inventory and identifying the impact of the alternative solutions on the natural, social, and
economic environment and consultation with review agencies (i.e. LPRCA) and the public to
solicit comment and feedback. Based on the consultants quote approximately $12,100 is need to
complete the remaining aspects of a Municipal Class EA Schedule ‘B’ for the Kinsmen
Pedestrian Bridge.
Further to Report OPS 19-14 approximately $12,300 of the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge
Enhanced OSIM Inspection budget remains unspent. Staff are requesting that the remaining
project funds be used to complete the Municipal Class EA Schedule ‘B’ for the Kinsmen
Pedestrian Bridge.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
The completion of a Municipal Class EA for the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge supports Objective 1
– Excellence in Local Government of the Community Strategic Plan by demonstrating
communication and collaboration and supports Objective 2 – Economic Sustainability of the
Community Strategic Plan through timely planning and renewal of infrastructure assets to reach
their full potential service life.
Page 302 of 564
Page 11 / 11
Report Approval Details
Document Title: OPS 19-44 Kinsmen Pedestrain Bridge Enhanced OSIM
Inspection.docx
Attachments: - OPS 19-44 Attachment 1 - Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Evaluation Report.pdf
Final Approval Date: Oct 22, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Dave Rushton - Oct 22, 2019 - 9:31 AM
Ron Shaw - Oct 22, 2019 - 10:03 AM
Donna Wilson - Oct 22, 2019 - 3:11 PM
Page 303 of 564
KINSMEN PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
EVALUATION REPORT
ENHANCED OSIM INSPECTION, LOAD LIMIT ANALYSIS, & OPTIONS EVALUATION
FOR
THE CORPORATION OF
THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
September 2019
Page 304 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 1
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SYNOPSIS 2 SECTION 1.0 ENHANCED OSIM INSPECTION 3
1.1 INTRODUCTION 4 1.2 STRUCTURAL INSPECTION 5 1.3 ENHANCED OSIM RECOMMENDATIONS 9
SECTION 2.0
LOAD LIMIT ANALYSIS 10
2.1 INTRODUCTION 11 2.2 EVALUATION 12 2.3 CONCLUSIONS 16 2.4 RECOMMENDATIONS 17
SECTION 3.0
OPTIONS EVALUATION 18
3.1 INTRODUCTION 19 3.2 OPTIONS 20 3.3 COST ESTIMATES 28 3.4 EVALUATION 31 3.5 RECOMMENDATIONS 33 STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS 34 CLOSURE 35
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - KINSMEN PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE SNAPSHOT PAGE
APPENDIX B - ENHANCED OSIM DATA REPORT APPENDIX C - KINSMEN PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE ENHANCED OSIM DRAWING APPENDIX D - BLACK BRIDGE, WATERFORD HERITAGE TRAIL
Page 305 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 2
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
SYNOPSIS
This report contains three distinct sections: 1. an Enhanced OSIM Inspection Report which was the basis to determine the condition of the bridge and provide data for; 2. a Load Limit Analysis Report, which outlines the load carrying capacity of the bridge
based on the calculation methods prescribed in the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code; and 3. an Options Evaluation Report which discusses options and costs for the bridge considering the result of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection Report and the Load Limit Analysis Report.
The Town of Tillsonburg has requested G. Douglas Vallee Limited to prepare an Enhanced OSIM
Inspection Report for the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge. The enhanced OSIM inspection is required by provincial law (O.Reg. 472/10 Standards for Bridges) which requires that inspections be done in accordance with the Ontario Structure Inspection Manual.
The Ontario Structure Inspection Manual (OSIM) further clarifies:
“…Enhanced OSIM inspections should typically be done for structures that are over 30 years old
with critical components in poor condition (see note below). The frequency of the Enhanced OSIM
inspection can be between one to six years depending on the structure conditions.” The enhanced inspection was also required to determine the condition and measured state of deterioration for the steel members in order to prepare a Load Limit Analysis Report. The Load Limit Analysis was performed in accordance with the requirements of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code as required by provincial law (O.Reg. 472/10 Standards for Bridges).
The following is a summary of the key overall points of this full report: • The Enhanced OSIM Inspection revealed advanced deterioration in lighter gauge steel members and connections, and the factors of safety for some elements have been significantly reduced by deterioration.
o Longitudinal wood deck planks should be addressed to improve slip resistance.
• The Load Limit Analysis found that the bridge is stable but has some deficiencies.
o Pedestrian fence barrier does not meet code requirements for lateral load.
• The structure is at a critical decision point. The Options Evaluation recommends that a rehabilitation with be initiated in less than 5 years OR a high level pedestrian replacement bridge be considered.
o If a high level replacement option is chosen, plans should be undertaken to do so in less than 10 years. o If the project is staged the supporting steel structure rehabilitation work must be completed in less than 10 years.
Page 306 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 3
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
SECTION 1.0
ENHANCED OSIM
INSPECTION REPORT
Page 307 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 4
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
1.0 ENHANCED OSIM INSPECTION REPORT
1.1 INTRODUCTION
At the request of the Town of Tillsonburg, G. Douglas Vallee Limited performed an enhanced OSIM inspection of the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge (Structure No. BR_KINS0001) in late June
2019. Where access to a structure is limited, it is necessary to utilize special equipment to get within arm’s-length of all areas of structure elements; inspections of this nature are called enhanced OSIM inspections. The frequency of enhanced OSIM inspections should be a maximum of six (6) years for structures that:
• are over 30 years old; and
• contain critical elements and components in poor condition.
Previous biennial OSIM inspections have been limited visual inspections only, and have not included detailed inspections within arm’s-length of all bridge components. The structure has significant access limitations due to the size and height of the structural steel frame. In order to complete the enhanced OSIM inspection, rope access methods and a drone-mounted camera were employed in conjunction with standard inspection methods to complete the assignment. The actual date of construction is not known, however it is estimated to have been built circa 1910. The former railway bridge is a nine (9) span steel trestle frame structure that was later
converted for pedestrian use following the demise of the railway. This bridge has become an important pedestrian link for the downtown core.
The Town does not have drawings or records of the structure from the railway. The level of
maintenance and repair for the structure is unknown, however it was kept in safe operational condition for the better part of the century. Currently, it is our observation that there is a significant amount of accumulated deterioration that has progressed over the years.
The structure itself consists of:
• Chain-link fence barriers and wood plank wearing surface, connected to
• Pressure-treated heavy timber deck ties (new in 2010), resting on
• Heavy steel girders, spanning from pier to pier, supported by
• Built-up steel column pier frames, founded on
• Concrete block and cast-in-place concrete abutments and pier foundations.
This report provides a summary of the observations of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection. The technical enhanced OSIM report can be found in Appendix A. Also appended to this report is a
schematic drawing of the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge that depicts key plan and observed deterioration in the bridge which were noted during the investigation. This drawing is used to reference the location of elements and should be viewed in combination with this written report.
Page 308 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 5
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
1.2 STRUCTURAL INSPECTION 1.2.1 General
A thorough three (3) day inspection of the structure was carried out on June 18, 20, and 21, 2019. Inspections were halted on June 19 due to rain. The Enhanced OSIM Inspection team consisted of the following personnel:
• A. Ryan Elliott, P.Eng., BDS: Project Manager
• Michael J. Rapai, P,Eng.: Project Engineer
• Jason Timmermans, B.Eng., EIT: Inspector
• Johnathan McMorrow, B.A.Sc., EIT: Inspector
• Jamie Smith, B.Eng., M.Sc., EIT: Drone Pilot
• RAM Inspections (Rope Access) – 3 certified rope access technicians
The technicians from RAM were briefed on the scope of work and were directed by our inspectors
on a full-time basis for the duration of the inspection. Our team was provided with live video from cameras equipped on RAM technicians inspecting the structure. Our inspectors provided real-time instructions to the RAM technicians on a point-by-point basis to complete a thorough and
detailed inspection. In accordance with enhanced OSIM inspection requirements, the steel sections were cleaned with a wire-brush and caliper measured to determine corrosion section loss in selected areas. Wood ties were tapped with a hammer to test for soundness, and all areas
of concrete were tested for soundness with the use of a hammer and a Delam 2000 tool. All relevant photos have been published for context, and additional photos and videos were provided for Town records.
The results of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection are summarized as follows:
1.2.2 Concrete Block Abutments, Concrete Block Pier Bases & Pier Caps
The structure is a nine (9) span bridge supported by two (2) abutments (one at each end) and a series of eight (8) piers along the length of the bridge. There are no records that indicate the abutments or piers have undergone a rehabilitation since it was constructed. Based on our observations, the abutments are constructed with pre-cast concrete blocks. It is unknown if the block piers are resting on a concrete foundation or a pile cap. As part of the ground inspection, nondestructive delamination testing of the concrete block abutments and piers was completed using a hammer and a Delam 2000 concrete sounding tool.
During the inspection, minor cracking and delamination of the abutment walls was noted. Deterioration of the mortar was also evident during the inspection; an average of approximately 30% mortar loss in the joints was noted. Our observations indicate approximately 60% of the abutments are in good condition, 30% are in fair condition, with 10% in poor condition. Maintenance to repair mortar joints for the abutment walls is recommended to be completed within 2 years.
Page 309 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 6
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
Piers ‘B’ through ‘I’ were inspected during the Enhanced OSIM Inspection (refer to the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge drawing appended to report for element locations). The pier bases are
constructed with concrete blocks similar to the abutment construction. The pier bases also display similar deficiencies to the abutments. Small areas of minor delamination and mortar loss were evident throughout all piers. The majority of piers have mortar loss ranging from 15% - 50%, with the North C pier having 50% mortar loss. A minority of piers (ie: North B, South B, North F, and South I) are estimated to have less than 15% mortar loss. Overall, the pier conditions are summarized as 63% good condition, 31% fair condition, and 6% poor condition. Maintenance to reinstate the mortar joints of the pier walls is recommended to be completed within 2 years.
The pier caps are concrete block pedestals located at the foot of each steel column, at the top of
the block piers. Narrow to medium cracking with small areas of surface delamination are typical throughout the pier caps. Steel strapping around pier caps have moderate to severe corrosion, with a wide range of 10% - 60% section loss in localized areas. Three (3) pier caps were noted to
have large cracks that spanned in the east to west direction. The piers that were observed to have large cracking are the South F, North I, and South I piers. The North I pier was also observed to be missing the steel strapping around the top of the pier cap. The pier caps are summarized as 56% good condition, 25% fair condition, and 19% poor condition. It is recommended that the concrete pier caps be rehabilitated in 1-5 years. The steel strapping around the North I pier cap is recommended to be replaced as soon as possible to prevent further deterioration of the pier cap.
1.2.3 Steel Columns
The columns are comprised of two (2) steel channels, one (1) steel plate on the exterior side, and steel braces on the interior. The steel columns are located at each pier and supported by each pier cap. The columns were observed to have a wide range of light to severe corrosion, flaking,
and delamination. The steel laces on the interior side of the columns were noted to be severely corroded with localized areas of failed laces on the north side of Column I. During the inspection, one of the laces broke off the column when being inspected by hand. The columns were found to
be 69% in fair condition and 31% in poor condition. The columns are recommended to be rehabilitated in 1-5 years.
1.2.4 Bearing Seats and Pads
There are two (2) bearings at each abutment and two (2) at each pier. In 2010, the timber bearing seats at each abutment were replaced with two (2) 6’’x10’’ timber members. The bearings at each
pier are steel plates. All bearings inspected were observed to have light to severe corrosion. Each bearing pad was also noted to have delamination with flaking of the delaminated steel. Considering all bearings, 95% were found to be in fair condition, and 5% in poor condition. The
bearings at the abutments and at the top of the steel pier columns are recommended for rehabilitation in 1-5 years.
1.2.5 Deck Girders and Diaphragms
The deck girders are arranged in two rows along the length of the bridge, with diaphragm cross-braces throughout to maintain alignment and stability. There are eighteen (18) steel girders over
Page 310 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 7
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
the nine (9) spans that run the length of the structure. These are the main structural girders that carry the deck load to the piers and abutments. The condition of each girder appears to be
consistent throughout the span of the bridge with some localized areas of deficiencies. Light to severe corrosion, flaking of delaminated steel, and heavily deteriorated rivet connections are evident throughout the girders.
Each steel beam includes flange tension stiffeners at the mid-span, vertical web stiffener angles spaced evenly between the bearings, and steel rivet connections. Flange tension stiffener plates
are located on the top and bottom of the girder flanges. In general, the plates are delaminated with 10%-15% section loss in localized areas. Surface delamination was noted on the exterior face of the web of the south girder between spans E and F. Significant deterioration of the vertical
stiffener angle on the interior side of the north girder between spans B and C was also noted. Overall, there was approximately 10%-15% section loss throughout girder flanges, web, and rivets. Overall, the girders were observed to be in 80% fair condition and 20% poor condition. The
girders are recommended to be rehabilitated in 1-5 years.
The diaphragm cross-braces, including the horizontal and diagonal components, are generally in fair to poor condition. Like most of the steel components on the bridge, the deficiencies include severe corrosion with flaking of delaminated steel causing section loss. The horizontal components observed 10% - 25% section loss while the diagonal components were observed to have 10% - 20% section loss. The horizontal components are 60% fair condition and 40% poor condition with the diagonal components being 70% fair condition and 30% poor condition. The diaphragms are recommended to be replaced in 1-5 years. As a general observation, it was noted
that smaller steel sections were in poorer condition than larger and thicker steel sections.
1.2.6 Wood Deck Ties
Removal and replacement of the former wood railway ties (wood deck ties) was completed in 2010. There were no significant deteriorations to the existing newer wood ties noted during the Enhanced OSIM Inspection. Minor deficiencies such as localized areas of staining with splitting and checking were noted. Overall, the wood deck ties were observed to be 80% good condition and 20% fair condition. There is no recommended work for the wood deck ties.
1.2.7 Non-structural Elements
Visual inspections of non-structural elements took place to ensure the proper functionality of the structure. A complete understanding of the condition of all of the non-structural elements can be found in the Enhanced OSIM Inspection report appended to this document. Below are some
elements that are recommended for either rehabilitation or replacement. These elements may be recommended for rehabilitation or replacement as safety precautions, however they did not exhibit signs of significant structural deterioration during the investigation. 1.2.7.1 Bridge Barrier The current barrier is a steel chain-link fence with barbed wire along the top. The pedestrian barrier has medium surface corrosion and a loose wire at the bottom of the fence. Maintenance is recommended to be completed within one (1) year. Although the current design meets the
Page 311 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 8
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
geometric requirements of the CHBDC, the barrier does not meet loading CHBDC pedestrian load requirements. This will be discussed in the Load Limit Evaluation under Section 2 of this report.
1.2.7.2 Deck Wearing Surface:
The existing wearing surface is wood plank decking attached to the wood deck ties beneath. The deck wearing surface was observed to be in 75% good condition, 24% fair condition and 1% poor condition. The deterioration noted during the inspection included light to medium weathering and minor checking and splitting. Two boards were also noted to be warped upwards. Maintenance to remove and replace the warped deck boards is recommended. Maintenance of this deck surface will be an ongoing task, given the nature of how it was constructed. This wearing surface was reinstalled following the 2010 wood deck tie replacement project for budgetary reasons. Deck replacement options will be reviewed since the deck surface has been identified as a safety
concern due to the slippery conditions in wet weather and winter months. The method of nailing the deck boards directly into the wood tie-beams without an air gap will also cause premature deterioration of the wood deck ties. Alternative deck surface options are considered in the Options
Evaluation under Section 3 of this report.
Figure 1 & 2: Existing Barrier and Deck Wearing Surface
Page 312 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 9
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
1.3 ENHANCED OSIM RECOMMENDATIONS In order to prevent further deterioration of the original structure, it is the recommendation of this report that a major rehabilitation of the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge occur in less than five (5) years. If no rehabilitation work is completed on the structure within this time, then a closure and/or replacement should be considered by the Town of Tillsonburg in less than ten (10) years.
A major rehabilitation to preserve the structure should include (but not necessarily be limited to): • Abrasive blast cleaning of major structural steel elements, (i.e. girders and columns) and application of protective coating.
• Replacement of severely deteriorated minor members (i.e.: cross braces and diaphragms).
• Replace structural connections throughout the structure as required.
• Reinforcement of existing structural frames.
• Concrete and mortar repairs to piers and abutments.
• Replacement of pedestrian chain link fence barrier.
• Replacement of deck wearing surface.
• Erosion protection of embankments.
The rate of deterioration of the accessible areas of the structure will continue to be monitored through regularly scheduled OSIM inspections. Due to the current condition of the major structural elements, the rehabilitation work is recommended to be completed within five (5) years. Delaying this rehabilitative work beyond this timeframe may incur a level of deterioration that is no longer feasible for repair, resulting in a recommendation for bridge closure.
The primary recommendation, as a result of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection is that the Town of Tillsonburg should begin the necessary planning to:
• undertake a major rehabilitation of this structure in less than five (5) years, OR
• consider planning for the closure of the structure and/or options for replacement within ten (10) years.
We trust that this report provides the Town of Tillsonburg with an in-depth condition assessment of the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge. Please do not hesitate to contact us, should there be any questions or concerns regarding the contents of this report. We thank you for the opportunity to be of service.
Page 313 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 10
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
SECTION 2.0
LOAD LIMIT
ANALYSIS REPORT
Page 314 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 11
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
2.0 LOAD LIMIT ANALYSIS
2.1 INTRODUCTION The Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge, along Veterans Memorial Walkway in the Town of Tillsonburg, is a multi-span steel trestle bridge that was constructed circa 1910. The bridge was built as a high
level railway structure, with an overall span length of approximately 106m. After the railway ceased operation, the structure was converted to a pedestrian bridge approximately 20 (+/-) years ago. This structure provides a critical connection to the residential area on the west side of Tillsonburg to the downtown core. The bridge was previously assessed in an options report dated October 10, 2007 that
recommended a steel structure rehabilitation along with full wood removal and a new concrete deck due to severe corrosion and section loss of structural steel members, and decay of the wood deck. New timber deck ties were installed in 2010, however, the existing deck plank wearing surface was reinstalled and no additional rehabilitation work has been performed on the structural steel members.
G. Douglas Vallee Limited (Vallee) was contracted in June 2019 to perform an Enhanced OSIM Inspection and a Load Limit Evaluation on the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge. The scope of the Load Limit Evaluation is to review the structure under pedestrian loading, natural loading (ie: snow) and loading anticipated from the usage of a sidewalk snow removal machine. Existing dimensions and section loss used in the evaluation were obtained from the Enhanced OSIM Inspection dated
June 2019. A copy of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection has been appended with this report.
Page 315 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 12
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
2.2 EVALUATION
The Load Limit Evaluation was performed utilizing the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC), CSA S6-14, and the reference of additional standards which aided in determining geometry and loading of the structural materials which comprise the bridge. The following list summarizes the supplemental documents used to analyze the structure in addition to the CHBDC:
• Handbook of Steel Construction Second Edition CSA Standard S16-1969;
• Handbook of Steel Construction Tenth Edition CSA Standard S16-09;
• Wood Design Manual 2010 CSA Standard O86-09;
• Ontario Building Code (July 1, 2017 update) O. Reg. 332/12.
The load limit analysis is done using the CHBDC, specifically §14 Evaluation. The evaluation process includes applying load combinations (ie: transport trucks, etc.) and comparing the load applied to the bridge against the calculated strength of the bridge. In the case of pedestrian bridges, typical traffic loading is not applicable, so the evaluation is completed using standard design calculation methods found elsewhere within the code.
The Enhanced OSIM Inspection revealed that the structural steel members and structural steel connection plates of the bridge are undergoing very severe corrosion and deterioration. Based on
the current condition of the structure, the section loss of each member was quantified and used in the evaluation. The section loss quantities will be discussed for each element analyzed in the element section discussion below. Connection elements (plates, rivets, etc.) in which the section
loss was not able to be quantified with measurements (inaccessible) were assumed to be equal in condition to the element being analyzed. Based on the cumulative deterioration of the critical components of the structure, a structural factor of safety of 2.0 was selected. This value was selected based on a desire for a low risk probability for critical failure, good engineering judgment, and best practices for an evaluation of this nature.
The Load Limit Evaluation for the main structural elements was completed using two ultimate limit state (ULS) load combinations:
• Combination 1: Dead Loading + Pedestrian Live Loading; • Combination 2: Dead Loading + Snow Loading + Sidewalk Snow Clearing Machine Load.
The pedestrian load is not considered to act simultaneously with the snow load because each load is assessed a maximum value. The probability of the maximum snow load occurring simultaneously with a maximum pedestrian load is negligible.
Lateral Loads (ie: wind, seismic, pedestrian, impacts) were considered separately. It was found
that the main structural load carrying elements were satisfactory for lateral loads, however the barrier (eg: chain link fence barrier) was not adequate for pedestrian and impact loading. This will be discussed further in later sections.
Page 316 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 13
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
The elements subjected to the load combinations were identified and analyzed by following the load path of the structure in a top-down manner. The load path is simply the route that a force, or
load, takes from the point of application until it meets the ground. For example, the load applied by an impact from a sidewalk snow clearing machine would be a lateral load applied to the barrier, which transfers to the deck, then into the girder, then the column, pier cross braces, the foundation, then ultimately into the ground. The following list compiles the elements evaluated following the load path: i. Chain link Fence Barrier; ii. Wood Deck Ties; iii. Steel Girders:
o Typical Girders;
o Centre-Span Girders;
iv. Steel Columns; v. Concrete Foundations, Piers and Abutments.
It was noted that the governing load combination for the wood deck ties was Load Combination 2. Whereas the remaining structural elements below the bridge deck (girders, columns, foundations) were found to be governed by Load Combination 1. The result of the analysis is discussed in detail in the following sections as it pertains to individual elements. 2.2.1 Chain link Fence Barrier The wood deck of the bridge was repaired in 2007, and the chain link fence was refurbished in accordance with OPSS 541. The existing fence barrier is a 6’ tall chain link galvanized fence, supported by posts spaced at 8’ on centre. Existing support outrigger angles are attached to each
post. The outrigger angles are anchored to the wood curb with four (4) – ¼” lag bolts. The fence posts are anchored to the bridge decking using a base plate secured with four (4) – ¼” lag bolts.
Loading was analyzed for the pedestrian fencing in accordance with the CHBDC § 3.8.8.2, considering the fencing as both a pedestrian and bicycle barrier. Based on the steel section properties, and the material properties of the wood ties, it was determined that the chain link fence barrier is insufficient as a barrier to resist the applied factored loading. Furthermore, the impact loading from a sidewalk snow machine would greatly exceed the loading encountered from pedestrian and bicycle traffic.
Therefore, for lateral loads due to pedestrian loading, bicycle loading, or impact loading from a sidewalk snow machine, the existing chain link fence is inadequate as a barrier for this purpose.
Page 317 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 14
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
2.2.2 Wood Deck Ties
The wood deck ties are 4.0m long, 8” x 8” (191mm x 191mm), and spaced at 10” (254mm) on centre. The members were analyzed as number 2 grade Spruce-Pine-Fur (S-P-F), un-incised, preservative treated. The wood deck ties were analyzed as simply supported members bearing on the steel girder flanges, with a clear span of 2.15m flange-to-flange. The analysis determined the following:
• The wood deck ties are adequate for Load Combination 1 with a 4.8 factor of safety;
• The wood deck ties are inadequate for Load Combination 2 with a 0.9 factor of safety. The wood deck planks that are supported by the wood deck ties also pose a serviceability problem due to slippery conditions during cold and wet weather conditions. The results of the analysis indicate that the existing wood deck ties are adequate for pedestrian loading. The existing wood deck ties are not adequate for loading from a sidewalk snow removal machine. 2.2.3 Steel Girders
Loads from the wood deck ties are directly transferred to the steel girders. The girders have additional cumulative steel plates along the top and bottom flange at the mid-spans to carry the
increased bending moment forces concentrated at the mid-span. The centre-span of the structure is longer (17.9m) than the typical span (10.9m). The girders at the centre-span are deeper, with four (4) additional plates attached to the top and bottom flange at the mid-span rather than the
three (3) additional bottom plates and two (2) additional top plates installed on the typical girders. The varying geometry of the girders resulted in three different load analyses:
• Typical span girder moment resistance at mid-span;
• Centre-span girder shear resistance at girder ends;
• Centre-span girder moment resistance at mid-span. The steel girders are experiencing corrosion throughout the flanges and web as observed during the Enhanced OSIM Inspection. The section loss due to corrosion was measured at 15% for the heavy steel girders, which was considered during the analysis of these members. The depth and thickness of section loss in all steel members is relatively the same, however since the heavy
girders are much thicker than other smaller lighter members, the section less has less impact on their capacity. The moment resistance at the mid-span of the typical 10.9m span girders were analyzed to be adequate with a 10.8 factor of safety. The centre-span shear resistance at the girder ends was analyzed to be adequate with a 2.4 factor of safety. The centre-span moment resistance at mid-
span was analyzed to be adequate with an 8.0 factor of safety. Therefore, the girders are adequate to support Load Combination 1 and 2.
Page 318 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 15
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
2.2.4 Steel Columns Each steel girder is supported by steel column tower structures consisting of vertical columns with cross-bracing members providing lateral stability. The steel columns are composed of two C-channels connected to form a hollow section via a steel plate on one side, and steel laces on the other. A reduction in the moment of inertia about the weak axis was applied due to severe corrosion and section loss noted in the steel laces. It is important to note that during the inspection, some of the steel laces had failed due to corrosion.
The worst-case section loss of the steel columns was 50%, as identified by the Enhanced OSIM Inspection. This significant section loss was included in the analysis calculations and safety factors determined. These columns have an adequate slenderness ratio when calculated in accordance with the CHBDC § 10.9.1.3. In the load combinations calculated, the compressive resistance of these columns has a 3.8 factor of safety. Therefore, the steel columns are adequate to support Load Combination 1 and 2. 2.2.5 Concrete Foundations, Piers, and Abutments
The steel columns rest on piers constructed with concrete block, and on concrete block abutments at each end of the bridge. The piers were analyzed assuming the maximum factored load produced by the centre-span support columns. Assuming a conservative minimum 15 MPa strength of the concrete block, the pier cap is adequate with a large factor of safety of 75. The foundations supporting the piers are not visible, and could not be quantified and qualified for analysis. Biennial inspections of the structure have shown that the piers are in relatively good condition, but do have mortar loss at the joints. No other changes, settlements, or movements
have been noted throughout the biennial inspections.
Therefore, the pier foundations and abutment foundations are in similar condition to the piers themselves, and are adequate to support Load Combination 1 and 2.
Figure 3 & 4: Severely Deteriorated Laces Bracing throughout, Note Broken Brace in Figure 3
Page 319 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 16
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
2.3 CONCLUSION The structure is deteriorating more rapidly as time progresses. The bridge will require significant rehabilitation to remain in service in the near future. The severe corrosion of structural members, section loss of structural connections, and cracking and corrosion of rivets throughout the structure have a cumulative effect on the overall condition of the bridge. Each element was visually examined, and analyzed utilizing the methods as noted in the
Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code, and other CSA standards. The load limit evaluation has determined the following results for the independent elements:
Element Adequate For Load Combination 1
Adequate For Load Combination 2
Governing Factor of Safety
Barrier Fence & Anchorage No No 0.0 < 2.0
Wood Deck Ties No 0.9 < 2.0
Steel Girders 2.4 > 2.0
Steel Columns 3.8 > 2.0
Concrete Foundations, Piers, and
Abutments 75 >> 2.0
Based on the result of the analysis, we can offer the following comments:
• The chain link fence barrier is not adequate to support lateral loads from pedestrians, cyclists, or snow removal vehicles.
• Wood deck planks pose a hazard to pedestrians due to slippery conditions in wet and cold weather. Even though this serviceability issue is not a load carrying issue, it should be considered in the event that a rehabilitation is performed.
• Wood deck ties are inadequate to support a sidewalk snow clearing machine.
• The main load carrying structural components of the structure are adequate in supporting the pedestrian loading combination (Load Combination 1).
• To support the sidewalk snow removal machine, upgrades are required for the barrier fence & anchorage, and the wood deck ties.
• Upgrades to the structure should only be considered if a full major rehabilitation is
considered in the near future.
Page 320 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 17
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
2.4 RECOMMENDATIONS Our primary recommendations for your consideration include that:
• The wood deck plank wearing surface be replaced with a non-slip surface as soon as feasible.
• The chain link fence barrier is not exhibiting signs of distress and has not experienced a
critical failure to-date. The chain link fence barrier should be monitored and any signs of damage or distress should be addressed as soon as they are noted. The chain link fence barrier should be replaced with a suitable barrier if the bridge is rehabilitated.
• The mortar joints and concrete blocks in piers and abutments be repaired within five (5) years.
• A major rehabilitation be performed on all structural steel members throughout the structure within five (5) years to maintain the structural integrity of the main load-carrying members. This would include: abrasive blast cleaning of all steel members and connections; repairs, replacements, and supplemental structural steel where required; and a protective epoxy coat finish.
• If a major rehabilitation of the structural steel is delayed by staging, it must be completed in less than ten (10) years.
The cost of a major rehabilitation to the structural steel will be significant. A phased approach to complete the above recommended work could be considered to lessen the financial impact over
time. Each year of delay contributes to additional deterioration and increases to repair costs. The risk of a repair not being feasible and increased liability to the Town also increases with each year.
Lacking the initiation of a major rehabilitation within the noted time frame of less than five (5) years, it is anticipated that the structure will require closure or removal for the public safety in less
than ten (10) years.
We trust that this report provides the Town of Tillsonburg with an accurate assessment of the load carrying capacity of the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge. Please do not hesitate to contact us, should there be any questions or concerns regarding the contents of this report. We thank you for the opportunity to be of service.
Page 321 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 18
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
SECTION 3.0
OPTIONS
EVALUATION REPORT
Page 322 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 19
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.0 OPTIONS EVALUATION
3.1 INTRODUCTION The Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge sits along Veterans Memorial Walkway in the Town of Tillsonburg. The structure is a former railway bridge that was converted to pedestrian use
approximately 20 years ago. The bridge is a typical railway trestle, circa 1910 (+/-) that comprises of wood deck ties, supported by heavy steel girders, supported by steel column piers, supported by concrete block abutments and pier bases. The wood deck ties were rehabilitated in 2010, but the bridge has not otherwise undergone significant structural rehabilitation. In order to evaluate available options, an Enhanced OSIM Inspection Report and a further Load
Limit Evaluation Report was prepared. The Enhanced OSIM Inspection Report is a thorough and detailed account of the condition of all of the bridge elements, including the fence barrier, wood deck, steel girders, steel columns piers, and concrete block pier bases and abutments. The load limit analysis reviewed the theoretical capacity of the structure with a focus on public safety. Based on the material conditions determined by the enhanced inspection, a load limit analysis
was completed in accordance with the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code – which is the national standard for calculating bridge load limits. It was determined that the current bridge in its present form and condition, requires some modifications and repairs to meet current standards. The bridge is not listed as a protected structure under the Ontario Heritage Act however, if a
Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report was undertaken it would likely score high enough to be eligible and recommended for designation. The bridge is not only an important pedestrian link to the downtown core for residents, but also has a lot of potential as an attractive cultural heritage piece for the Town. As a result of the above noted considerations, this options evaluation report has been prepared.
The four options reviewed as part of this evaluation include:
• Do nothing;
• Close the bridge;
• Repair the bridge; and
• Replace the bridge. This report will review and evaluate each of these four options, as well as provide some cost estimation for planning purposes. With respect to the repair option or the replace option, there are multiple methods for each that were considered. Following the discussion of these options, this report will summarize and recommend a course of action for consideration.
Page 323 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 20
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.2 OPTIONS
The options to be considered are measured against their adequacy in addressing the problem. For this structure, the problem is that: The century old former railway bridge is in an advanced state
of deterioration. It currently does not meet certain standards, has some serviceability deficiencies, and there is a risk of
hazard to public safety. An option must address the problem to be considered feasible. In addition to this, the preferred
option should also address other factors such as economics, accessibility, aesthetics, and serviceability in order be practical. 3.2.1 Do Nothing To ‘do nothing’ does not address the problem. Neglecting to complete the needed rehabilitation work will likely result in the bridge requiring closure in less than 10 years. The bridge would continue to deteriorate and will progress beyond the point of no return for a cost effective rehabilitation. To do nothing would carry no construction costs in the short term, but would need to have an enhanced OSIM completed (according to provincial law) by 2025, and eventually require a decision to close and remove, repair, or replace the bridge. The structure could remain open in its present state for a short time, however the risk to public safety will increase as time progresses.
To do nothing would only effectively delay a decision on the future of the bridge while deterioration continues. For the above noted concerns, this option is not considered to be a feasible solution. 3.2.2 Close the Bridge To close the bridge will only address the public safety issue. This option would create a new problem as the pedestrian access corridor would no longer be available. If the bridge were to be closed, it could remain as a heritage monument with some modifications, otherwise it should be demolished, removed, and the affected areas restored with landscaping. Benefits to this option are the low cost and the protection of public safety, but the bridge would require regular inspections until demolition. At this time however, the bridge does not require closure. If the ‘do nothing’ option is selected it would become a stage 1 decision and the demolition of the bridge would become stage 2. For the above noted concerns, this option is not necessary at this point in time but will need to be considered in the future if ‘Do Nothing’ becomes the selected option.
Page 324 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 21
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.2.3 Repair the Bridge
There are two deck rehabilitation options considered, one is a wood deck repair option and the other is an option that considers the removal and replacement of the wood deck ties and planks with a steel grate deck system. Both options require a new pedestrian barrier and rehabilitation of the supporting steel and concrete structure. Each option could be done in one stage or could be phased into two stages to ease the financial burden over time if required (ie deck replacement first, structural support rehabilitation second). It is extremely important to note however, that if phasing the work is chosen the overall cost will be higher upon completion. It is also imperative to state that the deck replacement should not be considered if the rehabilitation of the supporting structure is delayed more than a few years or neglected entirely. Without the rehabilitation of the supporting structure, the bridge will require closure regardless of the condition of the deck on top.
Repair Option – Wood Deck Replacement This option would replace the existing wood deck planks with a new wood deck system that is
less prone to slippery conditions in wet or cold weather, but would leave the wood deck ties in place. A new wood deck system could be designed to allow air flow between the deck planks and the wood deck ties which increase the lifespan of the wood. This option would require the
minimum amount of work for a deck rehabilitation and is the least costly repair. This option also provides the benefit of a modest increase in lifespan. Due to the existing wood deck ties not being able to properly support the weight of a sidewalk snow clearing machine however, the new wood deck replacement would still need to be cleared of snow by hand. A very similar example would be the deck and barrier recently constructed on the Black Bridge on the Heritage Trail in Waterford, Norfolk County. (An information page is included in Appendix D for reference). This option would include the following:
Stage 1
• Remove and replace the existing chain link fence barrier with a proper pedestrian guard.
A low maintenance and aesthetically improved barrier that meets code requirements for pedestrians and cyclists would be proposed (See Waterford’s ‘Black Bridge’ for example).
• Remove the existing longitudinal wood deck planks and replace with a lateral wood deck on sleeper joists similar to the Waterford Black Bridge. The current deck planks trap moisture in the surface of the deck ties and promote premature deterioration. A lateral
deck plank system on sleeper joists provides better protection for the deck ties. Placing the deck boards and wood grain perpendicular to the path of travel provides better slip resistance than the current longitudinal deck planks. Adhesive non-slip strips can also be
applied if necessary.
• Recommended to be completed in within five (5) years.
Stage 2
• Abrasive blast clean all structural steel.
• Replace severely deteriorated steel cross-braces, laces, etc., as required.
Page 325 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 22
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
• Supplemental structural steel frame may be required within steel pier frames dependent
upon state of deterioration at the time of rehabilitation.
• Install protective coating on all structural steel (ie: epoxy paint or similar).
• Repair mortar joints and concrete repairs to piers and abutments.
• Recommended to be completed within (5) years, but no more than ten (10) years.
The positive benefits of this option are:
• Least cost rehabilitation.
• Keeps bridge open.
• Lifespan is increased 30 years (+/- 10 years) until next major deck rehabilitation.
• Lifespan of the overall structure is increased 50 years.
• Aesthetics are improved with new attractive and effective barrier.
• Integrity of heritage value is protected with sympathetic modifications.
The negative aspects of this option to consider include:
• Even though it is the least costly rehabilitation option, it is still an expensive project.
• The wood deck will require maintenance and repairs on a 10 year cycle.
• Snow removal must still be done by hand.
• Slippery conditions will be improved, but not eliminated in wet and cold weather.
Notwithstanding the heavy cost for the full rehabilitation, this is a viable option to be considered.
Figure 5 & 6: New wood deck wearing surface and pedestrian barrier on Black Bridge in Waterford Refer to Appendix D for a brief description of the Black Bridge rehabilitation project.
Page 326 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 23
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
Repair Option – Steel Deck Replacement
This option would remove the wood deck planks and ties, which would be replaced by an open grate deck system very similar to the Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge on Lake Lisgar. The grated deck would significantly reduce slippery conditions in wet and cold weather, as well it could potentially eliminate the need for snow removal. As with the previous option, the rehabilitation of the supporting structural steel and concrete block piers and abutments will still be required but could also be phased in two stages.
This option would include the following:
Stage 1
• Remove the existing fence barrier and the wood deck planks and wood deck ties.
• Make any required repairs to steel diaphragm cross braces while accessible.
• Install a new steel grate deck system.
• Install a new low maintenance and aesthetically improved barrier that meets code requirements for pedestrians and cyclists (See Waterford’s ‘Black Bridge’ for example).
• Recommended to be completed in within five (5) years.
Stage 2 (Same as Stage 2 for previous option)
• Abrasive blast clean all structural steel.
• Replace severely deteriorated steel cross-braces, laces, etc., as required.
• Supplemental structural steel frame may be required within steel pier frames dependent upon state of deterioration at the time of rehabilitation.
• Install protective coating on all structural steel (ie: epoxy paint or similar).
• Repair mortar joints and concrete repairs to piers and abutments.
• Recommended to be completed within five (5) years but no more than ten (10) years. The positive benefits of this option are:
• Keeps bridge open.
• Lifespan is increased 40 years (+/- 10 years) until next major deck rehabilitation.
• Lifespan of the overall structure is increased 50 years.
• Aesthetics are improved with new attractive and effective barrier.
• Steel grate deck system is more durable.
• Steel grate deck requires less maintenance and repair.
• Steel grate deck may eliminate need for snow removal.
• Steel deck significantly improves slip resistance.
• Integrity of heritage value is protected with sympathetic modifications. The negative aspects of this option to consider include:
• More expensive rehabilitation option.
• Some pedestrians may be uncomfortable seeing through the steel grate deck if they are uncomfortable with heights.
• Removal of wood deck ties will have an aesthetic effect on the former railway bridge.
Notwithstanding the heavy cost for the full rehabilitation, this is a viable option to be considered.
Page 327 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 24
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
Figure 7 & 8: Hawkins Bridge at Lake Lisgar, used as an example for a Steel Grate Deck Option
3.2.4 Replace the Bridge
There are three methods of bridge replacement that were considered. A ‘Like-for-Like’ railway bridge replacement, a modern high level pedestrian bridge open to new design ideas, and a
‘Valley Path’ replacement that incorporates a much smaller pedestrian bridge along a path on the valley floor. The first method is a straight removal and replacement with a similar bridge: ‘Like-for-Like’. A new bridge could be designed to look nearly identical to the existing railway bridge. A beneift of this option is that pedestrian path could remain along the current horizontal path and elevation. The bridge would also retain the aesthetic appeal of a former railway bridge, though it would be expensive.
The second method would be to replace the existing railway bridge with a modern pedestrian
bridge. This could also be done along the same horizontal path which is a big benefit to pedestrians. The new design could be an opportunity for something new and exciting. It could also be done from a functional perspective with keeping costs low.
The third method to consider would be to remove the bridge (or leave sections as a heritage monument) and build a more modest pedestrian bridge over the waterway at the valley floor and incorporate barrier free accessible switchback paths on each embankment. This ‘Valley Path’ option is the least expensive replacement option, but individuals with mobility issues may not prefer a long walk up and down the embankments, regardless of barrier free requirements being met. 3.2.4.1 Replace Option – ‘Like-for-Like’ Replacement
This option would require full demolition of the existing structure. It would then be replaced with a modern pedestrian bridge that meets current design requirements. The bridge deck would be at the same elevation as the current bridge, so the pedestrian path would not be impacted. The structure could be designed to resemble the existing bridge. This option could also be staged (Stage 1: Demolition; Stage 2: Construction) if required for financial reasons, or it could be completed in a single construction season if financing is available.
Page 328 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 25
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
This option would include the following: Stage 1
• Complete demolition and removal of the existing bridge. Stage 2
• Construction of a new railway bridge at the same elevation. The positive benefits of this option are:
• Keeps bridge open.
• Keeps pedestrian path at the same elevation.
• Bridge can be designed to carry vehicles for maintenance purposes.
• Lifespan is significantly increased to 80 years.
• Aesthetics can be designed to mimic existing railway bridge.
The negative aspects of this option to consider include:
• Most expensive option.
• Heritage value of the existing railway bridge would be lost.
Given the heavy cost for this full replacement, this is may not be a viable option for consideration.
Figure 9: Image of the existing Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge, to represent a new bridge that would
mimic the existing bridge as a ‘Like-for-Like’ replacement.
Page 329 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 26
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.2.4.2 Replace Option – ‘High Level Pedestrian’ Replacement
This option would require full demolition of the existing structure. It would then be replaced with a modern pedestrian bridge that meets current design requirements. The bridge deck would be at the same elevation as the current bridge, so the pedestrian path would not be impacted. The structure could be designed with something totally new and modern in mind. It is anticipated that this option would include two abutments and three piers with four prefabricated pedestrian bridges spanning in between. A suspension bridge or other intriguing design could be considered with
tourism implications, but this was not considered in the cost estimate below. This option could also be staged (Stage 1: Demolition; Stage 2: Construction) if required for financial reasons, or it could be completed in a single construction season if financing is available.
This option would include the following:
Stage 1
• Complete demolition and removal of the existing bridge.
Stage 2
• Construction of a new pedestrian high level bridge.
The positive benefits of this option are:
• Keeps bridge open.
• Keeps pedestrian path at the same elevation.
• Bridge can be designed to carry vehicles for maintenance purposes.
• Lifespan is significantly increased to 80 years.
• Aesthetics can be designed to suit the Town’s wishes.
The negative aspects of this option to consider include:
• Not the least expensive option, but not the most expensive either.
• Heritage value of the existing railway bridge would be lost. Notwithstanding the heavy cost for the full replacement, this is a viable option to be considered.
Figure 10: Mechanic Street Foot Bridge in Paris, ON, shown as an example
of a High Level Pedestrian Bridge Replacement.
Page 330 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 27
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.2.4.3 Replace Option – ‘Valley Path’ Replacement This option would require at least a partial demolition of the existing structure if some of it were to remain as a heritage monument. A new valley path would be constructed with a more modest pedestrian bridge constructed over the waterway on the valley floor. The path would continue to the existing embankments where a series of switchback sections and railings along the path up
the embankments would be required. This option is the least expensive replacement option, but comes with the cost of losing the high level pedestrian path. This option could also be staged (Stage 1: Demolition; Stage 2: Construction) if required for financial reasons, or it could be
completed in a single construction season if financing is available.
This option would include the following: Stage 1
• Partial demolition of the existing bridge (Full demolition could be done if desired).
• Repairs and preservation of remaining existing structure section as a monument if desired.
Stage 2
• Construction of a new valley floor pedestrian bridge.
• Construction of a new valley floor path.
• Construction of new barrier free accessible switchback paths up each embankment. The positive benefits of this option are:
• Pedestrian link is maintained.
• Lowest cost replacement option.
• Bridge can be designed to carry vehicles for maintenance purposes.
• Lifespan is significantly increased to 60 years.
• Aesthetics can be designed to suit the Town’s wishes.
The negative aspects of this option to consider include:
• The valley path would be difficult for individuals with mobility issues to traverse the switchback paths on the embankments.
• Heritage value of the existing railway bridge would be diminished.
Notwithstanding the pedestrian path issues, this is a viable option to be considered.
Figure 11 & 12: Mechanic Street Foot Bridge in Paris ON, utilizing pedestrian ramps at the bridge approaches, and Summerhaven Bridge in Haldimand, a new path over a low valley waterway.
Page 331 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 28
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.3 COST ESTIMATES
For the purpose of this report, we consider the following classes of construction cost estimates: Class D – Order of Magnitude:
• Used to screen a project for feasibility.
• Defined scope of work is typically less than 20% known.
• Accuracy of estimate is typically between -50% to +75%.
Class C – Preliminary Design:
• Used to establish a budget for the project once a scope of work is better defined.
• Project definition level is typically 60% (+/- 10%) complete.
• Accuracy of estimate is typically between -30% to +50%. Class B – Detailed Design:
• Used to confirm a budget for the project prior to tender.
• Project definition level is typically 80% (+/- 10%) complete.
• Accuracy of estimate is typically between -15% to +25%.
Class A – Definitive:
• Prepared by a professional estimator, or
• Project is tendered and bids are received that can be executed with a contract.
• Project definition level is typically 100% (+/-5%) known.
• Accuracy of value is typically between -5% to +10%. The cost estimates provided for this report are considered to be preliminary Class D cost
estimates. These will be useful for evaluating the options provided and choosing a course of action. Once a direction for the project is known, additional information and project scope can be assembled and a Class C estimate can be prepared prior to advancing the project to a detailed design stage. Once a detailed design is near completion, a Class B estimate would be prepared in order to confirm the budget is adequate prior to tendering the work.
The estimates provided below include the engineering and construction costs only; no annual operating costs, maintenance cost, or other ancillary costs are included. This is done to provide some clarity regarding the actual construction cost of each option. It is noted that some options
will carry additional operating, maintenance, and ancillary costs, however when considering an order of magnitude Class D estimate, these secondary costs are unlikely to impact the decision path process.
Page 332 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 29
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.3.1 Do Nothing This option is self-explanatory, but it is important to note that delaying the decision on what to do with this bridge will require consideration of the consequence of doing nothing at this time. To do nothing will not incur short term construction costs, but will require scheduled inspections (eg: enhanced OSIM in 2025) or an unplanned repairs or closure.
Costs $ 20,000 Engineering $ 40,000
Contingency $ 20,000 TOTAL $ 80,000 3.3.2 Close the Bridge
This option would require modest work to be done in order to close the bridge to pedestrian traffic, such as approach barriers, signage, etc. It also would require consideration of the eventual decision to demolish or replace the structure.
Stage 1 (Closure) Stage 2 (Demolition) Cost of Construction $ 15,000 Cost of Construction $ 200,000
Engineering (10%) $ 1,500 Engineering (10%) $ 20,000 5Contingency (15%) $ 2,250 Contingency (15%) $ 30,000 TOTAL $ 18,750 TOTAL $ 300,000
Total Combined = $ 318,750 3.3.3.1 Repair – Wood Deck
This option is viewed as the least cost rehabilitation option. Staging the project would defer the structural steel rehabilitation costs to within 10 years for budget planning purposes. Completing stages 1 and 2 at one time would reduce the overall cost.
Stage 1 Stage 2 Cost of Construction $ 320,000 Cost of Construction $ 2,000,000 Engineering (10%) $ 32,000 Engineering (10%) $ 200,000 5Contingency (15%) $ 48,000 Contingency (15%) $ 300,000 TOTAL $ 400,000 TOTAL $ 2,500,000
Total Combined = $ 2,900,000 3.3.3.2 Repair – Steel Deck This option is the higher cost rehabilitation option but is more durable than the wood option. Staging the project would defer the structural steel rehabilitation costs to within 10 years for budget planning purposes. Completing stages 1 and 2 at one time would reduce the overall cost. Stage 1 Stage 2 Cost of Construction $ 540,000 Cost of Construction $ 2,000,000 Engineering (10%) $ 54,000 Engineering (10%) $ 200,000
Contingency (15%) $ 81,000 Contingency (15%) $ 300,000 TOTAL $ 675,000 TOTAL $ 2,500,000 Total Combined = $ 3,175,000
Page 333 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 30
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.3.4.1 Replace – Like for Like (Same elevation) This is the highest cost option, but it has a long lifespan and truly replaces the heritage railway bridge with a heritage railway bridge. The cost below reflects a replacement railway bridge, ‘Like-for-Like’ as shown in the OSIM report estimates. A new bridge however, is not required to carry train loads any longer, and never will be required to do so. For this reason, a new pedestrian bridge at the same high elevation has also been considered (see below), but this option has been included for comparative purposes.
Cost of Construction $ 3,500,000 Engineering (10%) $ 350,000 Contingency (15%) $ 525,000 TOTAL $ 4,375,000 3.3.4.2 Replace – High Elevation Pedestrian Bridge (Same elevation)
This option has a high cost but it has the longest lifespan and the greatest functionality. The actual cost of this option may vary significantly depending on the type and style of bridge design chosen. A more modest replacement pedestrian bridge that isn’t required to carry train or traffic loading could be designed and constructed for a much lower cost than a ‘Like-for-Like’ option. For this estimate, a 4-span ‘eagle’ bridge style structure on concrete piers and abutments was considered. Cost of Construction $ 1,800,000
Engineering (10%) $ 180,000 Contingency (15%) $ 270,000 TOTAL $ 2,250,000
3.3.4.3 Replace – Valley Path This option is the lower cost replacement option. It has a similarly long lifespan as the Like-for-Like or High Elevation replacement but it has reduced functionality due to the required barrier free accessible switchback paths up the embankments. Cost of Construction $ 1,000,000 Engineering (10%) $ 100,000
Contingency (15%) $ 150,000 TOTAL $ 1,250,000
Page 334 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 31
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.3 EVALUATION
Below are the considered criterion and their respective weights. These were used simply to provide a basis for an opinion of the evaluation – ultimately a decision on the criterion and the valuation of each are arbitrary to the reader. This has been provided to illustrate the context of the evaluation that was performed. The criteria, the assigned weights, and the associated assigned values are described below and shown on the 3.3.2 Evaluation Chart on the next page. 3.3.1 Criteria
The evaluation criteria used for this report include the following: Accessibility & Functionality: /20
How accessible is the option being considered? Does it present additional challenges or does it remove barriers to the path of travel? Lower challenges and barriers to the path of travel result in better functionality and a higher score.
Aesthetics & Heritage: /15 Does the option have aesthetic appeal? Is the visual appearance sympathetic to the heritage
value of the existing structure? Better visual appeal and lower impacts to heritage aesthetics result in a higher score.
Durability & Lifespan: /20 Does the option have durable materials that do not require periodic repair and replacement? Assuming that needed repairs and maintenance is carried out, does the option have a short, medium, or long term life expectancy? More durable options that require less maintenance and have a long lifespan result in a higher score.
Safety & Liability: /15 It is assumed that regulatory requirements (ie CHBDC, etc.) will be met, but are there hazards
that may pose a liability to the Town? Lower risks result in a higher score. Construction Cost: /30 How does the cost of construction compare to the other considered options? Lower costs result in a higher score.
TOTAL: /100 The sum total of all considered categories represent a score out of 100 points. The highest score being the more desirable option using the weighted criteria considered.
Page 335 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 32
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.3.2 Evaluation Chart
The evaluation chart above indicates:
• Most preferred - High Elevation Pedestrian Replacement, Steel Deck Rehabilitation
• Less preferred - Valley Path Replacement, Like-for-Like Replacement, Wood Deck Rehabilitation
• Least preferred - Close the Bridge, Do Nothing
It should be noted that if no work is undertaken within five (5) years, the rehabilitation options would no longer be feasible.
OPTIONS Accessibility & FunctionalityAesthetics & HeritageDurability & LifespanSafety & LiabilityComparative CostEstimated LifespanCost Estimate (Class D)Value per year (cost / lifespan in years)/20 /15 /20 /15 /30 (years)$ (k) $ (k)
Do Nothing 5 11 0 0 29 10 $80 $8
Close Bridge 0 8 2 11 28 10 $320 $32
Rehabilitation
– Wood Deck 12 14 14 11 9 50 $2,900 $58
Rehabilitation
– Steel Deck 18 13 17 13 7 50 $3,180 $64
Replace
‘Like-for-Like’19 7 18 14 0 80 $4,375 $55
Replace
‘High Elev
Pedestrian’
19 4 18 14 14 80 $2,250 $28
Replace
‘Valley Path’5 4 20 11 21 60 $1,250 $21
CRITERIA
OVERALL RATING/100
46
49
54
73
66
78
71
Page 336 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 33
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
3.4 RECOMMENDATION
The scores shown on the evaluation table provide a basis for the recommendation to consider the most desirable options. The Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge is at a critical decision point. To ‘do nothing’ will limit the feasible options available; as each year passes the cost and viability of a rehabilitation option diminishes. Based on the result of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection Report, the Load Limit Evaluation Report, and the result of the Options Evaluation Report, we offer the following recommendation: The preferred options are a High Level Pedestrian Replacement or a Rehabilitation – Steel Deck Replacement Each option should be reviewed with respect to the required schedule of a Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment (EA). It is likely that a closure option or a rehabilitation option would require a Schedule A+ EA. A replacement option would require a Schedule B EA unless the cost exceeds $2.4M, which would then require a Schedule C EA.
It is recommended that a Schedule B EA be commenced in order to confirm a preferred
solution with public consultation and Council direction. We trust that this report provides the Town of Tillsonburg with an in-depth and thorough evaluation of the options to be considered for the Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge. Please do not hesitate to contact us, should there be any questions or concerns regarding the contents of this report. We are able to pursue any option that the Town wishes to explore further, and we thank you for the opportunity to be of service.
Page 337 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 34
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS
The information presented in this Enhanced OSIM Report is limited to the conditions and
observations that were made over the course of the inspection. The observations and recommendations made in this report reflect the conditions observed at the time of the inspection. The information presented in this Load Limit Evaluation Report is limited to the conditions and observations that were made over the course of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection.
The information presented in this Options Evaluation Report is based on the result of the Enhanced OSIM Inspection Report and the Load Limit Analysis Report. The recommendations made in this report reflect the result of the supporting reports as well as our expertise and experience in bridge engineering, design, and construction practices.
The comments contained herein are intended to provide guidance to the Town of Tillsonburg staff, for the purpose of providing informed advice for the planning of this project to the Council of the Town of Tillsonburg. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied is intended or included in this report.
Page 338 of 564
Page 339 of 564
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge Town of Tillsonburg Page 36
G. DOUGLAS VALLEE LIMITED
Consulting Engineers, Architects & Planners
Authorized by the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario to offer professional engineering services.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - KINSMEN PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE SNAPSHOT PAGE APPENDIX B - ENHANCED OSIM DATA REPORT
APPENDIX C - KINSMEN PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE ENHANCED OSIM DRAWING APPENDIX D - BLACK BRIDGE, WATERFORD HERITAGE TRAIL
Page 340 of 564
APPENDIX A
KINSMEN PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE SNAPSHOT PAGE
Page 341 of 564
Town of Tillsonburg OSIM Inspection Performance Snapshot
MAP LINK
Location:
Overall Comments:
Rehabilitation / Replacement Recommendations: (Refer to OSIM elements for full details)
Timing Timing
1 - 5 yr 1 - 5 yr
1 - 5 yr 1 - 5 yr
1 - 5 yr
1 - 5 yr
1 - 5 yr 1 - 5 yr
1 - 5 yr 1 - 5 yr
1 - 5 yr
1 - 5 yr
Maintenance Needs: (Refer to OSIM elements for full details)
Timing Timing
2 yr
2 yr 2 yr
1 yr
1 yr 1 yr
Urgent
2 yr
Additional Investigation:
Rehab
Shafts/Columns/Pile Bents
Bearings
Element
Bracing Element
Diagonal Bracing Element
Shafts/Columns/Pile Bents Shafts/Columns/Pile Bents Other: Reinstall Mortar
Girders
Diaphragms (Diagonals)
Girders
Diagonal Bracing Element
Abutment Walls
Bearing / Bearing Seat
Wingwalls
Railing Systems
Rehab Shafts/Columns/Pile Bents
Caps
Work Required Element Work Required
Abutment Walls
Rehab RehabBearing / Bearing Seat Bearings (At Piers)
Ballast Walls
General Structure Information:
9
Wearing Surface (Decks)Embankments
Associated CostsTotal Costs
$1,130,000.00
$2,851,000.00
June 17, 2019
Costing Summary:
$1,721,000.00Task
Element
Inspection Date:
Construction Date:
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge
45OSIM Recommendation: Major Rehab - 1 to 5 years BCISite Number: BR_KINS0001
Enhanced OSIM Inspection completed with use of rope access technicians. All structure members inspected to determine severity of deterioration. Steel members showing light to severe corrosion and delamination. Delaminated steel sections are flaking. Steel strapping missing on North I pier cap (refer to Enhanced OSIM Drawing for element locations). The overall condition... Refer to OSIM for details.
Type:
Lanes:
1910
None
8 @ 11m, 1 @18m
1
Posted Speed:
Spans:
AADT:
Load Limit (Tonnes):
Cost Estimate
Construction Costs
I-Beam or Girders
Span Length:
Comment: Enhanced OSIM Inspection completed. Next Enhanced OSIM Inspection to be completed in 2025.
Other: Reinstall Mortar
Other: Fix Loose Wire
Rehab
Rehab Rehab
Replace Structural Connections Rehab
Wingwalls
Railing Systems
Diaphragms (Diagonals)
Other: Reinstall Mortar
Floor Beams
Streams and Waterways
Bracing Element
Wearing Surface (Decks)
Bearings
Structural Connections
Embankments
Foundation (Below Ground Level)
Caps
Deck Surface Repair
Rehab
Work Required Element Work Required
Replace
Streams and Waterways Foundation (Below Ground Level)
170m West of Rolph St.
Other: Replace Missing Strapping
Erosion Control at Bridges
Horizontal Bracing Element
Stringers
Floor Beams
Diaphragms (Horizontals)
Wearing Surface (Approaches)
Replace
Horizontal Bracing Element
Rout & Seal
Ballast Walls
Bearings (At Piers)
Wearing Surface (Approaches)
Diaphragms (Horizontals)
Stringers
Page 342 of 564
APPENDIX B
ENHANCED OSIM DATA REPORT
Page 343 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection FormTOWN OF TILLSONBURG
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge
Site Number BR_KINS0001
Veterans Memorial Walkway
170m West of Rolph St.
Enhanced OSIM Inspection
Page 344 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 1
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form Site Number:
Inventory Data:
Structure Name Kinsmen Pedestrian Bridge
X On Rail Road Navig. Water
Estimated BCI X Ped. Other X Non-Navig. Water
Under
Hwy/Road Name
Structure Location 170m West of Rolph St.
Latitude X Not Cons. List/not Design.
Longitude Cons./not App. Desig./not List
Owner(s)Town of Tillsonburg
MTO Region 30 Road Class:Freeway Arterial Collector Local
MTO District 31 Posted Speed No. of Lanes
Old County 23 AADT % Trucks
Geographic Twp.Min. Vertical Clearance (m)
Structure Type 6 Special Route Truck Emergency School Transit
Total Deck Length 107 (m)Detour Length Around Bridge (km)
Overall Str. Width 4 (m)Direction of Structure
Total Deck Area 278 (m2)Fill on Structure (m)
Roadway Width 2.6 (m)Skew Angle (degrees)
No. of Spans 9 Span Length (m)
Historical Data:
Year Built Year of Last Major Rehab.
Last OSIM Inspection Current Load Limit / /(tonnes)
Last Enhanced OSIM Inspection Last Evaluation
Last Condition Survey
Historical Comments:
Field Inspection Information:
Inspection Date:
Inspector:Others in Party:
Overall Comments:
Enhanced OSIM Inspection completed with use of rope access technicians. All structure members inspected to determine severity of deterioration. Steel members showing light to severe corrosion and delamination. Delaminated steel sections are flaking. Steel strapping
missing on North I pier cap (refer to Enhanced OSIM Drawing for element locations). The overall condition of structural connections located
throughout the substructure is severe. Replacement or reinforcement of all structural connections may be required.
BR_KINS0001
Southwestern
London/Stratford
Crossing
Type:
Oxford
1
42.860481
Veterans Memorial Walkway
Desig.
& List
8 @ 11m, 1 @18m
0
0
I-Beam or Girders
45
-
-80.735114
Heritage Designation:
Map
LINK
Johnathan McMorrow, B.A.Sc., E.I.T., G.
Douglas Vallee Ltd.
June 17, 2019
Jason Timmermans, B.Eng, E.I.T., G.
Douglas Vallee Ltd., R.A.M. Technicians
2010: Replacement of bearing seats at abutmnets and railway ties along bridge deck.
-
June 2, 2017
1910 2010
--
East -- West
Page 345 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 2
Site Number:
Urgent
Material Condition Survey
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Investigation Notes:
Overall Structure Recommendations:
None Minor Rehab Replace
Maintenance X Major Rehab
Timing of Recommended Work: Urgent < 1yr X 1 to 5 years 6 to 10 years
Date of Next Inspection:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1 - 5 yr
1 yr1 yr
Element Recommended Work
Rehab Replace 2 yr
Bearing / Bearing SeatBearings (At Piers)
Abutment WallsBallast Walls
Timing
XX
Maintenance Timing
WingwallsWearing Surface (Approaches)Railing SystemsDiaphragms (Horizontals)
1 - 5 yr1 - 5 yr
2 yr2 yrX1 yr1 - 5 yrXDiaphragms (Diagonals)Floor Beams
1 - 5 yr1 - 5 yrX
X
GirdersStringers Diagonal Bracing ElementHorizontal Bracing ElementBracing ElementStructural ConnectionsWearing Surface (Decks)EmbankmentsStreams and Waterways
X
XX
Monitoring Crack Widths:X
Shafts/Columns/Pile BentsShafts/Columns/Pile Bents
Foundation (Below Ground Level)
XX
Monitoring of Deformations, Settlements and Movements:
Detailed Coating Condition Survey:
Detailed Timber Investigation
June 2021
Enhanced OSIM Inspection completed. Next Enhanced OSIM Inspection to be completed in 2025.
Underwater Investigation:
Fatigue Investigation:
Structure Evaluation:
Monitoring
X
X
Post-Tensioned Strand Investigation
X
X
X
X
Recommended Work on Structure:
Seismic Investigation:
BR_KINS0001
X
X
X
X
PriorityAdditional Investigation Required:None Normal
Concrete Substructure Condition Survey:
Detailed Deck Condition Survey:
Non-destructive Delamination Survey of Asphalt-Covered Deck:
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form
X
Bearings Caps 1 - 5 yr 2 yr
1 - 5 yrX Urgent
1 - 5 yr
1 - 5 yr1 - 5 yr1 - 5 yr
Page 346 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page i
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Inspection Form Site Number:BR_KINS0001
Repair and Rehabilitation Required
Element #
3 Sandblast and coat bearings at abutments.X $10,000.00
4 Sandblast and coat bearings at piers.X $40,000.00
8 Replace horizontal diaphragm members.X $75,000.00
9 Remove and replace diagonal diaphragm members.X $75,000.00
11 X $200,000.00
11 X $25,000.00
13 X $300,000.00
14 X $125,000.00
14 X $50,000.00
15 X $70,000.00
16 X $100,000.00
22 X $30,000.00
22 X $30,000.00
23 X $90,000.00
23 X $50,000.00
$1,270,000.00
Maintenance Work RequiredElement #
1 X $10,000.00
5 X $10,000.00
6 X $2,000.00
7 X $2,500.00
17 X $1,500.00
18 X $50,000.00
22 X $5,000.00
24 X $50,000.00
$131,000.00
Additional Repair and Rehabilitation
Element #
7 X $150,000.00
17 X $170,000.00
$320,000.00
$1,721,000.00
Associated Work:Estimated CostTraffic Management Close bridge for construction.$10,000.00
Utilities Allowance.$10,000.00
Temporary Support Allowance.$600,000.00
Environmental Assessment Allowance.$10,000.00
Engineering Engineering, Contract Administration (Superstructure and substructure inspections)$125,000.00
Mobilization/Demobilization $175,000.00
Contingencies $200,000.00$1,130,000.00
Construction Cost:$1,721,000.00
Associated Work Cost:$1,130,000.00
TOTAL Estimated Cost $2,851,000.00
Sandblast and coat girders.
Sandblast and coat diagonal bracing between steel
Repair and Rehabilitation Required 6-10 years
Replace deck wearing surface.
Replace missing strapping on the north column I pier
Repair mortar in piers.
Sandblast and coat steel strapping on the pier caps.
Sandblast and coat composite steel pier columns.
Provide rip rap erosion control at quadrants.
Priority
1-5 years Within 1 year Urgent
Replace pedestrian barrier.
6-10 years
Justification
Sandblast and coat structural connections throughout
Repair cracks in the concrete pier caps.
Replace lace bracing along steel pier columns.
Repair and Rehabilitation Required Estimated Construction Cost1-5 years Within 1 year Urgent
Priority
Comments
Replace lace bracing along horizontal bracing
Urgent
Repair mortar on abutment walls.
Repair mortar on wingwalls.
Rout and seal cracking on the approaches.
Fix loose wire at bottom of chain-link fence.
Construction Sub-Total:
PriorityMaintenance Required 2 years 1 year Within 1 year
Note: The total cost estimation for all work is shown below. The elements listed in the "Additional Repair and Rehabilitation" section are included as requested by the Town of
Tillsonburg for serviceability purposes and represent a deck replacement prior to completing a major rehab of all steel elements (i.e. beams, piers, bracing, bearings, diaphragms
etc.) If the rehabilitation work is separated into multiple projects, additional costs for associated work will be required for each.
Replace deteriorated web stiffeners at girders.
Replace the lateral bracing beneath the bridge deck.
Associated Work Sub-Total:
Repair and Rehabilitation Total Cost:
Maintenance Work Required Total Cost:
Additional Repair or Rehabilitation Total Cost:
Estimated
Construction Cost
Sandblast and coat horizontal bracing elements between steel trestle piers.
Remove and replace warped and lifting deck boards.
Page 347 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 3
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form Site Number:
Element Data
Element Group:Abutments Length:
Element Name:Abutment Walls Width:
Location:East and West Height:
Material:Block Count:
Element Type:Gravity Wall Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year X 2 year
Element Group:Abutments Length:
Element Name:Ballast Walls Width:
Location:East and West Height:
Material:Block Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Abutments Length:
Element Name:Bearing / Bearing Seat Width:
Location:East and West Height:
Material:Steel / Wood Count:
Element Type:Plate Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab X Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
0.8
4
0.365
0.52
12
2
1.2
5
BR_KINS0001
25
0.9
5
2.5
2
0 15 7.5 2.5
Isolated narrow cracks with delamination in three stone faces at west abutment and one stone face at east abutment. Corrosion staining
from bridge. Loss of mortar at surface at approximately 30% of joints.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:Other: Reinstall Mortar
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.Good Fair Poor
sq.m
Poor
sq.m 0 10.8 1.2 0
Units Exc.Good Fair
0.1
Bearings sit on 2-6"x10"x13' timbers which sit on each abutment. Light cracking and splitting evident. Timbers in good to fair condition. Light to severe corrosion of bearing plate throughout with flaking of delaminated steel and light section loss.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.Good Fair Poor
sq.m 0 0
Perform. Deficiencies
Perform. Deficiencies
Perform. Deficiencies
Minor isolated narrow to medium cracks. Corrosion staining from bridge. Loss of mortar.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition
Data:
0.7
Page 348 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 4
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form Site Number:
Element Data
Element Group:Piers Length:
Element Name:Bearings (At Piers)Width:
Location:Top of Steel Pier Columns Height:
Material:Steel Count:
Element Type:Plate Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab X Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Abutments Length:
Element Name:Wingwalls Width:
Location:Quadrants Height:
Material:Block Count:
Element Type:Block Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year X 2 year
Element Group:Approaches Length:
Element Name:Wearing Surface (Approaches)Width:
Location:East and West Height:
Material:Asphalt Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Severe Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year X 2 year
6.7
41.3
2.4
4
BR_KINS0001
0.805
0.52
16
Good Fair
Perform. Deficiencies
Perform. Deficiencies
Poor
91
2.8
2
Fair
4.3
sq.m 0 0 6.1 0.6
Poor
Medium corrosion of bearing plates. Delamination typical throughout. Flaking of steel evident.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition Data:
Units Exc.
16.25
sq.m 0 34.4 6.8 0.1
Isolated narrow cracks with delamination. Loss of mortar on approximately 50% of joints (surface of mortar only).
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:Other: Reinstall Mortar
Condition Data:
Units Exc.Good
Narrow to medium longitudinal and transverse cracking. Isolated settlement with medium cracking at east approach, north edge. Patches
at bridge deck (0.4m x 2.8m at east, 1.25m x 2.8m at west). Narrow to medium transverse cracking in west approach.
Perform. Deficiencies
Condition Data:
Units Exc.Good Fair Poor
sq.m 0 63.2 27.3 0.5
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:Rout & Seal
Page 349 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 5
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form Site Number:
Element Data
Element Group:Barriers Length:
Element Name:Railing Systems Width:
Location:North and South Height:
Material:Steel Fence Count:
Element Type:Steel Fence Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Severe Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab X Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent X 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Beam/MLE'S Length:
Element Name:Diaphragms (Horizontals)Width:
Location:Beneath Deck between Girders Height:
Material:Steel Count:
Element Type:Cross Type Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace X
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Beam/MLE'S Length:
Element Name:Diaphragms (Diagonals)Width:
Location:Beneath Deck between Girders Height:
Material:Steel Count:
Element Type:Cross Type Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace X
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
520.6
92
0.1
0.1
92
BR_KINS0001
137
1.9
2
Good Fair
Perform. Deficiencies
Perform. Deficiencies
Poor
92
0.1
0.1
92
Fair
2.15
sq.m 0 321.2 177.8 21.6
Poor
Light to medium surface corrosion of post base plates. Light corrosion throughout. Loose fencing due to loose bottom wire.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:Other: Fix Loose Wire
Condition Data:
Units Exc.
2.4
Each 0 0 55 37
Includes top and bottom horizontal members in diaphragm. Very severe corrosion with delamation throughout all diaphragms.
Delaminated steel flaking causing 10-25% section loss in localized areas.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition Data:
Units Exc.Good
Includes both diagonal members in diaphragm. Severe corrosion with delamination throughout all diaphragms. Delaminated steel flaking
causing 10-20% section loss in localized areas.
Perform. Deficiencies
Condition Data:
Units Exc.Good Fair Poor
Each 0 0 64 28
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Page 350 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 6
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form Site Number:
Element Data
Element Group:Beam/MLE'S Length:
Element Name:Floor Beams Width:
Location:Height:
Material:Wood Count:
Element Type:Rectangular Wood Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Severe Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Beam/MLE'S Length:
Element Name:Girders Width:
Location:Height:
Material:Steel Count:
Element Type:I-Type Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:None
Comments:
Rehab X Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Beam/MLE'S Length:
Element Name:Stringers Width:
Location:North and South on Top of Floor Beams Height:
Material:Wood Count:
Element Type:Rectangular Solid Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:None
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
290
695.4
0.3
0.95
2
BR_KINS0001
4
0.25
0.25
290
Good Fair
Perform. Deficiencies
X
Perform. Deficiencies
Poor
84.8
0.2
0.1
2
Fair
106
Each 0 232 58 0
Poor
Light weathering with staining evident at localized areas. Localized areas of minor splitting and checking at timber edges.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition Data:
Units Exc.
106
sq.m 0 0 556.3 139.1
Light to severe corrosion evident throughout both girders. Rivets are heavily deteriorated throughout. Rivet connections appear to be stable. Medium delamination of top and bottom girder flanges typical throughout. Web appears to have minor delamination and corrosion with approximately 10% section loss. Stiffener plates attached to top and bottom of each girder. Top flange has 2 plates at mid-span. Bottom flange has 3 plates at mid-span. Plates are delaminated with 10-15% section loss in localized areas. Girder at mid-span of bridge (Span E-F on structure drawing) measures 0.3m x 1.5m. Flanges at span E-F has 4 stiffener plates at the top and bottom. Surface delamination on exterior south girder at Span E-F. Delamination located at 5th bay from F column. Vertical web stiffener (angle) located in first span from C column at Span B-C has 30% section loss. Deterioration of girder-end flange at south H column. Beams not visible on top where covered by the deck structure.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition Data:
Units Exc.Good
Light to medium weathering, checking and splitting.
Perform. Deficiencies
Condition Data:
Units Exc.Good Fair Poor
sq.m 0 73.3 11.5 0
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Page 351 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 7
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form Site Number:
Element Data
Element Group:Bracing Length:
Element Name:Diagonal Bracing Element Width:
Location:Between Steel Trestle Pier Height:
Material:Steel Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab X Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Bracing Length:
Element Name:Horizontal Bracing Element Width:
Location:Between Steel Trestle Pier Height:
Material:Steel Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab X Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Bracing Length:
Element Name:Bracing Element Width:
Location:Beneath Deck Height:
Material:Steel Count:
Element Type:Steel Angle Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Moderate Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace X
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
52
34
34
BR_KINS0001
52
Good Fair
Perform. Deficiencies
Perform. Deficiencies
Poor
76
3
76
Fair
Each 0 0 42 10
Poor
Medium to severe corrosion throughout with flaking of delaminated steel. Areas with 10% section loss.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.
Each 0 0 27 7
Members comprised of 2 C-Channels on top and bottom with lace bracing on exterior sides. Medium to severe corrosion throughout with
flaking of delaminated steel. Channels are in fair condition. Lace braces are severely delaminated.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.Good
Medium to very severe corrosion throughout with flaking of delaminated steel. Areas with 25-30% sections loss.
Perform. Deficiencies
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.Good Fair Poor
Each 0 0 30 46
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Page 352 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 8
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form Site Number:
Element Data
Element Group:Connections Length:
Element Name:Structural Connections Width:
Location:Substructure Height:
Material:Steel Count:
Element Type:Plate Total Quantity:All
Environment:Benign to Moderate Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab X Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Decks Length:
Element Name:Wearing Surface (Decks)Width:
Location:Height:
Material:Wood Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Severe Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent X 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Embankments and Streams Length:
Element Name:Embankments Width:
Location:Quadrants and Base of Abutments Height:
Material:Vegetation Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent X 1 year 2 year
1
278.2
2.6
1
BR_KINS0001
Good Fair
Perform. Deficiencies
Perform. Deficiencies
Poor
6
6
Fair
107
All 0 0 0 1
Poor
Severe corrosion is exhibited on the gusset plates of the structural connections, along with section loss due to delamination. Cracking and
severe corrosion leading to section loss was noted on various riveted connections. Rehabilitate connections throughout the structure.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.
sq.m 0 206.9 67.6 3.7
Light to medium weathering, checking and splitting. Corrosion at nails. Two boards warping upward from the deck.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:Deck Surface Repair
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.Good
Light erosion at quadrant embankments. Severe erosion at base of east abutment. Severe erosion at northwest wingwall embankment. Subdrain running down the northwest wingwall embankment.
Perform. Deficiencies
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.Good Fair Poor Unstable EmbankmentsEach0402
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:Erosion Control at Bridges
Page 353 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 9
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form Site Number:
Element Data
Element Group:Embankments and Streams Length:
Element Name:Streams and Waterways Width:
Location:Beneath Span Height:
Material:Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:All
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Foundations Length:
Element Name:Foundation (Below Ground Level)Width:
Location:Below Piers Height:
Material:Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:All
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:None
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Piers Length:
Element Name:Bearings Width:
Location:Top of Concrete Pier Caps Height:
Material:Steel Count:
Element Type:Plate Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Severe Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
1
1
1
BR_KINS0001
1
Good Fair
Perform. Deficiencies
X
Perform. Deficiencies
Poor
16
0.46
0.1
16
Fair
All 0 1 0 0
Poor
Light erosion of stream banks at east piers. Wood debris downstream slightly restricting flow.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition Data:
Units Exc.
0.76
All 0 0 1 0
Limited inspection due to the foundations being buried. Condition data of foundations based on condition of concrete piers.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition Data:
Units Exc.Good
Light to medium corrosion of plates and fasteners throughout.
Perform. Deficiencies
Condition Data:
Units Exc.Good Fair Poor
Each 0 0 16 0
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Page 354 of 564
G. Douglas Vallee Limited
Page 10
Ontario Structure Inspection Manual - Enhanced Inspection Form Site Number:
Element Data
Element Group:Piers Length:
Element Name:Caps Width:
Location:Top of Piers Height:
Material:Concrete Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:sq.m
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab X Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr X Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Piers Length:
Element Name:Shafts/Columns/Pile Bents Width:
Location:From Pier Caps to Underside of Girders Height:
Material:Steel Trestle Count:
Element Type:Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab X Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr X 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year 2 year
Element Group:Piers Length:
Element Name:Shafts/Columns/Pile Bents Width:
Location:Between Ground and Pier Caps Height:
Material:Concrete Count:
Element Type:Concrete Block Total Quantity:Each
Environment:Benign Limited Inspection:
Protection System:
Comments:
Rehab Replace
Timing: Urgent < 1yr 1 - 5 yr 6 - 10 yr Urgent 1 year X 2 year
136
16
16
BR_KINS0001
1.85
1.85
1.2
16
Good Fair
Perform. Deficiencies
Perform. Deficiencies
Poor
16
1.85
16
Fair
sq.m 0 76 28 32
Poor
Few narrow and medium cracks with small surface delaminations. Corrosion staining from bridge. Loss of mortar. Steel strapping around
pier caps have moderate corrosion (10 - 60% section loss). Three (3) pier caps have a vertical crack through top cap (South F, North I, and South I). Cracks in east to west orientation. Steel strapping missing at North I pier cap.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:Other: Replace Missing Strapping
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.
1.85
Each 0 0 11 5
Column comprised of 2 C-Channels, 1 steel plate on exterior side, and lace braces on interior side. Light to medium corrosion throughout
all members . Lace braces on each column have severely corroded. Localized areas of broken lace braces on north side of Column I.
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.Good
North C - Two small surface delaminations, typical 50% grout pop-out. South C - Small surface delamination, small hole, 30% grout popout. North D - Small sapling growing in south face mortar joint, typical 30% grout loss. South D - One small delamination, 20% grout loss. South E - One small delamination, 15% grout loss. North E - One 0.3m square surface delamination, 30% grout loss. South F - Two small facial delaminations, few short hairline cracks in blocks, 15% grout loss. North G - Small delamination at base, 25% grout loss. South G - Three small surface delaminations, one hairline crack, 20% grout loss. North H - One small delamination, 30% grout loss, corrosion staining evident. South H - One small delamination, 30% grout loss. North I - One 0.3m square delamination, typical corrosion staining, 30%
grout loss.
Perform. Deficiencies
Condition
Data:
Units Exc.Good Fair Poor
Each 0 10 5 1
Recommended Work:Maintenance Needs:Other: Reinstall Mortar
Page 355 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form Structure: BR_KINS0001
1.East Approach
2.West Approach
G.Douglas Vallee Limited Page: 1 / 52
Page 356 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form Structure: BR_KINS0001
3.North Elevation
4. South Elevation
G.Douglas Vallee Limited Page: 2 / 52
Page 357 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form Structure: BR_KINS0001
5.Upstream
6.Downstream
G.Douglas Vallee Limited Page: 3 / 52
Page 358 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form
7.Surface Corrosion on Diagonal Bracing, Typical
8. Severe Corrosion and Delamination on Girder and Diaphragm
G.Douglas Vallee Limited
Structure: BR_KINS0001
Page: 4 / 52
Page 359 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form
9.Severe Corrosion and Delamination on Horizontal Component of Diaphragm
10.Severe Corrosion and Rivet Cracking on Lateral Bracing on Soffit
G.Douglas Vallee Limited
Structure: BR_KINS0001
Page: 5 / 52
Page 360 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form Structure: BR_KINS0001
11.Medium Corrosion and Delamination of Diaphragm and Girder Connection
G.Douglas Vallee Limited Page: 6 / 52
Page 361 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form Structure: BR_KINS0001
13.Severe Corrosion, Delamination, and Cracking of Rivets at Lateral Bracing and Girder
�-<' 14.Severe Corrosion and Delamination on Columns
G.Douglas Vallee Limited Page: 7 / 52
Page 362 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form Structure: BR_KINS0001
15.Severe Corrosion and Delamination on Girder
'---•'· �lit, __ .___""'""' __ 16.Medium Corrosion of Bearing Plate
G.Douglas Vallee Limited Page: 8 / 52
Page 363 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form Structure: BR_KINS0001
G.Douglas Vallee Limited Page: 9 / 52
Page 364 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form
19.Surface Corrosion on Diagonal Bracing
20.Medium Corrosion and Delamination on Column
G.Douglas Vallee Limited
Structure: BR_KINS0001
Page: 10 / 52
Page 365 of 564
Municipal Structure Inspection Form Structure: BR_KINS0001
21.Medium Corrosion of Column at Girder
22.Medium Corrosion, Delamination, and Cracking of Rivets at Connection Plates on Girder
G.Douglas Vallee Limited Page: 11 / 52
Page 366 of 564
Page 367 of 564
Page 368 of 564
Page 369 of 564
Page 370 of 564
Page 371 of 564
Page 372 of 564
Page 373 of 564
Page 374 of 564
Page 375 of 564
Page 376 of 564
Page 377 of 564
Page 378 of 564
Page 379 of 564
Page 380 of 564
Page 381 of 564
Page 382 of 564
Page 383 of 564
Page 384 of 564
Page 385 of 564
Page 386 of 564
Page 387 of 564
Page 388 of 564
Page 389 of 564
Page 390 of 564
Page 391 of 564
Page 392 of 564
Page 393 of 564
Page 394 of 564
Page 395 of 564
Page 396 of 564
Page 397 of 564
Page 398 of 564
Page 399 of 564
Page 400 of 564
Page 401 of 564
Page 402 of 564
Page 403 of 564
Page 404 of 564
Page 405 of 564
Page 406 of 564
Page 407 of 564
APPENDIX C
KINSMEN PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE ENHANCED OSIM
DRAWING
Page 408 of 564
Page 409 of 564
APPENDIX D
BLACK BRIDGE, WATERFORD HERITAGE TRAIL
Page 410 of 564
Black Bridge
Client: Norfolk County
Location: Waterford Heritage Trails
The century old Black Bridge, spans the Nanticoke Creek over the Waterford Ponds.
The historic rail bridge consists of a through-truss, and multiple high level simply-
supported spans. Following the abandonment of the railway, the Waterford Heritage
Trail Association assumed stewardship of the structure, and commissioned a retrofit of
the bridge for pedestrian use. The wood deck was repaired and modified, lookout areas
were added, and a beautiful railing was installed. The work done for the rehabilitation of
Black Bridge was completed by Cedar Springs Landscaping Group in 2012.
Notable Design Features:
Deck design prevents further deterioration of rail ties.
Has become the most photographed bridge location in Norfolk.
Tendered Value: $134,300 Construction Cost: $134,300
Page 411 of 564
Report Title Airport Feasibility Analysis Results
Report No. OPS 19-47
Author Dan Locke, CET., Manager of Public Works
Meeting Type Council Meeting
Council Date October 28, 2019
Attachments Airport Feasibility Analysis Study Report
Page 1 / 5
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-47 Airport Feasibility Analysis Results;
AND THAT the Airport Feasibility Analysis Study be provided to the Oxford County Service
Delivery Review as information;
AND FURTHER THAT the Next Steps identified within this Report including an Airport Master
Plan be brought forward as part of the 2020 budget deliberations.
BACKGROUND
As part of the 2018 draft budget staff brought forward an Airport Master Plan capital item to
support the 2015 “Approved in Principle” conceptual master plan drawing and to provide
strategic direction and planning for the future of the Airport since the last Airport Master Plan
completed in 1989. During the 2018 budget deliberations it was communicated that Council
needed additional information regarding the asset before moving forward with an Airport Master
Plan, such as:
potential increased funding and/or sale/transfer to Oxford County,
potential for tax revenue sharing with SWOX,
third party management, and
options for disposal
As a result staff revised the 2018 Operations Business Plan and brought forward the concept of
completing an “Airport Feasibility Analysis” in advance of proceeding with a strategic Airport
Master Plan to address Council’s additional information request.
At the December 10, 2018 Council meeting Council requested staff to also provide information
regarding:
a new business model of a flight school managing the Airport facility, and
to provide a risk assessment of the general public accessing the Airport.
As part of the 2019 budget staff re-introduced the concept of an Airport Feasibility Analysis
incorporating and expanding upon all the informational items requested by Council as outlined
above. Through Report OPS 19-13 in May of 2019 Council was provided an opportunity to
review and revise the draft Terms of Reference of the Airport Feasibility Analysis RFP prior to
issuing the bid. In June 2019 through Report OPS 19-32 Council awarded the RFP to HM Aero
of Ottawa, Ontario the highest scoring proposal received.
Page 412 of 564
Page 2 / 5
SUMMARY
At the conclusion of the Airport Feasibility Analysis study the consultant identified that:
the Tillsonburg Regional Airport is performing well financially when compared to other
regional and municipal airports in Canada,
the economic benefit of the Airport is greater than the on-airport (direct) impacts alone
and that the importance of the Airport should be conveyed to the Township of Southwest
Oxford and Oxford County. Residents of Southwest Oxford and Oxford County benefit
from the presence of the Airport, however only $5,000 from Oxford County is contributed
to support the Airport.
the Airport provides adequate facilities, its proximity to Toronto, 5,502’ runway length
(once trees are removed), available development lands and competitive fees makes the
Airport a strong competitor in south-central Ontario to attract additional aviation activity
and business development,
there are additional opportunities to reduce the operating deficit through adjusting some
aspects of the Airport fee structure and potentially through the development of Town
owned hangars,
the current governance structure had previously not facilitated quick decision making and
hindered development. Changes to the decision-making process through an in-house
development process have since been created,
the Airport is not in violation of the Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR’s) in terms of
enforcing airport security provisions, but that some improvements can be made to
improve overall security.
Furthermore a summary of the consultant recommendations is provided below:
Immediate (within 1 year)
Review Aerodrome Signage – In the short-term (prior to a Primary Security Line being
established), it is recommended that a review of aerodrome signage in the core area be
conducted to confirm that existing signage effectively indicates a delineation between
airside and groundside areas of the Airport.
Investigate Tree Removal Prior to Threshold of Runway 26 – The operational runway
length of Runway 26 is restricted by the presence of trees prior to the threshold. This
results in a displacement of the runway threshold by 1,000’ (reducing the Landing
Distance Available to 4,502’), and potential takeoff restrictions on Runway 08 for larger
aircraft. For Tillsonburg Regional Airport to market and benefit from the full 5,502’ runway
length, it is recommended that these trees be removed as soon as practicable.
Complete a Hangar Development Business Case – Prior to constructing new Town-
owned hangars to be leased, a business case should be completed to confirm that this
investment would yield a financial return.
Short-Term (within 1-3 years)
Implement a Negotiation Strategy – Negotiate with the County of Oxford and Township of
South West Oxford to determine their desire for participation in governance and increased
funding contributions. It is recommended that the Town consider the collaborative or
compromising strategies for negotiations with the County and Township. The most
appropriate approach will be dependent on the substance or issues identified for the
Township and County.
Page 413 of 564
Page 3 / 5
Implement a Revenue Strategy – There may be an opportunity to reduce or eliminate the
cost-revenue gap through the implementation of a revised revenue strategy, including
examining the current fee structure. Improved revenue strategies would be identified
within an Airport Master Plan.
Implement an Airport Commission/Board Governance Model – Based on the role and size
of Tillsonburg Regional Airport, an Airport Commission/Board was ranked as the most
appropriate governance model. A Commission/Board for Tillsonburg Regional Airport
should be given the authority by Town Council to manage, operate, develop and market
the Airport, with appropriate goal setting and achievement measurements. Divestiture of
the Airport has not been identified as an attractive option for the Town, as the facility acts
as an economic driver for the region and is performing well financially.
Complete an Airport Master Plan – An Airport Master Plan is a strategic study used to
define the long-term progressive development of an airport. Tillsonburg Regional Airport
does not currently have a Master Plan, which could be hindering the rate of business
growth at the facility (e.g. the availability of development-ready lands, identification of
marketing tools to promote business growth at the facility, etc.). An Airport Master Plan
would examine all potential future business opportunities and markets for the airport and
would define and cost infrastructure development requirements and a comprehensive
Land Use Plan.
Establish a Primary Security Line – Though not obligated, the Airport should define a
Primary Security Line to better delineate the airside and groundside. Establishment of a
Primary Security Line is recommended as part of the development of an Airport Master
Plan whereby fence locations can be identified that support short, medium- and long-term
developments, with minimal future relocations required.
While an Airport Commission/Board is the consultant’s recommended governance model, the
current governance model of Town Owned and Operated was identified by the consultant as the
second most preferred governance model. It should also be noted that if the Township of
Southwest Oxford and/or Oxford County are unwilling to provide financial contribution to
participate in an Airport Commission/Board governance model the viability of implementing an
Airport Commission/Board should likely be re-evaluated.
Furthermore given the potential for change of the municipal governance landscape under the
Province’s Regional Review, at the time of authoring this report staff do not recommend
proceeding with negotiations with the Township of Southwest Oxford and/or Oxford County until
the results of the Regional Review have been fully digested. In the meantime staff are
suggesting that the results of the Airport Feasibility Analysis study be made available to the
Oxford County Service Delivery review team for consideration in their analysis.
Page 414 of 564
Page 4 / 5
Next Steps
In consideration that the additional information requested by Council regarding the Airport and
the Terms of Reference of the Tillsonburg Airport Advisory Committee staff are recommending
that Council now consider the commencement of an Airport Master Plan as part of the 2020
budget deliberations.
Staff are also recommending that the Immediate Recommendations of:
Review Aerodrome Signage,
Investigate Tree Removal Prior to Threshold of Runway 26, and
Complete a Hangar Development Business Case
be included as part of the 2020 Operations Business Plan Objectives for the Airport as well as
adjusting some of the identified Airport fees as part of the 2020 Rates & Fees By-law revisions.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
The consultant conducted several in person stakeholder meetings and interviews with staff,
Chair, Secretary and Council representative of the Tillsonburg Airport Advisory Committee, as
well as meeting with the entire Tillsonburg Airport Advisory Committee and hosting a Public
Consultation Session at the Airport with Tenants and other interested parties of the Airport
community.
Given that the scope of work under this assignment has been driven by Council requests that
are not necessarily part of the Tillsonburg Airport Advisory Committee Terms of Reference, staff
are providing Council with the results of the Airport Feasibility Analysis for consideration in
advance of any potential feedback form other stakeholders that Council may request.
FUNDING IMPACT/ FUNDING SOURCE
With Council’s decision to fund any future Airport initiative from the Tax Rate Stabilization
Reserve which his to be replenished upon the sale of Town owned lands adjacent to the Airport,
the completion of an Airport Master Plan has become even more imperative to ensure
appropriate lands are identified as surplus that will not hinder future Airport operations or the
long-term vision of the Airport.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP)
This initiative supports Objective 1 – Excellence in Local Government and Objective 2 –
Economic Sustainability of the Community Strategic Plan by providing additional information that
works towards a strategic master plan for the Airport and overall fiscal responsibility.
Page 415 of 564
Page 5 / 5
Report Approval Details
Document Title: OPS 19-47 Airport Feasibility Analylsis Results.docx
Attachments:
Final Approval Date: Oct 22, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Dave Rushton - Oct 22, 2019 - 9:47 AM
Ron Shaw - Oct 22, 2019 - 10:17 AM
Donna Wilson - Oct 22, 2019 - 2:44 PM
Page 416 of 564
Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
Tillsonburg Regional Airport
DRAFT FINAL REPORT
Town of Tillsonburg
200 Broadway, 2nd Floor
Tillsonburg, Ontario
N4G 5A5
Date: October 21, 2019
Submitted by:
HM Aero Inc.
532 Montreal Road, Suite 209
Ottawa, Ontario
K1K 4R4
Page 417 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
ii
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Study Objectives ...................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Stakeholder Consultations........................................................................................ 2
2 AIRPORT PROFILE ....................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Role and Designation ............................................................................................... 4
2.1.1 Role .................................................................................................................. 4
2.1.2 Designation ....................................................................................................... 4
2.2 History ...................................................................................................................... 4
2.3 Airport Management & Operations ........................................................................... 5
2.4 Current Infrastructure ............................................................................................... 5
2.4.1 Runways ........................................................................................................... 6
2.4.2 Taxiways and Aprons ........................................................................................ 6
2.4.3 Air Navigation Facilities ..................................................................................... 7
2.4.4 Aviation Service Facilities ................................................................................. 7
2.4.5 Air Terminal Building ......................................................................................... 8
2.5 User Profile ............................................................................................................... 8
2.5.1 Current Aviation Businesses ............................................................................. 8
2.5.2 Traffic Profile ..................................................................................................... 9
2.6 Economic Benefit ................................................................................................... 10
3 AIRPORT GOVERNANCE ........................................................................................... 11
3.1 Background ............................................................................................................ 11
3.2 Current Governance ............................................................................................... 11
3.3 Governance Approaches ........................................................................................ 12
3.3.1 No Involvement (Divestiture or Sale of Airport) ............................................... 12
3.3.2 Town Owned and Operated (Status Quo) ....................................................... 12
3.3.3 Town Owned and Contractor Operated .......................................................... 13
3.3.4 Airport Commission/Board .............................................................................. 13
3.3.5 Town Owned and Airport Authority Operated ................................................. 14
3.3.6 Airport Authority Owned and Operated ........................................................... 15
3.3.7 Governance Model Rankings .......................................................................... 18
3.3.8 Recommended Governance Model ................................................................ 19
3.4 Recommended Commission/Board Structure ........................................................ 19
3.5 Partnership ............................................................................................................. 20
Page 418 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
iii
4 BASELINE AIRPORTS COMPARISON ....................................................................... 21
4.1 Comparative Airport Selection ................................................................................ 21
4.2 Tillsonburg Regional Airport ................................................................................... 22
4.2.1 SWOT Analysis ............................................................................................... 22
4.3 Comparative Analysis ............................................................................................. 24
4.4 Findings .................................................................................................................. 25
5 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AND REVENUE STRATEGY ...................................... 26
5.1 Budget Sustainability .............................................................................................. 26
5.1.1 Revenue ......................................................................................................... 26
5.1.2 Expense .......................................................................................................... 26
5.1.3 Current Financial Situation .............................................................................. 27
5.2 Revenue Strategy ................................................................................................... 28
5.2.1 Current Aeronautical Revenues ...................................................................... 28
5.2.2 New Aeronautical Revenues ........................................................................... 29
5.2.3 Current Non-Aeronautical Revenues .............................................................. 30
5.2.4 New Non-Aeronautical Revenues ................................................................... 30
5.3 Negotiation Strategy ............................................................................................... 31
5.3.1 Background ..................................................................................................... 31
5.3.2 Negotiating Strategies ..................................................................................... 32
5.3.3 Analysis .......................................................................................................... 33
5.3.4 Recommended Strategy ................................................................................. 33
6 AERODROME SECURITY REQUIREMENTS .............................................................. 36
6.1 Aerodromes, Registered Aerodromes, and Certified Airports ................................. 36
6.1.1 Aerodromes .................................................................................................... 36
6.1.2 Registered Aerodromes .................................................................................. 36
6.1.3 Certified Airports ............................................................................................. 37
6.2 Prohibitions ............................................................................................................. 37
6.3 Implications for Tillsonburg Regional Airport .......................................................... 37
6.4 Aerodrome Security Recommendations ................................................................. 38
7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 39
7.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 39
7.2 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 39
Appendix A - TAAC Terms of Reference ........................................................................ 41
Page 419 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
iv
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Site Map ................................................................. 5
Figure 2.2 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Historical Aircraft Movements ................................. 9
Figure 3.1 – Airport Governance Structure Spectrum ........................................................... 12
Figure 5.1 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Revenue and Expense – 2015-2019 .................... 28
Figure 5.2 – Recommended Negotiating Strategy Framework .............................................. 33
List of Tables
Table 3.1 – Significant Airport Governance Features ............................................................ 15
Table 4.1 – Governance Models: Southern Ontario Airports ................................................ 21
Table 4.2 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Characteristics for Comparison ............................. 22
Table 4.3 – Comparative Airport Analysis ............................................................................. 24
Table 5.1 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Actual and Budgeted Finances – 2015-2019 ......... 27
Page 420 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
1
1 INTRODUCTION
The Town of Tillsonburg (the Town) commissioned HM Aero Aviation Consulting (HM Aero) to
prepare a Feasibility Analysis study for Tillsonburg Regional Airport. Tillsonburg Regional
Airport (CYTB) is a registered aerodrome owned and operated by the Town of Tillsonburg,
located in South West Oxford Township situated on more than 600 hectares of land. Originally
constructed to support flight training by the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) during World
War II, the Airport facility consists of one paved and two turf runways, and a supporting taxiway
and apron network.
Tillsonburg is a growing community in south-central Ontario, located south of Highway 401,
within Oxford County. Tillsonburg is home to approximately 16,000 residents and the
community continues to grow as a result of resident migrations. The Second Quarter Report
produced by the Town of Tillsonburg’s Building Planning and By-law Services Department
revealed that the total value of approved developments in the first two quarters of 2019 was
$33,076,609, exceeding the historical value for 2018 ($26,732,028). Additionally, 2018
outperformed 2017 by a factor nearly two (2017 total construction value was $14,113,805 after
two quarters). This indicates a strong level of growth within the community.
Currently, Tillsonburg Regional Airport does not support regularly scheduled passenger
service – the facility is classified as a registered aerodrome and is not certified in accordance
with the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs). Tillsonburg Regional Airport is home to one
flight school and the Canadian Harvard Aircraft Association (CHAA) who restores, maintains
and operates a fleet of Harvard aircraft.
Aerial View of Tillsonburg Regional Airport - August 2019
Page 421 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
2
1.1 Study Objectives
The objectives of the Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study are to:
1. analyze the current airport governance model for Tillsonburg Regional Airport to
identify current deficiencies and challenges;
2. identify appropriate governance models that are applicable to the size and scope of
infrastructure and operations at Tillsonburg Regional Airport;
3. complete a comparative analysis of the appropriate airport governance models to
determine the best fit for Tillsonburg Regional Airport based on the political landscape,
revenue generation potential, and the lowest risk to the Town;
4. investigate and identify appropriate revenue generation strategies for the Airport;
based on government contributions and through private investment;
5. identify and develop divestiture options for Tillsonburg Regional Airport,
6. conduct a review of the regulatory requirements of a registered aerodrome as they
pertain to security and provide recommendations to meet those requirements; and
7. engage with the Town and local stakeholders to build a current profile of Tillsonburg
Regional Airport that examines:
a. the Airport’s user profile;
b. the change of the Airport’s use over the past decade;
c. the most significant challenges and changes that could be expected at the
Airport in the future;
d. advantages and disadvantages of operating an airport in Tillsonburg; and
e. a comparison of air traffic volume and mix compared to other similar airports
in southern Ontario.
1.2 Stakeholder Consultations
To successfully achieve the study objectives, the HM Aero team completed a stakeholder
engagement program to better understand the current opportunities, constraints and
challenges with the management and operation of Tillsonburg Regional Airport. Stakeholders
were engaged through in-person meetings and interviews, HM Aero’s attendance at the
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Advisory Committee meeting, and through a public information
session held with airport tenants.
The following individuals and stakeholder groups were engaged (in-person) to support
development of the Airport Feasibility Analysis Study:
• Town of Tillsonburg:
o Director of Operations
o Manager of Public Works
o Airport Administrator
Page 422 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
3
• Tillsonburg Airport Advisory Committee Members:
o Chair (Appointed)
o Secretary (Appointed)
o Town of Tillsonburg Councillor
o South West Oxford Township (SWOX) Councillor
o 7 Additional Appointed Members
• Airport Tenants and Users (11)
In general, stakeholders expressed concern historically regarding the timelines related to
obtaining development approvals for new hangar construction. The following steps were
required under the process used until 2018:
1. The Applicant would make a request for hangar development to the Airport.
2. The Airport Administrator would draft a report for Town Council.
3. Town Council would review the report and grant approval if appropriate.
4. The Applicant would request a building permit from SWOX.
5. Once the permit was received, the Applicant could begin development.
Changes at SWOX in 2018 disrupted this process and resulted in a significant decrease in
hangar construction. A new process has been developed intended to streamline the process
and increase hangar development at the Airport:
1. The Applicant makes a request for hangar development to the Airport.
2. The Airport Administrator drafts a report for Town Council.
3. Town Council reviews the report and grants approval if appropriate.
4. The Applicant signs a lease with the Airport.
5. The Applicant requests an Airport Development Permit (ADP) from the Town of
Tillsonburg.
6. Once the ADP is approved, the Applicant begins development.
Page 423 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
4
2 AIRPORT PROFILE
2.1 Role and Designation
2.1.1 Role
The Airport Role Statement is the fundamental starting point in classifying current activity and
determining a future position in terms of long-term activities and development at the site.
Defining an airport role assists airport owners and operators in decision making as it relates to
ownership, operations, and required financial investment at an airport facility.
Tillsonburg Regional Airport serves the needs of commercial, recreational and government
aircraft operators within Oxford County and south-central. Ontario. In order to maximize the
future economic potential of the facility within the region, the short-term role of the Tillsonburg
Regional Airport should be to provide:
• a base for corporate and private aircraft owners and operators;
• a service hub for general aviation aircraft repair and maintenance activities;
• a base for flight training activities;
• a base for aircraft restorations;
• flexibility to support modest passenger air charter services (9 seat aircraft); and
• facilities to support aerial sightseeing activities.
2.1.2 Designation
Tillsonburg Regional Airport is owned and operated by the Town of Tillsonburg and is not a
member airport within Transport Canada’s National Airports System. As indicated previously,
Tillsonburg Regional Airport is classified by Transport Canada as a registered aerodrome,
indicating that the facility is not required to be designed and operated as per the requirements
stipulated within Transport Canada’s Aerodrome Standards and Recommended Practices
(TP312). Aerodromes are required to be certified if they support regularly scheduled
passenger air services, are located within a built-up area, or if the Minister of Transportation
stipulates that certification is required. Registered aerodrome operations are governed by
fewer regulatory requirements, compared to certified airports.
2.2 History
Tillsonburg Regional Airport was originally constructed by the Royal Canadian Air Force to
support flight training during World War II. The Airport was originally designed in the common
triangular runway configuration of the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan (BCATP) to
ensure favorable crosswinds conditions for student pilots. The lands occupied by Tillsonburg
Regional Airport were leased from the Federal Government starting in the 1950s. In 1971, the
Town paved Runway 08-26 and constructed a public apron and supporting taxiway. Also
added that decade was a terminal building, aircraft hangars, and a fuel facility. The Town
formally assumed ownership and operation of the Airport in 1981.
The Airport has since undergone an expansion and upgrade program including the extension
of Runway 08-26 to 5,502 feet in 2009. In 2010 a new terminal building was also developed to
support a restaurant, a flight school and airport administrative activities. Since 2010, several
new recreational aircraft hangars have been developed at the site.
Page 424 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
5
2.3 Airport Management & Operations
Tillsonburg Regional Airport is owned and operated by the Town of Tillsonburg. The lands
occupied by the Airport are located outside the limits of the Town (approximately 7 km north
of the Town centre), within the Township of South West Oxford. Airport operations are
overseen by an Airport Administrator that reports to the Manager of Public Works, who in turn
reports to the Town’s Director of Operations.
The facility is operated under the umbrella of the Town’s Operations Department and
maintenance resources (equipment and personnel) are provided to the Airport by Public
Works. The Airport is governed by Town Council and advised by the Tillsonburg Airport
Advisory Committee (TAAC).
The TAAC’s mandate is:
• to advise and make recommendations to Council on matters related to the Tillsonburg
Regional Airport;
• to provide a forum for receiving input and advice from aviation stakeholder groups and
the community with respect to the Airport Master Plan and strategic initiatives; and
• to provide a forum for dialogue and communication. Day to day operations of the
airport is the responsibility of Town staff.
The TAAC’s Terms of Reference are presented in Appendix A.
2.4 Current Infrastructure
A brief description of the current infrastructure at Tillsonburg Regional Airport is provided
herein as it relates to the Airport Feasibility Analysis study. The information presented in the
following sections was obtained through a site visit and inspection, and through a review of
current aeronautical publications, such as the Canada Flight Supplement (CFS), and the
Canada Air Pilot (CAP). Tillsonburg Regional Airport includes three runways, three taxiways,
and one public apron. The core development area is in the southeast quadrant of the Airport
property. The primary features of the facility are shown in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Site Map
Page 425 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
6
2.4.1 Runways
Runway 08-26
The primary runway, Runway 08-26, is 5,502’ x 100’ (1,677 m x 30.5 m) with a paved asphalt
surface. The threshold of Runway 26 is displaced 1,000’ due to the presence of trees
immediately east of the Airport property boundary. Runway 08-26 (the Airport’s primary paved
runway) is capable of supporting operations for aircraft up to and including the DHC8-400,
General Aviation (GA) corporate aircraft, and other turbofan (jet) aircraft types carrying fewer
than 100 passengers.
Threshold of Runway 08 at Tillsonburg Regional Airport
Runways 02-20 and 14-32
Two secondary turf runways are currently in operation at Tillsonburg Regional Airport -
Runway 02-20 and Runway 14-32. Runway 02-20 has dimensions of 2,348’ x 75’ (715.7 m x
22.9 m) and Runway 14-34 extends 2,258’ x 75’ (688.2 m x 22.9 m) in width. The two turf
runways are primarily used by smaller piston aircraft involved in recreational and flight training
activities. All four turf runway thresholds are displaced (either 100 ft. or 300 ft.) due to the
presence of seasonal tall crops and both turf runways are not maintained during the winter
season.
2.4.2 Taxiways and Aprons
Tillsonburg Regional Airport provides one primary taxiway that connects the approximate
midpoint of Runway 08-26 to the Airport’s main apron. The taxiway is approximately 15 m in
width and is comprised of a paved asphalt surface. Two additional paved private taxiways
connect the main apron to the east and west development areas at the Airport.
The main apron has dimensions of approximately 60 m x 60 m and is also comprise of a paved
asphalt surface. The apron supports aircraft tie-downs and a cardlock aviation fuelling system.
The configuration of the main apron, the primary taxiway and the private taxiways can result
in congestion during peak periods resulting in a limited area available to park aircraft on the
main apron.
Page 426 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
7
Furthermore, the Airport’s single taxiway connection to Runway 08-26 has been observed to
cause congestion during peak periods, sometimes requiring departing aircraft to exit the
taxiway and hold short of the runway within the grass area beside the taxiway to allow for
aircraft to clear the runway environment before taxiing to the main apron.
2.4.3 Air Navigation Facilities
Instrument Flight Procedures
Non-precision instrument approach capability is provided for Runway 08 at Tillsonburg
Regional Airport. A GPS-based LNAV Instrument Flight Procedure (IFP) provides increased
airport availability during periods of poor weather to a minimum descent altitude of 416’ Above
Ground Level (AGL) with visibility limits of 1 ¼ statute miles. A VOR/DME IFP is also provided
at Tillsonburg Regional Airport, supporting a minimum descent altitude of 527’ AGL and a
minimum visibility requirement of 1 ¾ statute miles (or better).
Visual Aids
The Airport is equipped with the following visual aids to support regular aircraft operations, and
operations during periods of darkness and/or reduced visibility.
• An Aerodrome Beacon;
• Low-Intensity Runway Edge Lighting (08-26);
• Low-Intensity Threshold and Runway End Lighting (08-26);
• Aircraft Radio Control of Aerodrome Lighting (ARCAL) System; and
• Lighted Windsocks.
2.4.4 Aviation Service Facilities
Aviation Communications
An Aerodrome Traffic Frequency (ATF) is currently provided at Tillsonburg Regional Airport.
ATFs are normally designated for active uncontrolled airports that do not meet the criteria for
a Mandatory Frequency (MF) service. ATFs are established to ensure that all radio-equipped
aircraft operating on the ground or within the vicinity of the aerodrome are listening on a
common frequency and following common reporting procedures. A Universal
Communications (UNICOM) service is provided at Tillsonburg Regional Airport during normal
operating hours whereby airport advisory information (wind speed, direction, altimeter setting,
and other reported traffic) can be conveyed to aircraft operating in the Airport’s vicinity. In
addition, the ATF is used to communicate intentions, aircraft position and other information
between aircraft operating in the vicinity of the Airport.
Airport Support Facilities
Several aviation support facilities are available at Tillsonburg Regional Airport. The following
support facilities are available, as stated within the most current publication of the Canada
Flight Supplement (CFS):
• 24-Hour Aircraft Fuel Services including 100 Low-Lead (Avgas) and Jet A1 fuel sales;
• Aircraft Storage;
• Servicing/Minor Aircraft Repairs;
• Major Aircraft Repairs;
• Extended Term Aircraft Parking; and
• Aircraft Tie Down Facilities.
Page 427 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
8
Further to the above, Tillsonburg Regional Airport is designated by Canadian Border Services
Agency (CBSA) as an Airport of Entry (AOE 15) capable of supporting transborder operations
for up to 15 passengers.
2.4.5 Air Terminal Building
Tillsonburg Regional Airport is supported by an air terminal building that supports an airport
administration office, a restaurant, boardroom, washrooms and leasable space currently
occupied by the Tillsonburg Flying School. The building is located at the centre of the core
area and supports administrative functions and itinerant aircraft arrivals and departures. The
building is supported by a vehicle parking area with the capacity to support 48 light vehicles.
The building has limited passenger processing capacity capable of supporting modest
scheduled passenger and charter air services (9 seat aircraft).
An exterior view of the Tillsonburg Regional Airport Air Terminal Building
2.5 User Profile
2.5.1 Current Aviation Businesses
Tillsonburg Regional Airport supports a variety of aviation-related businesses and
organizations that support the GA sector in south-central Ontario, as identified below.
• Canadian Harvard Aircraft Association (CHAA) – acquire, preserve, maintain,
display, and demonstrate Harvard and other training aircraft associated with the British
Commonwealth Air Training Plan and the Royal Canadian Airforce.
• Lee Air Leasing Ltd. – provides aircraft maintenance and specialized work.
• Tailwind Aviation Services – specializes in avionics for amateur built and certified
aircraft.
• Tillsonburg Flying School - private accredited career college located on the lower
level of the air terminal building offering flight training using Cessna 150 and Cessna
172 aircraft.
Page 428 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
9
In addition to the businesses identified above, Tillsonburg Regional Airport is home to
approximately 17 hangars that have been developed by private entities to support aircraft
storage. Three additional hangars at Tillsonburg Regional Airport support CHAA, Tailwind
Aviation, and Lee Air Leasing Ltd.
Consultations with the Airport Administrator indicate that there is continuing demand for the
development of GA recreational and commercial hangar facilities at Tillsonburg Regional
Airport. Consultations revealed that some hangar owners travel as far as 1.5 – 2.0 hours from
their place of residence to Tillsonburg Regional Airport to engage in recreational flying
activities, indicating that the facility is an attractive base for the further development of GA
activities.
2.5.2 Traffic Profile
Tillsonburg Regional Airport experiences a relatively even split of local and Itinerant (visiting
aircraft) traffic. Aircraft movement levels (takeoffs and landings) have been recorded by the
Airport Administrator on a regular basis. Historical aircraft activity levels at Tillsonburg
Regional Airport are shown in Figure 2.2. Between the years 2011 and 2018, aircraft
movement activity has remained relatively steady ranging from 9,500 to 15,000 annual
movements. Traffic peaked in 2016 but has declined for several reasons:
• The loss of flight instructors at the flight school;
• The closure of flights schools in London that frequented Tillsonburg Regional Airport;
and
• A reduction in the traffic reporting hours starting in May 2017 coinciding with the
installation of the card lock fuel system. (Though recorded traffic may have declined
as a result, actual traffic may not have declined by the same number).
Figure 2.2 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Historical Aircraft Movements
Records also indicate that in 2017 the Airport supported 69 corporate aircraft and 53 in 2018.
These aircraft operations supported executive transportation to local businesses, individuals
visiting the area to engage in fishing and hunting activities, and for other purposes. The
Airport is home to approximately 50 commercial and GA aircraft and supports a wide variety
of recreational, government and corporate users, including, but not limited to the Ontario
Provincial Police, Ornge, the Department of National Defence, and the Canadian Coast
Guard.
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018ANNUAL MOVEMENTSYEAR
Page 429 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
10
2.6 Economic Benefit
It is important to consider the economic benefit of an airport beyond its financial performance.
Though an airport may consistently have an operating deficit when examining annual financial
statements, it may very well be generating millions of dollars of economic benefit for the region.
In other words, it is important to view airports as potential economic drivers for the communities
and regions in which they serve.
Economic benefit occurs in three different ways:
1. Direct: These impacts occur on the site of the facility. These effects are generated
immediately through aviation activity (e.g. the sale of aviation fuel). There are no
intermediate steps between aviation activity and the benefits.
2. Indirect: Companies doing business on the Airport make many expenditures in the
region off-airport. The methods of economic impact analysis distinguish between
benefits occurring within the footprint of the Airport and those outside of it. The
"Indirect Effects" measure the importance of the tenants' expenditures on goods and
services that occur outside of the Airport. For example, an airport tenant may purchase
goods or services from companies outside of the Airport, potentially within the Town.
Although attributable to the Airport, they do not occur on the site of the Airport.
3. Induced: The employees of on-airport businesses and off-airport suppliers receive
wages and salaries. They spend these funds in the community to purchase a wide
range of other goods and services. These expenditures support further employment,
GDP, and labour income. The process continues indefinitely, with each further round
being smaller than the one immediately before it.
The goal of an airport should not be solely focused on being financially self sustainable, but to
facilitate greater economic benefit in the region. Though an airport may be perceived as a draw
on municipal resources, it is crucial to understand that expenses seen at the airport are offset
by economic gains in the community. These economic gains often far outweigh the expenses
of the airport, although it may not be obvious to all stakeholders (e.g. corporate users,
residents, etc.).
Page 430 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
11
3 AIRPORT GOVERNANCE
3.1 Background
Tillsonburg Regional Airport is currently owned and operated by the Town of Tillsonburg. The
Town is examining the Airport’s future vision, including the most applicable governance
structure. An appropriate airport governance structure can contribute to making better focused
decisions that are in the best interests of the Airport and the region.
The Airport is, and can be, an important tool for surrounding municipalities to achieve their
regional objectives. It can be a mechanism for economic development by attracting increased
passenger services, new businesses, and developing tourism and recreational activities in the
region. An effective airport governance structure provides airport owners with the tools to
effectively manage, plan, develop and market the airport in the best interests of the region in
which it serves.
There are very few small airports in Canada that generate a financial operating surplus. An
airport properly developed and managed is an economic generator where the cost is incurred
at the airport, but the benefit is realized in the businesses throughout the community.
Municipalities benefit from the increased tax base, more employment, greater economic
activity, and improved ability to attract new activity.
There are a range of governance options that are available for airports. Each model has
characteristics that are important to the type and credibility of the decisions and the ability to
encourage participation by others (governments, aviation operators, aviation support
businesses, potential economic opportunities, etc.) in airport development and operations.
3.2 Current Governance
Tillsonburg Regional Airport is currently owned and operated by the Town. The Airport is
managed on a day-to-day basis by an Airport Administrator. The Administrator reports to the
Manger of Public Works who reports to the Director of Operations and then to Town Council.
Furthermore, the Town Council has appointed an Airport Advisory Committee comprised of
two elected officials from the Town and the Township of South West Oxford, in addition to nine
appointees. The Airport Advisory Committee (TAAC) makes recommendations to Council on
matters related to the Tillsonburg Regional Airport. It is intended to provide a forum for
receiving input and advice from aviation stakeholder groups and the community with respect
to the Airport Master Plan and strategic initiatives and to provide a forum for dialogue and
communication. The Committee does not have any authority to make major decisions
regarding the operation or development of the Airport. The TAAC’s Terms of Reference are
presented in Appendix A.
Stakeholder consultations revealed that the requirement for financial support at the Airport is
a cause of concern at the community level. Some residents see the Airport as a facility for
aviation enthusiasts who can afford to own or fly airplanes for recreation purposes and many
may question why taxpayers should be paying the costs of operating an Airport.
Page 431 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
12
3.3 Governance Approaches
There are a range of governance approaches that are utilized by airports across Canada.
Some are more relevant to larger airports and some for smaller regional and community
airports. The range includes some dramatic options such as closing the Airport, up to the
formation of Airport Authorities that require a large amount of commercial passenger traffic to
be effective. For each option there can be different operating arrangements between the
airport owner and operator.
An airport governance structure is not dictated by who operates the airport, but by how
decisions affecting the operations and development of the airport are made. The range of
governance approaches typically employed at airports in Canada is illustrated in Figure 3.1.
The significant features of each governance option are summarized in Table 3.1.
Figure 3.1 – Airport Governance Structure Spectrum
3.3.1 No Involvement (Divestiture or Sale of Airport)
The option to sell the Airport could be very expensive as there may be several obligations to
be met by the owner. If the Airport is to be sold, all the risks and obligations will need to be
valued and become part of the sale price, including risk carried by operating an airport (e.g.
soil contamination, obligation to tenants and airport businesses to maintain an airport,
possibility of new owner using lands for an incompatible land use) and considering the facility
supported military training activities for the BCATP. In most cases, the cost to immediately
bring the Airport into a simplified sale condition may far outweigh the price a potential buyer
may be willing to pay for the Airport.
Furthermore, if the Airport is sold to a third party, the Town will have little control over the
activity that may take place on the airport property, reducing the ability to position the Airport
as an economic driver within the community. In addition, once airport lands are sold for other
uses, it may be extremely cost prohibitive to purchase lands and develop a new airport, if
future demand for aviation facilities in the community were to increase in the future.
3.3.2 Town Owned and Operated (Status Quo)
This is the current airport governance model in place at Tillsonburg Regional Airport. Under
this airport governance model, the Airport is operated and managed by the Town. The Town’s
council has appointed an Advisory Committee to advise and make recommendations to
Council on matters related to the Tillsonburg Regional Airport and provide a forum for receiving
input and advice from aviation stakeholder groups and the community with respect to the
Airport Master Plan and other strategic initiatives.
Page 432 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
13
One of the primary challenges of this model is that elected officials who are appointed to the
Airport Committee are subject to frequent change and do not necessarily cover all the
important skills common of a Commission/Board. In addition, as elected Councillors,
committee members may have conflicting priorities when trying to decide what is best for their
constituents and the Airport.
There may be times when the priorities of one may conflict with the priorities of the other (i.e.
the development of a community centre, a recreational centre, or a similar community facility
may compete for funds that could be used to develop the Airport).
Under the current governance model, the Town has the responsibility to hire and manage staff
at the Airport and ensure appropriate staff support activities are provided (i.e. training,
licensing, and benefits). This adds to the administrative burden for the Town. Furthermore,
the current Tillsonburg Airport Advisory Committee (TAAC) members have many
responsibilities that make it difficult to commit the time to focus on airport development. Under
this governance model the Town has direct control over airport planning and operations and
also carries any liabilities for legal and regulatory obligations.
3.3.3 Town Owned and Contractor Operated
This option is like the Town Owned and Operated model, with the exception that a private
entity would operate the Airport under some type of contract arrangement. The contract
conditions typically have a company operate an airport for a fee. This would eliminate the day-
to-day operational obligation, but there is normally a cost associated with this model, usually
a profit for the company that is operating the airport. The contractor is not focused on cost
efficiency or additional revenue generation at the airport unless they share in the gain.
Furthermore, under this governance model there is little incentive for the private operator to
promote the airport unless there is some form of compensation for time and costs incurred.
The private operator could assist in the airport administration, but this would normally be part
of the fee.
If this governance option were selected at Tillsonburg Regional Airport, the Town would still
carry legal and regulatory obligations and the overall integration of the Airport in regional plans
and site planning would remain with the Town. In general, the main benefit of this option is that
day-to-day operations are removed from the direct responsibility of the Town. The main
concern is that this option is more costly than the present approach, unless a benevolent group
is prepared to operate the Airport at minimal cost.
3.3.4 Airport Commission/Board
An Airport Commission/Board is a group of appointed individuals with the expertise and time
to focus on the planning, management, development, and promotion of the airport.
Commissions/Boards generally bring a more business-like focus to airport operations to
reduce the cost-revenue gap. Commission/Board members would be responsible for the
oversight of the day-to-day operations, relieving the municipal (Public Works) staff of this task.
A Commission/Board would also bring an annual budget and plans to Town Council for
approval. The Commission/Board would report to Council on progress against the financial
and operational plans and the reporting could be as often as Council deems appropriate. The
Commission/Board would operate under any policies deemed applicable by the Town (e.g.
contracting policies, environmental legislation, agreed upon signing authority to commit Town
resources, use of Town equipment, staff and facilities, etc.).
Page 433 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
14
To be most effective, the Commission/Board should be comprised of appointed volunteers
who have a strong interest in the Airport as well as the skills needed to manage and grow the
facility. These would include finance, marketing, aviation knowledge, engineering, legal, and
business management skills. The individuals that form the Commission/Board should not be
elected officials to avoid potential conflicts. In order to be most effective, the members should
be nominated by the groups that have an interest in the Airport, including the Town (owner),
surrounding townships and counties (current and potential funders, and citizens that utilize
and benefit from the Airport), airport user groups (tenants, businesses that use the airport),
and/or independent members form the community at large.
The members would be approved by the Town from the nominations submitted, with a typical
term of 3-5 years with a renewable option. The appointments should be staggered to ensure
ongoing knowledge transfer and the Commission/Board should elect from their members a
Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary, and Treasurer. They should meet as frequently as needed and
keep a record of meeting minutes and agendas.
The Airport Commission/Board would have more consistency of membership when compared
to the current model as their appointment could be for a longer term than each municipal
election. The individuals would bring the skills that are important to develop the Airport and
would fuse their knowledge and experience to help guide the future development of the Airport.
Commission/Board members often use their local contacts to promote and encourage airport
use and funding.
In addition, the presence of a Commission/Board of qualified persons assists in creating
credibility when approaching governments and industry for participation in the development of
the Airport.
Furthermore, under this model the Airport Commission/Board would develop plans for the
Airport in coordination with the regional plans developed by the Town, Township, and County.
The Town would own the land and carry the legal and regulatory obligations. There would
likely be a continuing need for a contribution from the Town and County and potentially
contribution from the Township, but with the knowledge and experience of members, the
amount of the contribution should decrease over time as the cost-revenue gap closes with
future business growth at the Airport. Successful negotiations and additional contributions from
the County and township, could potentially close or eliminate the gap.
An Airport Commission/Board comes with the benefit of the use and availability of skilled and
experienced individuals focused on improving and developing the Airport, consistent with the
objectives of the Town. Airport priorities are their main concern and as appointed persons
they are not in conflict with other Town priorities.
This governance model offers many attractive features for Tillsonburg Regional Airport. If a
Commission/Board is implemented, it should reduce the amount of financial contributions
required to support operations and development, relieve the municipal Councillors of the
additional workload, provide a dedicated effort to develop and promote the Airport, and bring
enhanced credibility to the marketing of the facility to business and governments.
3.3.5 Town Owned and Airport Authority Operated
This option is appropriate if a large Airport Authority wishes to have a smaller airport to
enhance their network of services or as a competitive advantage to other airports. This is not
a common governance structure in Canada for regional and community airports.
Most satellite airports for large Airport Authorities were part of the original transfer from the
federal government. In this model, the Airport Authority becomes the tenant at the airport and
the Town becomes the landlord. Depending on the arrangement, the Town could be removed
from operational responsibilities and liabilities.
Page 434 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
15
Under this model, the Airport Authority makes and carries out all decisions concerning airport
planning, funding, construction, customer relations, and meeting all applicable laws and
regulations. Town employees become employees of the Airport Authority in the initial stages,
after which collective bargaining processes affect the future hiring and compensation for airport
employees.
3.3.6 Airport Authority Owned and Operated
The Airport Authority form of governance is most applicable for very large airports with high
volumes of commercial and private aircraft operations. The Authority is created by a Provincial
statute which gives it significant powers to charge fees and incur debt. The Authority has full
power to plan, develop and operate the airport. This model is expensive to operate and is
generally not applicable to a regional and community airports.
Table 3.1 summarizes some of the significant features of each governance model.
Table 3.1 – Significant Airport Governance Features
Governance Option Characteristics Relevant to Tillsonburg Regional Airport
Positive Negative
Divestiture or Sale of Airport -No involvement in Airport
ownership, operation, or funding.
-No managerial effort required
after sale.
-No annual operating deficit to
cover
-Loss of future potential
economic generator for region.
-Buyer difficult to find if Airport is
currently subsidized.
-Cost to sell could be significant
(environmental responsibilities,
obligations to those at the Airport
site with leases, etc.).
-Loss of future marketing tool to
encourage business
development.
-Significant effort and political will
required to sell Airport. Very
difficult to find an “acceptable
buyer” (politically acceptable,
acceptable to aviation and
business community, etc.)
-May include commitment for
significant upgrades and financial
assistance in the short term. This
may include tree removal at end
of runway, environmental
remediation around fuel tanks,
etc.
- Use of lands may be
inconsistent with region priorities
-New owner may be a competitor
in some future aviation or
development opportunities.
-May be difficult to argue against
the perception that the Airport is
being run for profit and not in the
best interest of the region
-Moderate to high cost to
implement.
Page 435 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
16
Governance Option Characteristics Relevant to Tillsonburg Regional Airport
Positive Negative
Town Owned and Operated
(Status Quo)
-Airport available for future
development.
-Governments maintain control
over future airport planning and
development.
-Communications with Council
very direct and frequent.
-Use as a tool for economic
development.
-Ensure consistency with local,
regional, and provincial plans.
-No cost to implement
-Subsidies may be needed from
local government tax base.
-Lack of knowledge to operate
an airport in various government
levels.
-No assurance of availability of
appropriate airport related skills.
-Potential for missed business
opportunities.
-Town responsible to administer
the airport operations (hire
manager, training, etc.).
-Town carries safety and any
legislative liabilities
(Environment, employee safety,
aviation safety regulations etc.).
-Managerial effort to operate the
airport.
-Town staff time used on airport
issues.
-Financial risk borne by the Town
(all losses are the responsibility
of the taxpayers).
-Fee increases are a political
issue.
-Operational risk (i.e. aircraft
accident, fire, etc.).
-Specialized airport knowledge
not normally part of the Town
skill set (i.e. airport operations,
aviation planning, etc.).
-Raising capital on outside
markets could be difficult.
-Major infrastructure
improvements will be difficult to
fund within the Town budget.
Page 436 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
17
Governance Option Characteristics Relevant to Tillsonburg Regional Airport
Positive Negative
Town Owned and Contractor
Operated
-Removes day to day operating
responsibility.
-Government officials have
reduced time commitment.
-Could be more costly (operator
must make a profit) A party
willing to operate the airport for
little or no cost would be very
helpful (there may be very few
potential groups prepared to do
this).
-Airport may not be developed in
a direction in the best interest of
the Town and other surrounding
townships or County
-Town carries any safety and
legislative liabilities.
-Private contractor may not be
willing or able to pursue new
opportunities for airport
development.
-Little incentive for operator to
cut costs or make efficiency
gains.
-Some Town managerial effort to
manage the airport.
-Financial risk remains if revenue
does not exceed costs.
-Some specialized knowledge
still required (i.e. knowledgeable
contractor).
-Raising capital on outside
markets could be difficult.
-Moderate cost of
implementation.
Airport Commission/Board -Better expertise to manage the
development of the airport.
-More business-like focus on
running the Airport.
-Commission/Board is
responsible for the day to day
airport management (remove
responsibility from government
levels).
-More likely to find business
opportunities for the airport.
-Better able to find cost cutting
and revenue generating
opportunities.
-Town owns land and can ensure
direct airport development
consistent with municipal plans.
-Low cost of implementation.
-Financial contributions will be
required from all parties
participating in the decision-
making process.
-Loss of direct day-to-day
management of airport by the
Town.
-Town carries safety and any
legislative liabilities
(Environment, employee safety,
aviation safety regulations etc.).
-Financial risk borne by the
Owners (all losses are the
responsibility of the taxpayers).
-Operational risk (i.e. aircraft
accident, fire, etc.).
-Raising capital on outside
markets could be difficult.
-Major infrastructure
improvements will be difficult to
fund within the Town budget.
Page 437 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
18
Governance Option Characteristics Relevant to Tillsonburg Regional Airport
Positive Negative
Town Owned and Airport
Authority Operated
-All operational risk taken by AA.
-All staffing and training done by
AA.
-All labour negotiations done by
AA.
-Good ability to raise capital on
outside markets.
-AA markets and promotes
Airport.
-Local governments removed
from business and customer
relations.
-Must ensure compliance with
Town plans through agreements,
bylaws etc.
-Less able to use airport to
achieve other local government
objectives. Done through
discussion and agreements.
-Representation on Airport
Authority Board would be
minimal.
-Determination of local
representation on larger airport
Board would be difficult.
-AA may not make decisions in
best interest of Airport.
-High cost of implementation.
Airport Authority Owned and
Operated
(This model is most applicable to
very large scheduled passenger
traffic type airports)
-All operational risk taken by AA.
-All staffing and training done by
AA.
-All labour negotiations done by
AA.
-Good ability to raise capital on
outside markets.
-AA markets and promotes
Airport.
-Town continues to own land.
-Significant overhead cost.
-Integration with regional
planning more difficult.
-Requires significant passenger
volumes or a large contribution
to operations is necessary.
-Legislation required.
-More difficult to align with
municipal and Town Planning.
-Legislative and financial risks
remain.
-High cost of implementation.
3.3.7 Governance Model Rankings
Based on HM Aero’s research, analysis, stakeholder consultations and our understanding of
effective airport governance in Canada, the governance models examined as part of our study
have been ranked from one (most recommended), to five (least recommended) as they apply
to Tillsonburg Regional Airport:
1. Commission/Board
2. Town Owned and Operated (Status Quo)
3. Town Owned and Contractor Operated
4. Town Owned and Airport Authority Operated
5. Airport Authority
6. Sell (Divest) Airport
Page 438 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
19
3.3.8 Recommended Governance Model
In examining the range of governance options, it is HM Aero’s opinion that the governance
model best suited for Tillsonburg Regional Airport is the creation of an Airport
Commission/Board to plan, develop, operate, maintain, and market the Airport.
This model involves the creation of a semi-autonomous Board or Commission that oversees
all aspects of the airport operations independent of Council (aside from annual reporting on
budgets and capital funding requirements). Under this recommended airport governance
model, Tillsonburg Regional Airport would continue to be owned by the Town or the Town with
partnering municipalities sharing in funding operational deficits and capital projects.
Furthermore, it is expected that a Commission/Board model can be operated at no additional
cost (aside from potential costs to create a Board/Commission Mandate/Terms of Reference).
An example of this model is Lake Simcoe Airport. It serves general aviation, flight training and
commercial corporate jet activities. The Airport is jointly owned by the City of Barrie (60%), the
County of Simcoe (20%) and the Township of Oro-Medonte (20%) and is managed by a
Municipal Service Corporation (Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Inc.) which is responsible for
the Airport’s operation and maintenance. The Lake Simcoe Regional Airport Inc. Board of
Directors is comprised of nine members, five of which are City of Barrie appointees; two of
which are County of Simcoe appointees and two of which are appointed by the Township of
Oro-Medonte.
3.4 Recommended Commission/Board Structure
The composition and operational structure of a new Airport Commission/Board will be crucial
to its success, and the future success of the Airport. Based on our understanding of the current
constraints and challenges related to airport governance at Tillsonburg Regional Airport, HM
Aero is recommending that a Commission/Board be formed to govern the Airport on behalf of
Town Council. Commission/Board development characteristics for the Town’s review and
consideration are presented below:
Mandate: The Commission/Board will be responsible for decision making with respect to the
operations, planning, maintenance, and development of the Airport.
Reporting Structure: In the short-term it is recommended that the Airport Commission/Board
report to Town Council on an annual or bi-annual basis to report on airport financial and
development matters.
Commission/Board Members: A Board comprised of a Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary,
Treasurer, and up to five Directors, all of whom represent a function critical to the operation
and management of an airport (i.e. marketing, human resources, engineering, law, etc.). If
representation on the Board by elected officials is strongly desired by Town Council, it is
recommended that only one elected official be appointed, mainly to act as a communication
conduit between Council and the Board.
Airport Operations: An Airport Administrator responsible for the day-to-day management of
the Airport. The Airport Administrator would report to the Chair of the Board and coordinate
with the Town to provide required airport maintenance equipment and personnel. Under this
model, airport staff may not be Town employees, but could be employees of a third-party
service provider if determined to be financially feasible.
Membership Term: A Board member’s term could be from 3-5 years. It is recommended that
initially terms be offset to avoid all terms ending in the same year. This strategy assists in the
Commission’s/Board’s collective preservation of knowledge.
Page 439 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
20
Evaluation: It is recommended that the success of the Commission/Board be measured to
confirm if the governance model selected is appropriate and is achieving its goals.
Performance indicators may include, but are not limited to:
• financial performance (reduction in annual cost-revenue gaps);
• timeframe for decision making (i.e. development approvals);
• absorption rate of commercial lots; and
• aircraft traffic.
A combination of the above metrics will allow for a wholistic evaluation of Commission/Board
performance. In addition, the overall medium to long term success of the Commission/Board
can be measured by further reductions in annual cost-revenue gaps, further development of
recreational and commercial facilities, and traffic growth at the Airport.
3.5 Partnership
Although an Airport Commission/Board is recommended for the future governance of
Tillsonburg Regional Airport, it is crucial that the future ownership of, or financial responsibility
for the Airport also be determined.
Based on the existing airport ownership situation and considering Tillsonburg Regional Airport
lands are outside the official Town limits, it is recommended that an airport funding partnership
between the County of Oxford, the Township of South West Oxford, and the Town of
Tillsonburg be established. The partnership should cover funding contribution (both ongoing
and significant infrastructure improvements), nominating authorities for membership on a
Commission/Board, and participation in decisions on development plans, marketing plans, and
budgets.
Building partnerships with the Township of South West Oxford and the County of Oxford may
be challenging, especially considering their historic interest in the operation and development
of Tillsonburg Regional Airport. Negotiating Strategies for approaching the County and
Township are presented in Section 5.3.2.
Page 440 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
21
4 BASELINE AIRPORTS COMPARISON
4.1 Comparative Airport Selection
Key information was collected and analyzed for several airports in southern Ontario that are
considered comparable to Tillsonburg Regional Airport from an airport role and traffic profile
perspective.
Table 4.1 identifies four airports within southern Ontario, and their current governance model.
Table 4.1 – Governance Models: Southern Ontario Airports
Airport Owner Operator Governance Model
Brantford City of Brantford Brantford Flying Club City Department
Chatham-Kent Municipality of
Chatham-Kent
Z3 Aviation Municipal Department
Niagara Central City of Welland, City of
Port Colbourn, Town of
Pelham, Wainfleet
Township
Niagara Central Airport
Commission
Airport Commission
St. Thomas City of St. Thomas City of St. Thomas City Department
Tillsonburg Town of Tillsonburg Town of Tillsonburg Town Department
As illustrated in Table 4.1, there are a variety of airport governance models currently in use at
airports within southern Ontario. This demonstrates that each airport owner has selected a
governance model for their facility that best fits the needs of the community. The effectiveness
of airport governance models should not be measured simply by comparing one airport to
another with a similar infrastructure and traffic profile. Several factors should be considered
when identifying an appropriate airport governance model (e.g. how can the airport be best
positioned to achieve economic growth, what options provide the most flexibility for external
funding opportunities, are there several levels of municipal government that have a stake in
the Airport, etc.).
Consultations with each of the airports listed in Table 4.1 indicate a mix of both challenges and
success factors with their governance models. For instance, one airport sited constraints to
future development as a result of their current governance model, as approval is required from
each of the three funding municipalities – limiting the potential for future airport development
and attraction of new businesses to the airport as Council members can have conflicting
opinions of the value of airport investment.
Considering the above, the selection of an appropriate airport governance model is specific to
each airport and should not be determined simply by comparison with other airports with
similar airport infrastructure and air traffic profiles.
Page 441 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
22
4.2 Tillsonburg Regional Airport
Select comparators were identified for Tillsonburg Regional Airport to focus the Baseline
Airports Comparison and aid the reader in better understanding competition in the General
Aviation market in southern Ontario. Those comparators are presented in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Characteristics for Comparison
Population Served 16,000
Runways (Asphalt) 3 (1)
Longest Runway 5,502 ft (1,677 m)
Owner Town of Tillsonburg
Operator Town of Tillsonburg
Aviation Fuel 100LL, JA-1
Best Published Approach (MDA) LNAV (416')
Landing Fee No
Facility Fee No
Parking Fee 6/day
Fuel Price (100 LL) $1.92
4.2.1 SWOT Analysis
Research, analysis, stakeholder consultations and HM Aero’s understanding of the aviation
markets and airports in southern Ontario was applied to identify the relevant Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats related to the current and future operation of
Tillsonburg Regional Airport.
Strengths
• Runway length – at 5,502’, Tillsonburg has one of the longest runways for a regional
or community airport within south-central Ontario. Of the comparator airports, it is
matched only by Chatham-Kent. Runway length is of importance in attracting new
aviation businesses or corporate users. A longer runway allows aviation businesses to
accept larger aircraft and allows corporate users to access more markets with fewer
stops for fuel.
• New terminal building – the first impression of an airport for itinerant pilots or residents
is often the terminal building. By accommodating a restaurant, the terminal building is
now a gathering place for the community, as well as a destination for itinerant
recreational aircraft. Furthermore, the presence of the restaurant allows local
residents to visit the airport and can lead to more positive impressions of the facility
within the community.
• Anchor Tenant – consistent growth at an airport is often facilitated by an anchor tenant.
CHAA’s specialty in WWII training aircraft maintenance and preservation has made
Tillsonburg Regional Airport a destination for many aviation historians. These tenants
regularly use the services of other aviation businesses at the Airport and can be crucial
in developing an aviation supply chain.
Page 442 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
23
• Reputation as well-managed – consultations indicated that Tillsonburg Regional
Airport has a strong reputation for being well-managed within the southern Ontario
aviation community. This reputation is a form of marketing that can help to attract new
businesses and tenants as well as itinerant pilots.
• Far from noise sensitive land uses – because the Airport is approximately 4 kilometres
from the Town limits and surrounded by agricultural lands, there is a small likelihood
of complaints concerning aircraft noise as the Airport develops and activity levels
increase.
Weaknesses
• Displaced threshold Runway 26 – the current operational runway length is restricted
by the presence of obstacles (trees) prior to the threshold of Runway 26. In order for
Tillsonburg Regional Airport to benefit from the full 5,502’ runway length, it is
recommended that these trees be removed as soon as practicable.
• Site servicing – the Airport lands are not provided with municipal services (e.g. potable
water, sewer) from the Town and future capacity to provide electrical services to larger-
scale aviation commercial operators is limited. To attract new businesses and tenants
wanting to develop new facilities and business at the facility, the provision of site
servicing should be considered (potentially addressed and costed within a formal
Airport Master Plan).
• Weather information – the Airport does not currently operate and maintain
instrumentation to provide weather information services to aircraft operators.
Consideration should be given to providing weather observation and reporting
capability at the Airport.
• Traffic congestion during peak periods – as only one taxiway connection is provided
to connect the main apron to Runway 08-26, aircraft congestion can occur during peak
periods when arriving aircraft are required to exit the runway environment, but the
presence of an aircraft waiting to enter the runway restricts aircraft flow.
Opportunities
• Partnership with CHAA – an opportunity could be explored for the Airport to partner
with CHAA to highlight the historical significance of Tillsonburg Regional Airport and
its role as a BCATP training facility. Tillsonburg Regional Airport could be further
marketed as a destination for aviation historians within Canada, and internationally.
• OPP support facilities – consultations indicated the possibility of the Ontario Provincial
Police increasing their activity at Tillsonburg Regional Airport, potentially via the
development of a new hangar facility (or through a lease agreement). The OPP has a
forensics lab in Tillsonburg and the OPP operates the Ontario Police College in nearby
Aylmer Ontario. Tillsonburg Regional Airport is the closest airport to these OPP
operations, and there is a potential for increased personnel transport via air, or to better
support aerial speed enforcement activities on nearby Highway 401. Furthermore,
OPP Aviation Services operate helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft to support search
and rescue (SAR); support of specialized units; support during public demonstrations;
transportation of personnel; advanced operational photography; search and
containment of escapees; regional traffic or crime initiatives; drug eradication; and
evidence searches. These could also be potential opportunities for Tillsonburg
Regional Airport.
Page 443 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
24
• Airport business expansion – the quality of the aviation businesses at Tillsonburg
Regional Airport may allow the Airport to grow through the expansion of the current
businesses as well as attraction of new business.
Threats
• Competitor airports – there are many airports in southern Ontario serving similar roles
and competing for the same business opportunities. While Tillsonburg Regional Airport
does have some unique characteristics, it does not differ significantly from its
competitors. Identifying and exploiting a competitive advantage will be important for
future business development at Tillsonburg Regional Airport.
• Availability of funding – while the Airport is performing well financially (based on HM
Aero’s experience working with similar airports across Canada), future capital projects
will require external funding or grants. Because Tillsonburg Regional Airport does not
have scheduled passenger services, there are limited grants or programs that can be
accessed for capital funding.
4.3 Comparative Analysis
Four airports were selected for comparison with Tillsonburg Regional Airport based on nine
specific criteria, including but not limited to: airport certification, number of runways, longest
runway, aviation fuel provided, lowest IFP minima, landing fees, facility fees, parking fees, and
fuel prices.
For the purpose of the Feasibility Analysis study, the following four airports were selected as
suitable comparisons to Tillsonburg based on their general infrastructure and traffic profiles:
1. Brantford Airport;
2. Chatham-Kent Airport;
3. Niagara Central Dorothy Rungeling Airport; and
4. St Thomas Municipal Airport.
An analysis of comparative airports is presented in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3 – Comparative Airport Analysis
Airport Brantford Chatham-Kent Niagara
Central
St. Thomas Tillsonburg
Certified/Registered Registered Certified Registered Certified Registered
Runways (Asphalt) 3 (3) 1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 3 (1)
Longest Runway 5036 ft
(1535 m)
5502 ft
(1677 m)
3493 ft
(1065 m)
5013 ft
(1528 m)
5502 ft
(1677 m)
Aviation Fuel 100LL, JA-1 100LL, JA-1 100LL, JA-1 100LL, JA-1 100LL, JA-1
Lowest IFP Minima
(MDA)
LNAV (448') LPV (250') LNAV (519') LPV (250') LNAV (416’)
Landing Fee None None None None None
Facility Fee None None None $95/day
(turboprop)
None
Parking Fee No $10/night None $10/day $6/day
Fuel Price (100LL) $1.99 $2.20 $2.14 $1.95 $1.92
Page 444 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
25
4.4 Findings
HM Aero’s review of the selected comparator airports identified the following findings:
1. With three runways and one equal in length to the longest of the comparator airports,
Tillsonburg Regional Airport is equipped with competitive airfield infrastructure that can
be further utilized and expanded to support increased business and economic
development within the region.
2. All the comparator airports offer aviation fuel for sale with Tillsonburg Regional Airport
having significantly the lowest 100LL price.
3. All the comparator airports have Instrument Flight Procedures (IFPs) providing
increased airport availability during periods of poor weather and/or visibility. Relative
to the comparators, Tillsonburg Regional Airport supports an LNAV IFP to Runway
with a Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) of 416’ AGL. This level of airport availability
could be improved through commissioning of an obstacle survey and tree removal
program. Chatham-Kent and St. Thomas have the IFPs with the lowest MDAs (250’).
Lower MDAs allow aircraft to access an airport in poorer weather conditions. Providing
lower MDAs increases overall annual airport availability and is an attractive feature
when marketing facilities to new businesses considering relocating to the site.
4. The fee structures at the comparator airports varies widely. Most do not charge a
landing fee for light aircraft, and approximately half charge an overnight parking fee.
One comparator airport currently charges a facility fee (combination landing and
terminal fee) to commercially registered turbine aircraft.
Westerly View of Main Apron – Tillsonburg Regional Airport
Page 445 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
26
5 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AND REVENUE STRATEGY
5.1 Budget Sustainability
The success of many regional airports in Canada is measured not in the profit generated, but
their financial sustainability. The goal of most airports is to be financially self-sufficient and
therefore not require grants or subsidies from the communities they serve. Depending on the
environment in which the airport operates and the population it serves, the services it provides,
and the management and governance structure in place, there may be considerable
challenges to achieving this goal.
The goal of most airports is not necessarily to be financially profitable, but to facilitate greater
economic benefit in a region. Though an airport may be perceived as a draw on municipal
resources, it is crucial to understand that the expenses accrued at an airport are frequently
offset by economic gains within the community. These economic gains often far outweigh an
airport’s operating deficit (as described within the Economic Impact section of this report).
HM Aero has completed a financial performance review at Tillsonburg Regional Airport for the
past five years to evaluate the financial sustainability of the facility. A summary of the Airport’s
operating costs and revenues as well as the overall financial situation are presented below.
5.1.1 Revenue
Revenue at the Airport is generated in a variety of ways including, but not limited to:
• fuel sales;
• aircraft parking fees; and
• land and other rentals.
Overall, revenue has decreased steadily over the past five years. During this period fuel sales
have declined year over year and revenue from land rentals has varied widely. The revenue
from aircraft parking fees was not an individual line item within the financial breakdown
provided to HM Aero, but it believed to be relatively small compared to fuel sales and land
rentals.
5.1.2 Expense
The items contributing most to the expenses at the Airport include:
• salary and wages;
• materials and inventory;
• subconsultant expenses; and
• debt (principal and interest).
Like revenue, expenses have also decreased steadily over the past five years. While this may
be the result of the decrease in revenue (e.g. lower fuel sales require less fuel to be
purchased), it also appears to be the result of fiscal responsibility. For example, salary and
wages increased year over year until 2018, where it dropped sharply suggesting
management’s efforts to avoid increasing annual deficits were successful. Subconsultant
expenses have ranged from $26,000 to $44,000 since 2015. The requirement for small and
regional airports to rely on consultants is a common practice as tasks like preparing master
plans require specialized skills, but those skills are only needed every 5 to 10 years. Finally,
debt as an operating expense has remained constant between $35,000 and $42,000 during
this period.
Page 446 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
27
5.1.3 Current Financial Situation
Generally, the Airport’s financial position is considered to be strong based on HM Aero’s
understanding of the facility and how its financial position compares to similar airports in
Canada. The Tillsonburg Regional Airport has been successful in managing expenses relative
to revenues, which has resulted in a consistent annual deficit. A summary of the Airport’s
recorded revenues and expenses for the past five years is presented in Table 5.1 and
illustrated in Figure 5.1.
While managing expenses versus revenue is one means of controlling deficits, the Airport
should also investigate a revenue strategy to increase revenues and reduce or eliminate the
gap between expenses and revenues. HM Aero has identified a high-level revenue strategy
for Tillsonburg Regional Airport in Section 5.2; however, a more detailed revenue generation
strategy should be prepared as part of a formal Airport Master Plan.
Table 5.1 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Actual and Budgeted Finances – 2015-2019
Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Source Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Budget
General
Revenue $381,054 $316,713 $289,922 $269,726 $265,000
Expense $533,614 $475,022 $499,458 $422,135 $404,400
General Subtotal -$152,560 -$158,309 -$209,536 -$152,409 -$139,400
Land Rentals
Revenue $91,012 $146,530 $154,600 $105,600 $104,900
Expense $8,937 $15,370 $12,666 $11,137 $-
Land Rentals Subtotal $82,075 $131,160 $141,934 $94,463 $104,900
Building Maintenance
Revenue $4,320 $4,320 $6,960 $29,668 $6,000
Expense $18,617 $28,927 $23,167 $31,513 $24,400
Building Maintenance Subtotal -$14,297 -$24,607 -$16,207 -$1,845 -$18,400
Total Revenue $476,386 $467,563 $451,482 $404,994 $375,900
Total Expense $561,168 $519,319 $535,291 $464,785 $428,800
TOTAL -$84,782 -$51,756 -$83,809 -$59,791 -$52,900
Page 447 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
28
Figure 5.1 – Tillsonburg Regional Airport Revenue and Expense – 2015-2019
Following review of the Airport’s financial performance and considering the Airport’s potential
to become a stronger economic driver within the region, it is recommended that the Town not
divest the Airport but investigate the implementation of a Revenue Strategy to reduce or
potentially eliminate the annual operating deficit.
5.2 Revenue Strategy
The Revenue Strategy presented below intends to increase the Airport’s net revenues by
altering the current fee structure and by introducing new revenue streams where appropriate.
The Strategy considers both aeronautical and non-aeronautical revenues.
5.2.1 Current Aeronautical Revenues
Aviation Fuel Surcharge
Review of competing airports suggests Tillsonburg Regional Airport can increase 100LL fuel
prices and still be competitive within the marketplace. A preliminary scan supports increasing
the price of 100LL by $0.02/L. This increase would maintain the Airport’s competitive
advantage while generating additional revenue.
Aircraft Parking Fee
The Airport currently charges $6/day for aircraft parking. Comparable airports either do not
charge a parking fee or charge $10/day. It is recommended that the Airport increase the
parking fee from $6/day to $10/day and increase the monthly parking fee from $42 to $70. This
strategy could decrease the operating deficit while not increasing operating expenses.
$-
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Net Revenue Net Expenses
Page 448 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
29
Landing/Facility Fees
The Airport does not currently charge a landing fee. Comparable to St. Thomas, the Airport
should consider the application of a facilities fee to commercially registered turbine aircraft.
Records indicate that the Airport serves approximately 50 corporate or commercially
registered aircraft per year including DND, OPP, MNR, and other charters.
It is recommended that a facility fee be implemented at $100/day, and the aircraft operator be
compensated 1 day of fee per visit if a minimum value of fuel is purchased. It is estimated that
this fee could yield noticeable revenue increase in the future.
The Airport should also consider charging landing/facility fees to air ambulance operators
(such as Ornge), a similar practice amongst comparable airports in Ontario.
Commercial Land Rental Rate
The Airport currently charges $0.29/sq. ft./year for commercial land. While comparable to other
airports, there may be an opportunity to increase the rate marginally ($0.03-$0.04). While not
a significant increase to an existing or prospective tenant, this strategy has the potential to
have significant positive impacts on future revenue generation, especially as additional tenants
and businesses establish at the Airport.
Other Aeronautical Revenues
The following fees were reviewed and determined to be appropriate. It is recommended that
these fees be monitored and adjusted for inflation annually:
• Fuel Call-Out Fee;
• Boardroom Rental Fee;
• Infrastructure Fee;
• Airport Maintenance Fee;
• Airport Administration Fee; and
• Hangar Application Fee.
It is important to note that local airport users and tenants may oppose any increases to airport
fees; however, clear communications to the airport tenants and users as to the intent and
benefit of the rate increases (funding capital improvements, planning studies, etc.) is
recommended to mitigate potential negative impacts.
5.2.2 New Aeronautical Revenues
Special Events
Tillsonburg Regional Airport currently hosts some special events. It is recommended that the
Airport plan or encourage the planning of additional special events for two reasons:
1. To increase revenue for the Airport and the community through fuel sales, parking,
(landing fee may be charged or waived), food sales at restaurant, hotels, car rentals,
etc.
2. To increase public exposure of the Airport.
Develop Aircraft Hangars
Consideration of constructing Town owned aircraft hangars as an opportunity to increase
revenue, through the leasing of hangar space (although developers should still be permitted
to develop their own facilities on leased airport lands). Prior to investing in a capital project of
this scope, HM Aero recommends the following steps:
Page 449 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
30
1. Complete a detailed Business Case that demonstrates the financial feasibility of
hangar construction including, but not limited to:
a. number of hangars proposed;
b. cost of construction and operation;
c. proposed lease rate and term;
d. minimum sustainable occupancy;
e. market demand;
f. timeframe for ROI; and
g. risk assessment.
2. Complete an Airport Master Plan to determine appropriate locations for Town owned
hangar development
5.2.3 Current Non-Aeronautical Revenues
Agricultural Land Rental
The agricultural land leases on Airport undergo a competitive tender process every five years
with the highest bid selected. The lease rates of these lands are lower on average than other
lands in the County due to poor drainage. This process is appropriate and it is recommended
that it continue.
5.2.4 New Non-Aeronautical Revenues
There are also non-aeronautical revenue opportunities that are not currently collected by
Tillsonburg Regional Airport. These revenues are identified and detailed below.
Sell Portion of Non-Aviation Lands
To fund a capital program or to pay off debts, the Airport may elect to sell a portion of its non-
aviation lands. This strategy may result in a large, but one-time cash inflow. This strategy has
been used by the Airport previously to fund taxiway improvements. While effective, this
strategy is not a sustainable solution and can only generate revenue until surplus lands are
exhausted. An Airport Master Plan should be completed prior to selecting lands to sell to
protect for the long-term development of the Airport.
Request Increase in County of Oxford Contribution
The Town of Tillsonburg could solicit an increase in the annual contribution from the County
of Oxford. The annual contribution currently provided by the County is $5,000. While this
contribution aids in the operation of the airport, it appears to be an arbitrary amount not tied to
a metric (e.g. population). However, it is important that the value of any requested increase be
justifiable and consider the Airport’s current financial performance. It would also be beneficial
to demonstrate what the County gains from further supporting the Airport, as well as identifying
the facility within their Transportation Master Plan.
Solicit Contribution from the Township of South West Oxford
The Town may also elect to solicit a contribution from the Township of South West Oxford.
Because Tillsonburg Regional Airport is within the Township, the Township collects tax
revenue from the Town and the airport tenants. While these tax revenues do contribute to fire
suppression at the Airport, the Airport may wish to request an annual contribution or a
percentage of the tax revenue. As with the County, it would also be beneficial to demonstrate
what the Township would gain from supporting the Airport.
Page 450 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
31
Additional Non-Aeronautical Revenue
Other non-aeronautical revenue options that the Airport may want to consider include:
• RV and boat storage;
• warehousing;
• self-storage;
• freight forwarding; and
• solar energy generation
It is important to note that, while additional non-aeronautical revenue methods may increase
the Airport’s revenue, it also results in those tenants or businesses paying tax to the Township.
If it is not necessary for a business to be located at the Airport, the Town may wish to promote
businesses establishing within the Town limits.
5.3 Negotiation Strategy
5.3.1 Background
A negotiation is a discussion aimed at reaching an agreement while avoiding argument or
dispute.
There are several issues of interest to the Town of Tillsonburg, Oxford County, and the
Township of South West Oxford including airport financing, airport ownership, revenue
sharing, and future airport development (among others). These issues will need to be resolved
to allow the Airport to grow and become a greater economic generator for the Town, Township,
and County.
There have previously been discussions that did not result in an agreement amongst the
parties. To have all three governments participate appropriately in the development of
Tillsonburg Regional Airport, some form of negotiation will be necessary.
There are three major elements in a negotiation:
• process;
• behaviour; and
• substance.
Process determines how the negotiation will unfold. Will it be a one on one negotiation, a group
on group discussion, a single meeting, or a series of meetings? This must be determined and
agreed by all parties.
Behaviour identifies who will be involved and how they will act. The persons involved need to
be objective and trusted by all parties and have the requisite negotiating skills (e.g. listening,
focus, composure, etc.).
Substance is what is being negotiated – what are the issues available for discussion and what
are the issues not available? This will include determining the needs of both parties (i.e. what
do they wish to achieve), developing a list of possible solutions that may work for both parties,
and choosing the most appropriate solution. The Town of Tillsonburg will need to identify the
substance prior to initiating the negotiation process. This will require research and agreement
by the appropriate Councils.
Page 451 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
32
The potential issues that may form part of the Town of Tillsonburg’s negotiation strategy are
financial support (ongoing and large projects), ownership, access to decision making (Board
membership), and municipal servicing and services. Currently, the County’s and Township’s
issues of concern are unknown. It is important to know these issues prior to selecting a
negotiating strategy.
In a negotiation, four principles must be kept in mind:
1. You must separate the people from the problem. The issues should be decided on
merit rather than influenced by emotion.
2. It is important to focus on the interest of the negotiating parties and not their
positions. What are the issues being negotiating and not the current stated position of
the parties?
3. Do not be too narrow in the definition of the potential issues for negotiation. It is
necessary to generate options that are mutually beneficial.
4. The outcome of the negotiation should be based on objective criteria, not who won
and lost on any issue.
5.3.2 Negotiating Strategies
There are effectively five strategies for negotiation:
1. Competitive;
2. Collaborative;
3. Compromising;
4. Avoiding; and
5. Accommodating.
The Competitive strategy is an approach where one party wins at the expense of the other.
This is sometimes referred to as a win-lose or the Bargaining approach. It assumes
compromise is not an option and there is a fixed amount of assets to negotiate. If one wins the
other must lose.
The Collaborative strategy is an approach characterized by an “I win you win” goal with both
parties having their needs met. This strategy is often used when trying to build a long-term
partnership.
The Compromise strategy assumes both parties can give something up to achieve an
acceptable outcome. One party must convince the other to settle for less than everything they
want to resolve the remaining issues.
The Avoiding strategy is a conflict laden approach. It assumes one party ignores the other
parties’ wishes to achieve their own goals. This is seldom successful unless one party has all
the power in the negotiation.
Finally, the Accommodating strategy is characterized by an “I lose you win” approach. It is
used when the interest of one party has caused harm to the other party and the relationship
needs to be repaired.
Page 452 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
33
5.3.3 Analysis
In the case of involvement of the County and Township in the financing and decision-making
aspects of Tillsonburg Regional Airport, the Competitive, Avoiding, and Accommodating
approaches are not the most appropriate strategies. Any negotiation concerning the
Tillsonburg Regional Airport will require some compromise by all parties. Therefore, a
Competitive strategy is not likely to succeed.
The Avoiding approach may quickly lead to conflict and the deterioration of relationships.
Because none of the three parties have had harm done to them, the Accommodating approach
may well be desirable for the County and Township but would not be in the best interest of the
Town of Tillsonburg.
It is recommended that the Town consider the Collaborative or Compromising strategies for
negotiations with the County and Township. Which of these two is selected will depend on
the process, behaviour, and substance identified by the Town.
5.3.4 Recommended Strategy
A framework of the recommended negotiation strategy has been prepared defining the high-
level steps to:
• discuss Township and County participation in governance;
• negotiate financial contributions; and
• and initiate a new governance model.
These steps are presented in Figure 5.2 and are detailed below.
Figure 5.2 – Recommended Negotiating Strategy Framework
Page 453 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
34
Present Feasibility Analysis Study to SWOX and Oxford County
It is recommended that the Town arrange to present the Feasibility Analysis Study to the
Township and County (either together or separately), to identify the study objectives, findings,
and recommendations. These presentations will be an opportunity to update the parties on the
current activity and businesses located at the Airport as well as the benefit the Airport brings
to the Town, Township, and County. Examples of these benefits include, but are not limited
to:
• Local Employment – there are businesses located at the Airport that employee
residents of the Town, Township, and County. With respect the aviation businesses,
these jobs are highly skilled and specialized.
• Economic Benefit – In addition to the Full-time Equivalent (FTE) positions generated
by the on-airport businesses, the Airport also attracts itinerant aircraft through flight
training and other General Aviation activities. These pilots often make purchases on-
airport (e.g. aviation fuel, restaurant) as well as in the Town, Township, and County
(e.g. hotels, restaurants, grocery stores, rental cars, etc.).
• Access to Corporate Aircraft – numerous organizations have accessed the region
using corporate aircraft via Tillsonburg Regional Airport in support of ongoing business
in the region, or business development. Additionally, corporations have previously
elected to use the facilities in the terminal building to conduct business.
• Access to Government Services – numerous government agencies make regular use
of Tillsonburg Regional Airport including, but not limited to:
o ORNGE Air Ambulance;
o Department of National Defence (DND);
o Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR); and
o Ontario Provincial Police (OPP).
• Community Gathering Place – both aviation enthusiasts and the general public gather
at the airport to access the aviation facilities as well as the restaurant, which is the only
restaurant in the Township.
Additionally, these presentations may be an opportunity to initiate preliminary discussions on
‘substance’ or issues of interest of the Township and County. It is recommended that these
presentations be made to the respective CAOs of the Township and County.
Confirm Willingness to Participate in Airport Governance
Either during the discussions following the presentations or thereafter, the it is recommended
that the Town demonstrate to the Township and County the benefits of participation in the
governance of the Airport. The primary benefit is the opportunity to participate in the decision-
making process with respect to the operations, planning, and development of the facility and
the ability to align the asset to the objectives of the respective municipalities. The objective of
these discussions is to confirm the parties’ willingness to participate in the governance of the
Airport in principal.
Page 454 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
35
Negotiate Financial Contributions
Negotiations of financial contributions are recommended to occur in parallel to discussions
concerning participation in governance. Prior to these negotiations, it is important to
understand the causes of the annual operating deficit in detail and the financial contributions
expected of the parties. The Town should also have an expectation of the issues or substance
the Township and County may bring forward as well as their potential responses (i.e. there
may be certain desires from the Township and the County that the Town can provided that are
not related to the Airport that could be used as part of financial negotiation process).
Additionally, to negotiate financial contributions with the County, it will be critical to understand
the rationale for their current annual contribution before hand.
Draft Terms of the Governance and Contribution Structure
Following agreement on participation in governance and annual financial contribution (and
assuming that the Township and the Town agree to further involvement in the Airport), the
parties should collaborate to draft the respective terms of the agreement. Terms will include
number of members of the Commission/Board, representation of each party, and value of the
financial contributions.
Initiate Commission/Board Governance Model
Following agreement on the terms of the governance and contribution structure,
Commission/Board by-laws should be drafted and a Commission/Board established.
Page 455 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
36
6 AERODROME SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
The following sections describe security requirements as they apply to certified airports and
registered aerodromes, relevant prohibitions provided in the Canadian Aviation Regulations
(CARs), the implications of these prohibitions, and recommendations related to aerodrome
security. The intent of this section is to clarify the Town of Tillsonburg’s regulatory
responsibilities in regard to operating a registered aerodrome in Canada.
6.1 Aerodromes, Registered Aerodromes, and Certified Airports
6.1.1 Aerodromes
An aerodrome is defined by the Aeronautics Act as:
Any area of land, water (including the frozen surface thereof) or other supporting surface
used, designed, prepared, equipped or set apart for use either in whole or in part for the
arrival, departure, movement or servicing of aircraft and includes any buildings,
installations and equipment situated thereon or associated therewith.
An unregistered aerodrome in Canada is not obligated to satisfy aerodrome security
requirements.
6.1.2 Registered Aerodromes
Canadian Aviation Regulations (SOR/96-433) Part III Subpart 1 defines the requirements for
an aerodrome to be registered. A summary of the requirements as detailed in CAR 301.01
through 301.07 and CAR 301.09 is presented below:
Inspection – The operator of an aerodrome shall, at the request of a Transport Canada
inspector, allow the inspector access to aerodrome facilities.
Registration – An aerodrome may be registered in the Canada Flight Supplement if the
aerodrome operator provides Transport Canada information including the location,
markings, lighting, use and operation of the aerodrome.
Markers and Markings – Appropriate markers or markings must be provided when a
manoeuvring area (runway, taxiway, apron) is closed.
Warning Notices – the operator of the aerodrome must post notices warning of the
hazard on any public way that is adjacent to the manoeuvring area where low-flying or
taxiing aircraft are likely to be hazardous to pedestrian or vehicular traffic.
Wind Direction Indicator – the operator of the aerodrome must install and maintain at
the aerodrome a wind direction indicator except where the direction of the wind can be
determined by radio or other means such as smoke movement in the air or wind lines on
water.
Lighting – If used at night, the operator is required to provide appropriate lighting or retro-
reflective markers to indicate the edge of runways, taxiways, or other manoeuvring areas
and to denote manoeuvring areas that or closed or otherwise unusable.
Fire Prevention – no person shall, while at an aerodrome, smoke or display an open
flame: on an apron, on an aircraft loading bridge, or in an area where doing so may create
a fire hazard unless authorized or permitted by the operator.
Page 456 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
37
Based on a site inspection, stakeholder consultations and a review of current aeronautical
publications, Tillsonburg Regional Airport is meeting all of the requirements for registered
aerodromes, as per the CARs.
6.1.3 Certified Airports
As stated in Transport Canada’s Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), with respect to
aerodromes that have been issued a certificate and are therefore “certified”, the objective is to
protect the fare-paying public and residents in the vicinity of an airport who do not have the
knowledge or ability to protect themselves and who could be affected by unsafe operations.
This is achieved through ensuring sites are inspected periodically for compliance with
Transport Canada standards for the following elements and services recorded in the
Airport/Heliport Operations Manual:
• obstacle limitation surfaces;
• physical characteristics; marking, lighting, maintenance procedures; and
• emergency response services, etc.
6.2 Prohibitions
In addition to CAR 301.01 – 301.07 and CAR 301.09, which are requirements that must be
satisfied by the aerodrome operator to be registered, CAR 301.08 lists prohibitions which must
be adhered to by everyone, and not only the operator. A sample of these prohibitions provided
below state that no person shall:
• walk, stand, drive a vehicle, park a vehicle or aircraft or cause an obstruction on the
movement area of an aerodrome, except in accordance with permission given by the
operator or air traffic control unit or flight service station.
• Tow an aircraft at night or park an aircraft on an active manoeuvring area at night
unless the aircraft displays the appropriate lighting.
• remove, deface, extinguish or interfere with a marker, marking, light or signal that is
used air navigation.
• display a marker, marking, light or signal that is likely to cause a person to believe that
a place other than an aerodrome is an aerodrome.
• Allow a bird or animal to be unrestrained within the boundaries of an aerodrome unless
to control other birds or animals as permitted by the operator.
6.3 Implications for Tillsonburg Regional Airport
Because Tillsonburg Regional Airport is a registered aerodrome, the Airport is required to
adhere to the standards identified in CAR 301.01-301.07 and 301.09. Additionally, airport staff,
tenants, users, and the general public are required to satisfy the prohibitions listed in CAR
301.08. However, regulations do not state that an operator of a registered aerodrome is
obligated to enforce the prohibitions at all times. Of course, during staffed hours, the operator
would intervene if one of the prohibited activities were observed, but 24-hour security staffing
or monitoring is not a regulatory requirement at Tillsonburg Airport.
Page 457 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
38
However, as stated in the AIM:
Aerodrome operators are encouraged, in the interest of aviation safety, efficiency, and
convenience, to improve their aerodromes beyond the basic regulatory requirements
using, as guidelines, the standards and recommended practices applicable for the
certification of aerodromes as airports, heliports, or water airports.
Aerodrome users are, however, reminded that the improvement of aerodrome physical
characteristics, visual aids, lighting, and markings beyond the basic regulatory
requirements for aerodromes stated in CAR301 is a matter of individual aerodrome
operators’ initiative.
6.4 Aerodrome Security Recommendations
Following review of the airport site and analysis of the applicable regulations, it is
recommended that Tillsonburg Regional Airport consider the following actions:
1. Establish a Primary Security Line (PSL)
As defined in the Canadian Aviation Security Regulations, a Primary Security Line is the
boundary between a restricted area and a non-restricted area at an aerodrome. Though not
required at a registered aerodrome, a PSL, accompanied by fencing and access gates, would
help to establish a restricted area and discourage airside access by those not permitted by the
operator. This may help address some of concerns raised about airside access.
2. Identify PSL Partners
A PSL partner is a business, organization or non-profit that occupies an area that is on an
aerodrome’s primary security line and that includes a restricted area access point. For
example, a commercial lessee on an aerodrome. Understanding who these partners will be
and ensuring they understand their obligation as a PSL partner is critical before the decision
is made to establish a PSL. Establishing a PSL without the buy-in of all tenants and users will
not yield the desired result.
3. Develop an Airport Master Plan
It is recommended that the Airport develop an Airport Master Plan prior to the establishment
of a PSL. Having a plan for future airside commercial development will allow for the installation
of fencing and gates one time and reduced expensive removals and installations resulting from
disorganized or ad hoc development.
4. Review Aerodrome Signage
In the short-term, it is recommended that a review of aerodrome signage in the core area be
conducted to confirm that existing signage effectively indicates a delineation between airside
and groundside areas of the Airport.
Page 458 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
39
7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Conclusions
1. Tillsonburg Regional Airport is a valuable asset and the Airport is performing well
financially. The cost/revenue gap within the financial information is relatively small
compared to many regional and municipal airports in Canada.
2. The economic benefit of the Airport is greater than the on-airport (direct) impacts alone.
Airports are important assets to a community and a region, and this message should be
conveyed amongst the Councils of the Town of Tillsonburg, the County of Oxford and the
Township of South West Oxford.
3. Tillsonburg Regional Airport provides adequate facilities to attract additional aviation
activity and business development at the site. Its proximity to Toronto, the 5,502’ runway
length (once trees are removed), the availability of development lands, and competitive
fees makes it a strong competitor in south-central Ontario.
4. There are opportunities available to decrease the expense-revenue gap through changes
in the current airport fee structure, and potentially through the development of additional
hangars and commercial businesses.
5. The governance structure had previously not facilitated quick decision making and
hindered business development at Tillsonburg Regional Airport. Recently, changes were
made to the decision-making process with respect to hangar development whereby an in-
house development process has been created.
6. The Township and County benefit from the Airport and should consider contribution to the
funding of the Airport. Residents of the County and the Township benefit from the
presence of Tillsonburg Regional Airport and only the residents of the Town of Tillsonburg
financially support the Airport.
7. The future growth and development of the Airport should be consistent with a long-term
plan, connected with the local economy.
8. The Airport is not in violation of the CARs in terms of enforcing airport security provisions,
but some improvements could be made concerning security.
7.2 Recommendations
Immediate and Short-term recommendations are presented below in order of priority:
Immediate Recommendations
1. Review Aerodrome Signage – In the short-term (prior to a Primary Security Line being
established), it is recommended that a review of aerodrome signage in the core area be
conducted to confirm that existing signage effectively indicates a delineation between
airside and groundside areas of the Airport.
2. Investigate Tree Removal Prior to Threshold of Runway 26 – The operational runway
length of Runway 26 is restricted by the presence of trees prior to the threshold. This
results in a displacement of the runway threshold by 1,000’ (reducing the Landing
Distance Available to 4,502’), and potential takeoff restrictions on Runway 08 for larger
aircraft. For Tillsonburg Regional Airport to market and benefit from the full 5,502’ runway
length, it is recommended that the removal of these trees be investigated as soon as
practicable.
Page 459 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
40
3. Complete a Hangar Development Business Case – Prior to constructing new Town-
owned hangars to be leased, a business case should be completed to confirm that this
investment would yield a financial return.
Short-Term Recommendations
4. Implement a Negotiation Strategy – Negotiate with the County of Oxford and Township
of South West Oxford to determine their desire for participation in governance and
increased funding contributions. It is recommended that the Town consider the
collaborative or compromising strategies for negotiations with the County and Township.
The most appropriate approach will be dependent on the substance or issues identified
for the Township and County.
5. Implement a Revenue Strategy – There may be an opportunity to reduce or eliminate
the cost-revenue gap through the implementation of a revised revenue strategy, including
examining the current fee structure. Improved revenue strategies would be identified
within an Airport Master Plan.
6. Implement an Airport Commission/Board Governance Model – Based on the role and
size of Tillsonburg Regional Airport, an Airport Commission/Board was ranked as the
most appropriate governance model. A Commission/Board for Tillsonburg Regional
Airport should be given the authority by Town Council to manage, operate, develop and
market the Airport, with appropriate goal setting and achievement measurements.
Divestiture of the Airport has not been identified as an attractive option for the Town, as
the facility acts as an economic driver for the region and is performing well financially.
7. Complete an Airport Master Plan – An Airport Master Plan is a strategic study used to
define the long-term progressive development of an airport. Tillsonburg Regional Airport
does not currently have a Master Plan, which could be hindering the rate of business
growth at the facility (e.g. the availability of development-ready lands, identification of
marketing tools to promote business growth at the facility, etc.). An Airport Master Plan
would examine all potential future business opportunities and markets for the airport and
would define and cost infrastructure development requirements and a comprehensive
Land Use Plan.
8. Establish a Primary Security Line – Though not obligated, the Airport should define a
Primary Security Line to better delineate the airside and groundside. Establishment of a
Primary Security Line is recommended as part of the development of an Airport Master
Plan whereby fence locations can be identified that support short, medium- and long-term
developments, with minimal future relocations required.
Page 460 of 564
Tillsonburg Regional Airport Feasibility Analysis Study
41
Appendix A - TAAC Terms of Reference
Page 461 of 564
Page 462 of 564
Page 463 of 564
Page 464 of 564
Page 465 of 564
Report Title Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge Shoreline Protection Project
Report No. OPS 19-45
Author Shayne Reitsma, P.Eng., Manager of Engineering
Meeting Type Council Meeting
Council Date October 28, 2019
Attachments Shoreline Protection Options
Page 1 / 4
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-45 Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge Shoreline Protection
Project;
AND THAT the 2019 Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge Shoreline Protection Project be cancelled;
AND FURTHER THAT the shoreline protection of the Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge be
incorporated with other associated rehabilitation work as part of future budget deliberations.
BACKGROUND
The Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge, constructed in approximately 1993, is located 60m west of
Frank Street and Delevan Crescent. The structure is a 3 span girder bridge with a total length
of 61.8m. There is no indication that this structure has received any rehabilitation work since its
installation. During the 2017 OSIM Inspection it was noted that the post and lag abutments,
beam diaphragms, beam girders, bracing and piers all display light to severe corrosion. The
2019 OSIM inspection also noted that rotation/deformation of the diaphragm at the west
abutment has occurred and as well as undermining of the retaining wall footing. Both the 2017
and 2019 OSIM inspections recommend rehabilitation work within the next 1-5 years.
SUMMARY
Current Embankment Condition
The embankments surrounding the Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge have experienced some
erosion and settlement, but are currently in stable condition. The current configuration of the
embankment is susceptible to erosion at the toe of the slope (bottom/water level) and erosion
from surface runoff. Continued erosion will generate an unstable condition which will lead to
settlement of the abutments. Based on recent geotechnical information the current soil
conditions would not be able to support any type of shoreline protection wall structure without
the installation of imported granular base material.
Shoreline Protection Options
Based on geotechnical information staff developed alternative options to facilitate the
requested armour stone shoreline protection retaining wall structure that would accommodate
varying water levels and maintain the current embankments that support the bridge abutments.
Three (3) options were considered. A summary of each option as well as the main advantages
and disadvantages is provided below:
Page 466 of 564
Page 2 / 4
Option A – Short stack armour stone wall
Option A consists of removing and replacing the deteriorating wood retaining wall
with two (2) layers of retaining wall armour stones and rip-rap covering the entire
slope as shown in Figure 3. This option will maintain the existing slope
minimizing the amount of trees will that be damaged/removed. The
disadvantage of this option will be the steep slope (2:1) will still be prone to
erosion and will require regular maintenance to maintain in a good state of repair.
The estimated cost of this option is approximately $115,000.
Option B – Tall stack armour stone wall
Option B would consist of removing and replacing the deteriorated wood
retaining wall with five (5) layers of retaining wall armour stones and rip-rap
covering the entire slope as shown in Figure 1. The main advantage of this
option would be the height provided by the five (5) layers of armour stone; this
decreases the slope of the embankment creating a safer area with less risk of
erosion from surface runoff. The disadvantage of this option is that a majority of
the existing trees would be removed to facilitate construction of a reduced slope.
The estimated cost of Option B is approximately $145,000.
Option C – Terraced armour stone wall
Option C takes a layered/stepped retaining wall approach with 2 sections of
armour stone retaining walls on the west embankment and 3 sections of retaining
walls on the east as shown in Figure 2. The layered/stepped method creates the
safest slope and has the highest structural retaining strength that doesn’t require
rip rap to cover the slope of the embankment or ongoing maintenance. The main
disadvantage of this option is the overall estimated cost of approximately
$195,000.
Following review of geotechnical information, the estimated costs for the scope of work to
properly complete the project and the 2017 and 2019 OSIM Inspection reports it is staff’s
recommendation that the 2019 Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge Shore Line Protection project be
cancelled and combined with the other future rehabilitation work as per the Bridge, Culvert &
Retaining Wall 10-year Capital schedule to reduce overall costs associated with piecemeal
construction.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
Town staff consulted the 2017 and 2019 OSIM Inspection Summary Reports as well as recent
geotechnical information during the development of this report.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The 2019 Capital Budget currently identifies $25,000 for the Hawkins Bridge Shoreline
Protection project as presented by the Lake Lisgar Revitalization Committee during 2019 budget
deliberations. The total estimated cost of current identified rehabilitation works is presented in
the table below (excluding HST).
Page 467 of 564
Page 3 / 4
Estimated Rehabilitation Costs
Construction
Cost Est.
Option B - Tall Stack Armour Stone Wall $145,000
Repair & Reinforce Girder $15,000
Clean and paint structural steel components $100,000
Contingency (15%) $40,000
Engineering (10%) $25,000
Total $325,000
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN
Cancelling the 2019 shoreline protection project for the Hawkins Pedestrian Bridge supports
Objective 1 – Excellence in Local Government of the Community Strategic Plan by
demonstrating accountability and supports Objective 2 – Economic Sustainability of the
Community Strategic Plan through timely planning and renewal of infrastructure assets to reach
their full potential service life.
Page 468 of 564
Page 4 / 4
Report Approval Details
Document Title: OPS 19-45 Hawkins Pedestrain Bridge Shoreline Protection
Project.docx
Attachments: - OPS 19-45 Attachment 1 - Shoreline Protection Options.pdf
Final Approval Date: Oct 22, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Dave Rushton - Oct 22, 2019 - 9:38 AM
Ron Shaw - Oct 22, 2019 - 10:26 AM
Donna Wilson - Oct 22, 2019 - 3:22 PM
Page 469 of 564
002000000021233.6 233.8 234.2 234.8235.2 235.8 237.0237.0235.6235.2234.8234.4234.0233.4233.0232
.
6
233.0233.4233.8233.0233.4233.8234.4234.8235.2235.6236.0236.4236.8232.8232.6233.2233.6234.0232.8234.0234.4234.8235.0235.2235.6236.0236.6236.4232.0
232.2
232.8
233.2
23
3
.
4
23
4
.
0
234
.4234.8
2
3
5
.
2
23
5
.
8
23
6
.
8
23
7
.
6238.0
232.6 233.4233.8234.2234.6235.0235.4235.4235.4235.4233.0
233.4233.8
234.2
234.6
235.2
235.6236.4237.2237.6238.0CONSTRUCTION NORTH
200 Broadway, Suite 204(519) 688-3009Tillsonburg, Ontario, N4G5A7HAWKINS-BRIDGESHORELINE-PROTECTIONLAKE-LISGARNAFIGURE-1Town of TillsonburgNOTESPLAN AND DETAILS - OPTION A013012LAKE LISGARSCALE:101SITE PLANSCALE 1 : 100 201RETAINING WALL CROSS-SECTIONSCALE 1 : 50301RETAINING WALL CROSS-SECTIONSCALE 1 : 50Page 470 of 564
000200021000233.6 233.8 234.2 234.8235.2 235.8 237.0237.0235.6235.2234.8234.4234.0233.4233.0232
.
6
233.0233.4233.8233.0233.4233.8234.4234.8235.2235.6236.0 236.4236.8232.8232.6233.2233.6234.0232.8234.0234.4234.8235.0235.2235.6236.0236.6236.4232.0
232.2
232.8
233.2
23
3
.
4
23
4
.
0
2
3
4
.4234.8
23
5
.
2
23
5
.
8
23
6
.
8
23
7
.
6238.0
232.6 233.4233.8234.2234.6235.0235.4235.4235.4235.4233.0
233.4233.8
234.2
234.6
235.2
235.6236.4237.2237.6238.0CONSTRUCTION NORTH
200 BROADWAY, SUITE 204(519) 688-3009TILLSONBURG, ON, N4G 5A7TOWN OF TILLSONBURGTOWN OF TILLSONBURGHAWKINS BRIDGE SHORELINE PROTECTIONNAFIGURE -2NOTESLAKE LISGARPLAN AND DETAILS - OPTION B013012LAKE LISGARSCALE:101SITE PLANSCALE 1 : 100 201RETAINING WALL CROSS-SECTIONSCALE 1 : 100 HORIZ. 301RETAINING WALL CROSS-SECTIONSCALE 1 : 100 HORIZ. Page 471 of 564
002000000021233.6 233.8 234.2 234.8235.2 235.8 237.0 237.0235.6235.2234.8234.4234.0233.4233.0232
.
6
233.0233.4233.8233.0233.4233.8234.4234.8235.2235.6236.0236.4236.8232.8232.6233.2233.6234.0232.8234.0234.4234.8235.0235.2235.6236.0236.6236.4232.0
232.2
232.8
233.2
23
3
.
4
23
4
.
0
234.4234.8
2
3
5
.
2
23
5
.
8
23
6
.
8
23
7
.
6238.0
232.6 233.4233.8234.2234.6235.0235.4235.4235.4235.4233.0
233.4233.8
234.2
234.6
235.2
235.6236.4237.2237.6238.0CONSTRUCTION NORTH
BROADWAY, SUITE 204(519) 688-3009TILLSONBURG, ON, N4G 5A7TOWN OF TILLSONBURGHAWKINS BRIDGE SHORELINE PROTECTION19-038FIGURE-3NOTESLAKE LISGARPLAN AND DETAILS - OPTION C013012LAKE LISGARSCALE:101SITE PLANSCALE 1 : 100 201RETAINING WALL CROSS-SECTIONSCALE 1 : 100 HORIZ. 301RETAINING WALL CROSS-SECTIONSCALE 1 : 100 HORIZ. Page 472 of 564
Report Title Results for RFP 2019-012 Transit Operations
Report No. OPS 19-46
Author Kevin De Leebeeck, P.Eng. Director of Operations
Meeting Type Council Meeting
Council Date October 28, 2019
Attachments IBI Group Recommendation Letter
Page 1 / 5
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive Report OPS 19-46 Results for RFP 2019-012 Transit Operations;
AND THAT Council direct staff to negotiate with the highest scoring proponent to reduce
operating costs;
AND FURTHER THAT Council direct staff to negotiate with the Ministry of Transportation to
amend the scope of the Inter-Community Transportation Project.
SUMMARY
On August 12, 2019, Council authorized By-Law 4326 to enter into an agreement with the
Province to provide funding through the Community Transportation Grant Program for the Inter-
Community Transportation Project.
In accordance with the Inter-Community Grant Program and the 2019 Operation Services
Business Plan, Request for Proposal RFP 2019-012 Transit Operations was issued to acquire a
transit service provider for both the Inter-Community Transportation Project and the In-Town
T:GO service. To obtain economies of scale and efficiencies in the RFP, Proponents were
requested to bid on operating both the Inter-Community transit service and the in-town T:GO
transit service, the contract of which expires July 1st 2020.
The RFP was advertised on the Town of Tillsonburg website, the Tillsonburg News, Ebid
Solutions, Biddingo and the Ontario Public Transit Association website on September 12th 2019
and closed on October 11th 2019 at 2:00pm with six (6) proposals received. Town staff and the
Transit Consultant reviewed and scored the six (6) proposals based on the scoring table
included in the RFP. Scoring was based on the following:
Completeness of Proposal 5 pts
Qualifications and Experience 10 pts
Service Initiation Plan 15 pts
Understanding of Requirements and Approach 10 pts
Vehicle Specifications 10 pts
Past Performance 15 pts
Page 473 of 564
Page 2 / 5
Value Added Services 5 pts
Cost 30 pts
Total Score 100 pts
Proposals received ranged from $69.20 to $117.70 per hour (incl. net HST of 1.76%) for 2020
with an average inflationary increase of approximately 2% per year over the term of each
respective service. The scoring results from the Evaluation Committee are summarized below:
Proponent Total Score
1. Voyago 89
2. First Student Canada 80
3. Sharp Bus Lines 77
4. TOK Group 75
5. BTS Network 67
6. Driveseat 55
The proposal from Voyago is the highest scoring proposal offering the most value based on the
requirements outlined in the RFP and was the second lowest price received. Voyago currently
provides transit services for Woodstock, St Thomas, London and Owen Sound and is currently
in discussions with other communities to provide Inter-Community transit services.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
The Evaluation Committee comprised of the Director of Operations, Transit Coordinator, and the
Transit Consultant reviewed and scored the proposals received.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
In-Town T:GO
The In-Town T:GO transit service is funded through the annual Municipal budget process
utilizing Provincial Gas Tax funding, revenue from passenger fares and taxation. The following
table outlines the funding requirements over the next five (5) years to operate the In-Town T:GO
transit service through a third party service provider:
In-Town T:GO Pricing Summary (incl. net HST)
July 1 to December 31, 2020 $119,903.97
January 1 to December 31, 2021 $244,833.09
January 1 to December 31, 2022 $250,963.12
January 1 to December 31, 2023 $257,215.74
January 1 to December 31, 2024 $263,652.26
January 1 to March 31, 2025 $68,906.34
Total $1,205,474.52
Page 474 of 564
Page 3 / 5
This new third party service pricing represents a significant (57%) increase in cost over the next
two years to provide the In-Town T:GO service. Although economies of scale for operating both
the Inter-Community service and the In-Town T:GO service were used in the RFP, the increase
in operating cost is likely attributed to meeting the requirements and specifications for public
transit vehicles as set out in O.Reg. 191/11 Integrated Accessibility Standards under the
Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA).
Inter-Community T:GO
The following table outlines the cost to operate the Inter-Community Transportation Project
through a third party service provider:
Inter-Community Pricing Summary (incl. net HST)
January 1 to December 31, 2020 $400,900.82
January 1 to December 31, 2021 $427,793.20
January 1 to December 31, 2022 $506,163.32
January 1 to March 31, 2023 $132,365.34
Total $1,467,222.67
The Transfer Payment Agreement (TPA) with the Province for the Inter-Community
Transportation Grant provided a budget of $1,199,891 in funding for transit operations, leaving a
deficit of $267,331.67 based on the pricing from the highest scoring proposal.
Next Steps
Staff are recommending that the Evaluation Committee, in accordance with section 1.13 of the
RFP document, which states the “The Town reserves the right to negotiate with a bidder of the
Town’s choice, if all bids are over budget or too high”, negotiate with the highest scoring
proposal to potentially reduce the operating price.
In addition staff propose the following:
Complete a cost-benefit analysis/comparison of performing the In-Town T:GO transit
service in-house;
Negotiate with the Ministry of Transportation regarding a revised scope of the Inter-
Community service (i.e. reduce project duration, reduce additional service hours, etc.)
and subsequently amend the Transfer Payment Agreement;
Explore additional funding opportunities with municipal counterparts that benefit from the
Inter-Community service.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP)
This initiative supports Objective 3 – Demographic Balance by supporting the aging population
and active senior citizenship and Objective 4 – Culture and Community of the Community
Strategic Plan by improving mobility and promoting environmentally sustainable living.
Page 475 of 564
Page 4 / 5
Page 476 of 564
Page 5 / 5
Report Approval Details
Document Title: OPS 19-46 Results for RFP 2019-012 Transit Operations.docx
Attachments:
Final Approval Date: Oct 23, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Dave Rushton - Oct 22, 2019 - 12:28 PM
Ron Shaw - Oct 22, 2019 - 7:24 PM
Donna Wilson - Oct 23, 2019 - 3:58 PM
Page 477 of 564
Report Title Awarding RFT 2019-018 – Station Arts Shingle Roof
Replacement
Report No. RCP 19-52
Author Rick Cox, Director of Recreation, Culture & Parks
Meeting Type Council Meeting
Council Date October 28, 2019
Attachments
Page 1 / 3 Awarding RFT 2019-018 – Station Arts Shingle Roof Replacement
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receives Report RCP 19-52 – Awarding RFT 2019-018 – Station Arts Shingle
Roof Replacement;
AND THAT Council award RFT 2019-018 to 818185 Ontario Inc. for $58,480 before taxes.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Tillsonburg Station Arts Centre shingle roof is leaking and requires replacing. This report
recommends awarding the project to 818185 Ontario Inc. for $58,480 before taxes based on
their bid submission.
BACKGROUND
The shingle replacement for the Station Arts Centre was scheduled for 2019 but was deferred by
Council during the 2019 Budget process, with the final approved budget including $80,000
contributed to reserves towards an anticipated $80,000 cost to replace the shingles in 2020. In
recent months the shingles have failed resulting in leaks inside the building and Council
approved bringing forward the project at their meeting of August 12, 2019.
RFT2019-018 was issued and three qualified bid submissions were received. The submissions
are summarized in the table below:
Having confirmed with the provided references that the low-bid contractor has provided good
quality work on similar projects, staff recommends awarding the work to 818185 Ontario Inc. for
their submitted bid price of $58,480.00 before taxes.
CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
Staff consulted with Garland Canada to prepare the roofing specification and evaluate the bid
submissions. PK Construction Inc. was consulted with respect to taking on the successful
Brantford, Ontario $58,480.00
Toronto, Ontario $76,399.98
Etobicoke, Ontario $107,579.00
818185 Ontario Inc.
T Hamilton & Son Roofing Inc
Proteck Roofing & Sheet Metal
Page 478 of 564
Page 2 / 3 Awarding RFT 2019-018 – Station Arts Shingle Roof Replacement
vendor as a subcontractor to their existing project to facilitate construction timelines and mitigate
risk to the Town.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The approved budget for the shingle roof replacement project is $80,000 funded from the Asset
Management Reserve. The tendered work is within the approved budget, leaving adequate
room to accommodate the 12% fee ($7,016) PK Construction Inc. will charge to carry this vendor
as a subcontractor.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT
1. Excellence in Local Government
☒ Demonstrate strong leadership in Town initiatives
☐ Streamline communication and effectively collaborate within local government
☒ Demonstrate accountability
2. Economic Sustainability
☐ Support new and existing businesses and provide a variety of employment opportunities
☒ Provide diverse retail services in the downtown core
☐ Provide appropriate education and training opportunities in line with Tillsonburg’s
economy
3. Demographic Balance
☒ Make Tillsonburg an attractive place to live for youth and young professionals
☒ Provide opportunities for families to thrive
☒ Support the aging population and an active senior citizenship
4. Culture and Community
☒ Promote Tillsonburg as a unique and welcoming community
☒ Provide a variety of leisure and cultural opportunities to suit all interests
☒ Improve mobility and promote environmentally sustainable living
Page 479 of 564
Page 3 / 3 Awarding RFT 2019-018 – Station Arts Shingle Roof Replacement
Report Approval Details
Document Title: RCP 19-52 - Awarding RFT2019-018 - Station Arts Shingle Roof
Replacement.docx
Attachments:
Final Approval Date: Oct 21, 2019
This report and all of its attachments were approved and signed as outlined below:
Dave Rushton - Oct 21, 2019 - 8:26 AM
Ron Shaw - Oct 21, 2019 - 10:19 AM
Donna Wilson - Oct 21, 2019 - 11:00 AM
Page 480 of 564
Report Title ICIP Grant Submission Options
Report No. RCP 19-53
Author Rick Cox, Director of Recreation, Culture & Parks
Meeting Type Council Meeting
Council Date October 28, 2019
Attachments
Page 1 / 7 ICIP Grant Submission Options
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receives Report RCP 19-53 – ICIP Grant Submission Options;
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP: Community, Culture &
Recreation Stream Multi-purpose Intake to secure funding to modernize the Tillsonburg Community Centre and re-imagine the Lake Lisgar Waterpark; (Option 1)
OR
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP: Community, Culture &
Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake to secure funding to rehabilitate
Tillsonburg’s outdoor aquatic infrastructure; (Option 2)
OR
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP: Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake to secure funding to rehabilitate
Tillsonburg’s indoor aquatic infrastructure and other parts of the Tillsonburg Community Centre;
(Option 3)
OR
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP: Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake to secure funding to renovate
Tillsonburg’s aquatic infrastructure; (Option 4)
OR
AND THAT Council direct staff to submit an application to the ICIP: Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake to secure funding to improve Tillsonburg’s aquatic infrastructure. (Option 5)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Council directed staff to prepare a submission to the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program’s Community, Culture and Recreation Stream, and to bring back application options for Council to consider. The Multi-purpose Intake (MPI) has a maximum eligible project scope of
Page 481 of 564
Page 2 / 7 ICIP Grant Submission Options
$50 million and the Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake (RRI) has a maximum eligible project scope of $5 million. The options prepared reflect the two grant intakes, both of which require a
minimum municipal contribution of 26.67% for eligible expenses. The total value of the project
option proposed for submission to the MPI is $27,209,422 which will require a minimum municipal contribution of $7,256,753. The project options proposed for submission to the RRI have a total value ranging from $3,665,841 to $6,863,008 and will require a minimum municipal contribution ranging from $977,680 to $3,196,508. As the submission deadline is November 12,
a decision on which option and what the submission will include is required at the October 28
meeting of Council.
BACKGROUND
At their meeting on September 9, 2019, Council passed the following resolution: Moved By: Councillor Gilvesy Seconded By: Councillor Rosehart
THAT Report RCP Aquatic Facility Upgrades in Tillsonburg be received; AND THAT Staff prepare a submission for the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program’s Community, Culture and Recreation Stream 2019 funding intake; AND THAT the submission incorporates a major upgrade to the Tillsonburg Community Centre using the MJMA Report as a guideline;
AND THAT the submission incorporate funding for a splash pad (site undetermined) and revitalization of the Lake Lisgar Waterpark area; AND THAT up to $20,000 from budgeted aquatic design study for application options to be brought back to Council.
The Investing In Canada Infrastructure Program – Community, Culture & Recreation (ICIP-CCR)
stream will fund $1.08 billion in infrastructure projects across the country over 10 years. The
ICIP-CCR stream intake opened on September 3, and closes on November 12, 2019. Confirmation regarding provincial nomination is anticipated in Winter 2020, with notification of project approval from the federal government estimated in Spring/Summer 2020.
The Community, Culture & Recreation stream is an application based program. The intake is a
competitive process and there is anticipation of a high demand for limited funding. Projects must improve access to and/or quality of community, cultural, and recreation infrastructure. Projects must also be community oriented, non-commercial, and open to the public. Municipalities, public sector, not for profit organizations and First Nations and other Indigenous communities/organizations are eligible to apply. Projects must be substantially completed by
March 31, 2027. For municipal projects, projects must be consistent with municipal asset management plans, and municipalities are required to submit their updated asset management plans upon project approval. All organizations must demonstrate a strong plan to operate/maintain facilities or must have a strong and sustainable operating plan.
The following breakdown defines the maximum cost share percentages of the total eligible cost:
Page 482 of 564
Page 3 / 7 ICIP Grant Submission Options
The Province will prioritize projects based on the following policy objectives:
• Meets community and user needs
• Promotes good asset management
• Represents good value for money
• Improves accessibility Projects that focus on vulnerable populations (e.g. low income persons) and Indigenous peoples will be given additional consideration as part of the assessment process. Eligible asset types include:
• Recreation Facilities (e.g., hockey arenas, multipurpose recreation centres)
• Cultural Facilities (e.g., theatres, libraries, museums, cultural centres)
• Community centres/hubs (e.g., multi purpose spaces community spaces offering a variety
of services)
• Education and health facilities advancing Truth and Reconciliation Commission Calls to Action (e.g., Indigenous healing centres, Indigenous learning facilities)
Projects will be grouped into two different categories:
• Rehab and Renovation Projects (project cap of $5 million)
o Small scale renovations and rehabilitations that mainly address functionality, condition and use of existing facilities, including small accessibility improvements. o Small scale new build will be considered in this stream.
• Large Scale Multi Purpose Facilities (flexible project cap of $50 million) o Focus on integrated service delivery to address service level gaps o New build or larger scale renovation and expansion of existing facilities to provide a variety of services.
Working with MJMA, staff has prepared five project outlines (attached). Four of the five options include a splash pad. Three options would address both indoor and outdoor facilities, while the other two are split between indoor pool/splash pad and waterpark/splash pad. Overall, the five options provide Council with a range of approaches to address aquatic infrastructure in Tillsonburg.
The Tillsonburg Community Centre and Lake Lisgar Waterpark Modernization Project would be submitted to the Multi-Purpose Intake (MPI):
Option 1: The Tillsonburg Community Centre and Lake Lisgar Waterpark Modernization Project will reset Tillsonburg’s aquatic infrastructure for the next two generations. Reflecting our growing community’s need for modern active-living facilities on a year-
round basis the project will completely re-imagine and modernize the indoor aquatic and
Page 483 of 564
Page 4 / 7 ICIP Grant Submission Options
fitness spaces. Capitalizing on the existing co-generation infrastructure at the facility, the project will utilize waste heat for water and space heating and dehumidification. The
project will also reinvigorate our long-serving outdoor waterpark as a regional seasonal
attraction for all ages and establish a splash pad near the Community Centre. The total
value of this ICIP-CCR Multi-Purpose intake project is $27,209,422 which will require a
minimum municipal contribution of $7,256,753.
Alternatively, the Tillsonburg Community Centre Rehabilitation Project, the Lake Lisgar
Waterpark Rehabilitation Project, the Tillsonburg Community Centre and Lake Lisgar
Waterpark Renovation Project, or the Tillsonburg Community Centre and Lake Lisgar
Waterpark Improvements Project would be submitted to the Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake (RRI):
Option 2: The Tillsonburg Community Centre Rehabilitation Project will address end-of-life
facility conditions in the Town’s indoor aquatic and health club infrastructure in order to
reboot the usability of this high-use, regionally unique facility for the next several decades.
In addition to dramatically increasing the barrier-free service levels to those who need
them, the work will reduce the utility footprint of operating the facility and implement new spaces and amenities that will meet the needs of modern families. The total value of this
ICIP-CCR Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake project is $4,999,304 which will require a
minimum municipal contribution of $1,333,314.
Or:
Option 3: The Lake Lisgar Waterpark Rehabilitation Project will address end-of-life facility conditions in the Town’s outdoor aquatic infrastructure in order to reboot the usability of
this high-use, regionally unique facility. New AODA-compliant change rooms and a
replaced pool deck and mechanical system will improve accessibility and reduce utility
consumption. An expanded compound will include additional water features and an
updated concession that can serve both waterpark patrons and park visitors. A splash pad in the adjacent park space will provide cooling and enjoyment to the community for a
significantly longer operating season than the Waterpark provides. The total value of this
ICIP-CCR Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake project is $3,665,841 which will require a
minimum municipal contribution of $977,680.
Or:
Option 4: The Tillsonburg Community Centre and Lake Lisgar Waterpark Renovation
Project will address asset management requirements in the Town’s indoor and outdoor
aquatic infrastructure in order to extend the life of these high-use, regionally unique
facilities. The total value of this ICIP-CCR Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake is
$4,999,882 which will require a minimum municipal contribution of $1,333,469.
Or:
Option 5: The Tillsonburg Community Centre and Waterpark Improvements Project will
address end-of-life facility conditions in the Town’s aquatic infrastructure in order to
reboot the usability of these high-use, regionally unique facilities. Indoor facilities will be
refreshed with new flooring and mechanical systems. The project will also reinvigorate our
Page 484 of 564
Page 5 / 7 ICIP Grant Submission Options
long-serving outdoor waterpark as a regional seasonal attraction for all ages and establish a splash pad adjacent to the waterpark to serve the community. Both indoor
and outdoor facilities will be augmented with new AODA-compliant family change rooms.
The total value of this ICIP-CCR Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake is $6,863,008
which will require a minimum municipal contribution of $3,196,508.
The ICIP-CCR funding program will accept multiple submissions from a single municipality, however they must be prioritized. The amount of work to prepare multiple submissions including
the required business case and documentation is considerable and will be extremely difficult for
staff to accomplish in time for the November 12 deadline. It is recommended that Council select one project to move forward with for staff to focus efforts on producing the best possible submission. The following table provides a summary of how the various elements of the projects compare:
As the grant program is in high demand and the competition will be intense, the Town would be well-served to plan for the likelihood the application will not be selected for funding. Staff recommends that the Town incorporate some of the necessary rehabilitation work in the 2020
asset management work plan and budget. If the project is approved for funding, the budget allocation can be redirected to serve as the municipal contribution component required under the funding program.
FINANCIAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Regardless of the option selected the funding sources for the municipal contribution that will
have to be considered include:
• Taxation
• Tax-supported debt
• User-pay debt
Focus Element
Option 1:
TCC & LLWP
Modernization
Option 2:
TCC
Rehabilitation
Option3:
LLWP
Rehabilitation
Option 4:
TCC & LLWP
Renovation
Option 5:
TCC & LLWP
Improvements
Rehab existing pool
AODA upgrades
Family Change Room
New pool
South Entrance Improvements
Rink Area Improvements
Rehab existing
Slide
Family Change Room
AODA upgrades
New Canteen
Size 5000sf 3600sf 3600sf 3600sf
Location Hardy St
West side
Hardy St
East side North of LLWP North of LLWP
Total 27,209,422$ 4,999,304$ 3,665,841$ 4,999,882$ 6,863,008$
Town 7,256,753$ 1,333,314$ 977,680$ 1,333,469$ 3,196,508$
Meets community and user needs
Promotes good asset management
Represents good value for money
Improves accessibility TCCLLWPSplash padCostGrant CriteriaPage 485 of 564
Page 6 / 7 ICIP Grant Submission Options
• Reserves
• Fundraising
For projects of this scope, size, and regional significance, it would be appropriate to establish and resource a fundraising and sponsorship program that pursues contributions from individuals, corporations, service clubs and neighbouring municipalities to offset a portion of the
municipal contribution. A reasonable position to take might be a 50/50 match of fundraised
dollars to municipal dollars.
The municipality will be responsible for any ineligible project expenditures and cost overruns.
The total value of the TCC Modernization Project is $27,209,422 which will require a minimum municipal contribution of $7,256,753. This is a very large commitment for the Corporation to
make and it will consume a significant portion of the Town’s borrowing capacity for many years.
Currently, the Town may get significant funding from other levels of government and can borrow the municipal contribution at very inexpensive rates. Together these factors make a project of this size feasible to consider. If either of those two factors were to change, a project of this scale would be unsustainable for Tillsonburg.
The Tillsonburg Community Centre Rehabilitation Project, the Lake Lisgar Waterpark Rehabilitation Project, and the Tillsonburg Community Centre and Waterpark Renovation Project have a much smaller scope and the municipal contribution is within range of the annual funding envelope for asset management. The 2020 draft capital budget includes $1,859,000 towards the indoor and outdoor aquatic infrastructure for scheduled asset management work. If
the application is successful, this allocation could offset the required municipal contribution.
The Tillsonburg Community Centre and Waterpark Improvement Project exceeds the grant application maximum of $5million but pursues the best value for municipal dollar. The Town would be responsible for all costs above the $5million threshold, in addition to the 26.67% of the eligible expenses, for a municipal contribution of $3,196,508.
Regardless of which project is selected by Council to move forward with, in order to succeed with the on time/on budget/on spec delivery of the work, it will be important to augment staff resources with dedicated project management capacity.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN (CSP) IMPACT
1. Excellence in Local Government
☒ Demonstrate strong leadership in Town initiatives
☐ Streamline communication and effectively collaborate within local government
☒ Demonstrate accountability
2. Economic Sustainability
☐ Support new and existing businesses and provide a variety of employment opportunities
☐ Provide diverse retail services in the downtown core
☐ Provide appropriate education and training opportunities in line with Tillsonburg’s
economy
Page 486 of 564
Page 7 / 7 ICIP Grant Submission Options
3. Demographic Balance
☒ Make Tillsonburg an attractive place to live for youth and young professionals
☐ Provide opportunities for families to thrive
☒ Support the aging population and an active senior citizenship
4. Culture and Community
☒ Promote Tillsonburg as a unique and welcoming community
☒ Provide a variety of leisure and cultural opportunities to suit all interests
☒ Improve mobility and promote environmentally sustainable living
Page 487 of 564
Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program
Community, Culture & Recreation Stream
Tillsonburg Submission
Project Options and Outlines
Focus Element
Option 1:
TCC & LLWP
Modernization
Option 2:
TCC
Rehabilitation
Option3:
LLWP
Rehabilitation
Option 4:
TCC & LLWP
Renovation
Option 5:
TCC & LLWP
Improvements
Rehab existing pool
AODA upgrades
Family Change Room
New pool
South Entrance Improvements
Rink Area Improvements
Rehab existing
Slide
Family Change Room
AODA upgrades
New Canteen
Size 5000sf 3600sf 3600sf 3600sf
Location
Hardy St
West side
Hardy St
East side North of LLWP North of LLWP
Total 27,209,422$ 4,999,304$ 3,665,841$ 4,999,882$ 6,863,008$
Town 7,256,753$ 1,333,314$ 977,680$ 1,333,469$ 3,196,508$
Meets community and user needs
Promotes good asset management
Represents good value for money
Improves accessibility TCCLLWPSplash padCostGrant CriteriaPage 488 of 564
Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Multi-Purpose Intake
Project Outline: Option 1
The Tillsonburg Community Centre and Waterpark Modernization Project will reset Tillsonburg’s aquatic infrastructure for the next two generations. Reflecting our growing community’s need for
modern active-living facilities on a year-round basis, the project will completely re-imagine and
modernize the indoor aquatic and fitness spaces. Capitalizing on the existing co-generation infrastructure at the facility, the project will utilize waste heat for water and space heating and dehumidification. The project will also reinvigorate our long-serving outdoor waterpark as a regional seasonal attraction for all ages and establish a splash pad near the Community Centre.
As well as completely rehabilitating the existing indoor 6-lane lap pool, a major addition to the west
end of the Community Centre will add an indoor leisure pool, a therapeutic warm tank and steam sauna. The addition will also include a new pool mechanical room, family change rooms and pool administration space. The main, elevated south entrance to the facility will be replaced with a barrier-free, at-grade main entrance opening into a new lobby with access control for the aquatic and fitness
areas. Overlooking both the new south entrance and the pools, will be a brand new health centre and
fitness studio. The north entrance will be enclosed as a new public lounge and youth drop-in space. An indoor walking track will circulate through all of these new spaces on the upper level and connect them to the existing Senior Centre and squash courts. Accessibility, efficiency and energy-savings improvements will also be added to the rink operations at the facility through smaller additions on the
north, east and west sides of the facility. The value of this work is $21,603,417
Re-imagining the adjacent Lake Lisgar Waterpark outdoor facility will completely update the site. A new, expanded compound will incorporate new splash elements as well as a new waterslide, new water features and replaced deck for the beach-entry pool. A new change pavilion will provide barrier-free change spaces and a new canteen that can service customers inside and outside the
compound. The existing building will be refitted with modern finishes and a new at-grade mechanical
room. The value of this work is $4,939,405.
Complementing the indoor aquatic facility and the seasonal waterpark attraction, both of which will have admission fees, a new free-to-use 5000sf splash pad will be placed in proximity to the Community Centre such that the pool filtration equipment can be shared between the two facilities.
The value of this work is $666,600
The total value of this ICIP-CCR Multi-Purpose Intake project is $27,209,422 which will require a minimum municipal contribution of $7,256,753.
Page 489 of 564
INDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY OUTDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY OUTDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY
Area Rate Value Area Rate Value Area Rate Value
Natatorium Modernization Part 1 - Reimagining the Lake Lisgar Waterpark Part 2 - New splash pad
Demolition 12,000 sf $35 $420,000 Wave Pool Upgrades (minimum to meet code, excludes new basin)
Renovation area Lower level 2,000 sf $175 $350,000 Pool Deck $200,000 New splash pad 5,000 sf $75 $375,000
(includes new elevator)Upper level 2,000 sf $175 $350,000 Main Drains $6,800
Pool Uupgrades (per Sept 17, Pool Audit)Main Drain body $28,000
Main drains $6,800 Skimmers $112,000
Tactile Indicators $15,000 Contrasting Tile $1,200
Inlets replacement $100,000 Contrasting Tile Pool Perimeter $25,000
Protruding Step fix $17,000 New Sand Filters $40,000
Gutter drop grates cleaning $6,500 Recirculating Piping $250,000
Recirculation Pump replacement $15,000 Larger Recirculating Pump $15,000
Adding deck drains, new deck slope $37,000 Automatic Level Controller $4,500
Replace deck tile $300,000 Flow Meter $1,500
Pool Tile $400,000 Update schedule piping $20,000
Recirculation piping $220,000 Coping repair $62,000
Chemical controller $6,000 New water feature $25,000
Chemical tanks $3,000 Upgraded features +pump $46,000
Chemical feeds $2,500 Subtotal Wave Pool Upgrades $837,000
Tubing and chemical sensor $1,600 New waterslide $230,000
Subtotal Pool Upgrades $1,130,400 Bathhouse
Existing building upgrades 4,000 sf $300 $1,200,000
New Construction 21,950 sf $600 $13,170,000 New AODA family changerooms/canteen 1,500 sf $550 $825,000
Site Development 20,000 sf $5 $100,000 Site development 15,000 sf $5 $75,000 Site development 6,500 sf $5 $32,500
Mechanical site servicing 5,000 sf $4 $20,000 Mechanical site Servicing 20,000 sf $3.0 $60,000 Mechanical site Servicing 6,500 sf $3.0 $19,500
Electrical site servicing 5,000 sf $2 $10,000 Electrical site servicing 20,000 sf $2.0 $40,000 Electrical site servicing 6,500 sf $2.0 $13,000
Asebestos Removal (assumed)$275,000 Asebestos Removal (assumed)$50,000 SUBTOTAL $440,000
SUBTOTAL $15,825,400 SUBTOTAL $3,317,000
General Requirements and Fees 10%$1,582,540 General Requirements and Fees 10%$331,700 General Requirements and Fees 10%$44,000
Design Allowance 15%$2,373,810 Design Allowance 20%$663,400 Design Allowance 25%$110,000
Escalation Allowance 4%$633,016 Escalation Allowance 10%$331,700 Escalation Allowance 10%$44,000
TOTAL Community Centre Upgrades 25,950 sf $787 /sf $20,414,766 $4,643,800 $638,000
Signage 0.50%$79,127 Signage 0.50%$16,585 Signage 0.50%$2,200
FFE Allowance 3%$474,762 FFE Allowance 3%$99,510 FFE Allowance 3%$13,200
Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$158,254 Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$33,170 Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$4,400
Door Hardware $160,000 Door Hardware $80,000
AV 2%$316,508 AV 2%$66,340 AV 2%$8,800
Community Centre Full Scope $832.50 /sf $21,603,417 Waterpark 10,000 sf $494 /sf $4,939,405 Splash pad 5,000 sf $133 /sf $666,600
Total Project Value $27,209,422
Municipal contribution (26.67%)$7,256,753
Option 1: Tillsonburg Community Centre and Lake Lisgar Waterpark Modernization
Page 490 of 564
Pool, Health Club & new entrance
New entrance & lounge area
Barrier-free rink access
Expanded maintenance area
Splash park
Pedestrian-friendly pavement
Legend
Tillsonburg Community Centre
& Waterpark Modernization
Project Sketch
Page 491 of 564
171819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.04.08
Page 492 of 564
201819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.04.08
B
DEPARTMENT
ADMIN
ATHLETIC
PUBLIC
SUPPORT
TRACK
1 : 500 101MARCH 7, 2019
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1
TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
HEALTH CENTRE
NEW ELEVATOR
NEW PUBLIC LOUNGE/ YOUTH DROP -IN
FITNESS STUDIO
WALKING TRACK
Page 493 of 564
191819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.04.08
B
DEPARTMENT
ADMIN
AQUATIC
ATHLETIC
CHANGEROOMS
PUBLIC
SUPPORT
WASHROOMS
1 : 500 100MARCH 7, 2019
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 0
TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
NEW FAMILY CHANGE
NEW AQ. STAFF
NEW SPA
NEW LEISURE POOL (4.5'depth)
EXTERIOR CHANGEROOMS
LOBBY AND CONTROL DESK
NEW ELEVATOR
Page 494 of 564
New change pavilion & concession
Renovated entrance and mechanicals
Splash pad area
Water elements
New waterslide
Legend
Tillsonburg Community Centre & Lake Lisgar Waterpark Modernization Project Sketch
Page 495 of 564
OPTION A
Page 496 of 564
WC
JAN BF WC
WC
CANTEEN
Page 497 of 564
Page 498 of 564
CHANGE ROOMPANIC AREA
SPLASHPAD
CANTEEN
WC
WC
JAN
BF WC
POOL
CHANGE CUBICLES
SEATING AREA
WCSHOWER ROOMWASHROOMCHANGE ROOMLOBBYLOCK-UP AREALUNCH ROOMLIFE GUARD ROOMFIRST AID ROOMSHOWER ROOMWASHROOMSHOWER POLES
PICNIC AREA
SPLASHPAD
SEATING AREA
CHANGECUBICLES
SHOWER POLES
CANTEEN
POOL
Page 499 of 564
OPTION B
Page 500 of 564
Page 501 of 564
JAN
WCCANTEE
N
WC
BF WC
Page 502 of 564
JAN
BF WCWCWC
CHANGE CUBICLES
CANTEEN
SEATING AREA
SHOWER POLES
PANIC AREA
SHOWER ROOMCHANGE ROOMWASHROOMSHOWER ROOMFIRST AID ROOMLIFE GUARD ROOMLUNCH ROOMLOCK-UP AREALOBBYCHANGE ROOMWASHROOMPOOL
SPLASHPAD
WCPICNIC AREA
SPLASHPADTO PUBLICSEATING AREA
OLD PLAY FEATURES
OLD PLAY FEATURES
NEW PLAY FEATURES
NEW PLAY FEATURES
NEW PLAY FEATURES
NEW PLAY FEATURES
OLD PLAY FEATURES
SHOWER POLES
CHANGE CUBICLES
CANTEEN
POOL
Page 503 of 564
Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake
Project Outline: Option 2
The Tillsonburg Community Centre Rehabilitation Project will address end-of-life facility conditions in the Town’s indoor aquatic and health club infrastructure in order to reboot the usability of
this high-use, regionally unique facility for the next several decades. In addition to dramatically
increasing the barrier-free service levels to those who need them, the work will reduce the utility footprint of operating the facility and implement new spaces and amenities that will meet the needs of modern families.
The tile surfaces of the indoor pool deck, pool tank, change rooms and pool office will be replaced.
The main drain pumps, bodies and associated piping will be replaced with new equipment that meet
current standards in terms of configuration and flow rates. Drains will be installed in the deck to meet current code requirements. The diatomaceous earth filtration system will be completely replaced. Lighting will be replaced with high-efficiency, long-lasting LED fixtures with controls that turn the lights off when the spaces are empty. Leveraging waste heat from the existing co-generation plant,
dehumidification and HVAC systems will be replaced with new units that can be incorporated into the
modern building control systems in use elsewhere in the facility. The natatorium roof will undergo a full restoration. An addition to the west façade of the natatorium will house barrier-free family change rooms, a new pool administration office, the new pool mechanical room and additional storage. A ramp-entry will be built adjacent to the shallow end to provide better and safer water entry. The
existing sauna space will be repurposed into additional health-club space and the sauna relocated
into the former pool office and connected to the co-gen heat loop for energy efficiency. A second small addition to the east façade of the attached ice rink facility will establish an indoor ice-melting pit using heat from the co-gen loop and more efficient ice resurfacer maintenance space. The main, elevated south entrance to the facility will be rehabilitated to be barrier-free, easy to maintain in all
seasons and landscaped along the building to incorporate 3600sf of outside splash pad amenities
that leverage their proximity to the main filtration system.
The total value of this ICIP-CCR Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake project is $4,999,304 which will require a minimum municipal contribution of $1,333,314.
Page 504 of 564
INDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY OUTDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY
Area Rate Value Area Rate Value
Renovation New splash pad
Demolition 2,000 sf $35 $70,000
Renovation area Lower level 1,500 sf $225 $337,500 New splash pad 3,600 sf $75 $270,000
(includes new elevator)Upper level 1,000 sf $175 $175,000
Pool upgrades (per Sept 17, Pool Audit)
Main drains $6,800
Tactile Indicators $15,000
Inlets replacement $100,000
Protruding Step fix $17,000
Gutter drop grates cleaning $6,500
Recirculation Pump replacement $15,000
Adding deck drains, new deck slope $37,000
Replace deck tile $300,000
Pool Tile $400,000
Recirculation piping $220,000
Chemical controller $6,000
Chemical tanks $3,000
Chemical feeds $2,500
Tubing and chemical sensor $1,600
Subtotal Pool Upgrades $1,130,400
New Construction 2,925 sf $450 $1,316,250
Site development 5,000 sf $5 $25,000 Site development 3,600 sf $5 $18,000
Mechanical site servicing 5,000 sf $1 $5,000 Mechanical site Servicing 3,600 sf $1.0 $3,600
Electrical site servicing 5,000 sf $1 $5,000 Electrical site servicing 3,600 sf $1.0 $3,600
Asebestos Removal (assumed)$275,000 SUBTOTAL $295,200
SUBTOTAL $3,339,150
General Requirements and Fees 10%$333,915 General Requirements and Fees 10%$29,520
Design Allowance 15%$500,873 Design Allowance 20%$59,040
Escalation Allowance 4%$133,566 Escalation Allowance 4%$11,808
TOTAL Community Centre Upgrades 3,000 sf $1,436 /sf $4,307,504 $395,568
Signage 0.50%$16,696 Signage 0.50%$1,476
FFE Allowance 3%$100,175 FFE Allowance 3%$8,856
Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$33,392 Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$2,952
Door Hardware $60,000AV2%$66,783 AV 2%$5,904
Community Centre Full Scope $1,528.18 /sf $4,584,548 Splash pad 3,600 sf $115 /sf $414,756
Total Project Value $4,999,304
Municipal Contribution (26.67%)$1,333,314
Option 2: Tillsonburg Community Centre Rehabilitation
Page 505 of 564
New change rooms & mechanicals
New entrance and landscaping
Splash park
Expanded maintenance area
Legend
Tillsonburg Community Centre & Waterpark Rehabilitation Project Sketch
Page 506 of 564
Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake
Project Outline: Option 3
The Lake Lisgar Waterpark Rehabilitation Project will address end-of-life facility conditions in the Town’s outdoor aquatic infrastructure in order to reboot the usability of this high-use, regionally
unique facility. New AODA-compliant change rooms and a replaced pool deck and mechanical
system will improve accessibility and reduce utility consumption. An expanded compound will include additional water features and an updated concession that can serve both waterpark patrons and park visitors. A splash pad in the adjacent park space will provide cooling and enjoyment to the community for a significantly longer operating season than the Waterpark provides.
At the outdoor pool, the whole facility will be rehabilitated and the compound enlarged. The entrance
building and existing change rooms will be renovated to modern finishes and layout. Additional barrier-free and family-friendly change facilities will be put in place in a new, open format structure. The concrete deck, water filtration & heating equipment and decommissioned waterslide will be replaced. Water features in the pool area will be replaced and augmented with new amenities. A
separate splash pad area will be established to improve the experience for those with very small
children. The existing canteen will be removed and replaced with a new canteen that can serve patrons both inside and outside the compound. The value of this work is $3,251,085.
In the park adjacent to the Waterpark, a 3600sf splash pad will be placed so that it can share the mechanical systems of the Waterpark. It will provide a no-cost cooling option for park users for a
much longer annual operating window. The value of this work is $414,756.
The total value of this ICIP-CCR Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake is $3,665,841 which will require a minimum municipal contribution of $977,680.
Page 507 of 564
OUTDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY - Waterpark OUTDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY - Splashpad
Area Rate Value Area Rate Value
Part 1 - Lake Lisgar Waterpark Refurbishments Part 2 - New splash pad
Wave Pool Upgrades (minimum to meet code, excludes new basin)
Pool Deck $200,000 New splash pad 3,600 sf $75 $270,000
Main Drains $6,800
Main Drain body $28,000
Skimmers $70,000
Contrasting Tile $1,200
Contrasting Tile Pool Perimeter $25,000
Recirculating Piping $250,000
Larger Recirculating Pump $15,000
Automatic Level Controller $4,500
Flow Meter $1,500
Update schedule piping $20,000
New water feature $169,000
Upgraded features +pump $46,000
Subtotal Wave Pool Upgrades $837,000
New waterslide $230,000
Bathhouse
Existing building upgrades 4,000 sf $50 $200,000
New AODA family changerooms/canteen 1,500 sf $550 $825,000
Site development 15,000 sf $5 $75,000 Site development 3,600 sf $5 $18,000
Mechanical site Servicing 20,000 sf $1.0 $20,000 Mechanical site Servicing 3,600 sf $1.0 $3,600
Electrical site servicing 20,000 sf $1.0 $20,000 Electrical site servicing 3,600 sf $1.0 $3,600
Asebestos Removal (assumed)$50,000 SUBTOTAL $295,200
SUBTOTAL $2,257,000
General Requirements and Fees 10%$225,700 General Requirements and Fees 10%$29,520
Design Allowance 20%$451,400 Design Allowance 20%$59,040
Escalation Allowance 4%$90,280 Escalation Allowance 4%$11,808
$3,024,380 $395,568
Signage 0.50%$11,285 Signage 0.50%$1,476
FFE Allowance 3%$67,710 FFE Allowance 3%$8,856Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$22,570 Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$2,952
Door Hardware $80,000AV2%$45,140 AV 2%$5,904
Waterpark 10,000 sf $325 /sf $3,251,085 Splash pad 3,600 sf $115 /sf $414,756
Total Project Value $3,665,841
Municipal Contribution (26.67%)$977,680
Option 3: Lake Lisgar Waterpark Rehabilitation
Page 508 of 564
New change pavilion & concession
Renovated entrance and mechanicals
Splash pad area
Water elements
New waterslide
Legend
Lake Lisgar Waterpark Rehabilitation Project Sketch
Page 509 of 564
31819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.10.23
CHANGE
CUBICLE
S
SHOW
E
R
P
O
L
E
S
WASHR
O
O
M
SPLASH PAD
OPTION 2
Page 510 of 564
41819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.10.23 41819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.10.23
SHOWER POLES
2
3
4
5
6 7
8
9
10
11 12
1
PICNIC AREA
SPLASH PAD
POOL
PUBLIC CHANGE ROOMS
CANTEEN
WC
JAN
FAMILY CHANGE CUBICLES
MALE CHANGE ROOM
FEMALE CHANGE ROOM
LOBBY
ADMIN
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
Page 511 of 564
51819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.10.23
JAN
PAVILION
123 4
5
6
7 9
8
CANTEEN
WC
JAN
PUBLIC CHANGE ROOMS
FAMILY CHANGE CUBICLES
MALE CHANGE ROOM
FEMALE CHANGE ROOM
LOBBY
ADMIN
The canteen has two openings: one is open
toward the picnic area for the public to
purchase food and beverages, another one is
open to the private members in the pool area.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Page 512 of 564
61819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.10.23 61819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.10.23
JAN
POOL
NEW POOL FEATURES
EXISTING POOL FEATURES
The new pool features include shower poles,
and splash pad play features such as semiciru-
lar pipe shower, a mushroom-shaped shower,
water bucket, etc.
Page 513 of 564
71819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.10.23
JAN
PUBLIC SPLASHPAD & PICNIC AREA
PICNIC AREA
PUBLIC SPLASHPAD
LANDSCAPE FENCE
The public splashpad and picnic area are con-
nected, parents can watch over or wait for their
children at the picnic area when they are play-
ing at the splashpad. The private pool and the
splashpad are divided by a landscape fence.
1
2
3
2
1
3
Page 514 of 564
81819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.10.23 81819, TILLSONBURG COMMUNITY CENTRE
COUNCIL PRESENTATION 19.10.23
JAN
Page 515 of 564
Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake
Project Outline: Option 4
The Tillsonburg Community Centre and Lake Lisgar Waterpark Renovation Project will address asset management requirements in the Town’s indoor and outdoor aquatic infrastructure in order to
extend the life of these high-use, regionally unique facilities.
The tile surfaces of the indoor pool deck, pool tank, change rooms and pool office will be replaced and the roof will be restored. The main drain pumps, bodies and associated piping will be replaced with new equipment that meet current standards in terms of configuration and flow rates. Drains will be installed in the deck to meet current code requirements. The diatomaceous earth filtration system
will be completely replaced. Lighting will be replaced with high-efficiency, long-lasting LED fixtures
with controls that turn the lights off when the spaces are empty. The value of this work is $2,309,252.
At the outdoor facility the concrete deck, water filtration & heating equipment and decommissioned waterslide will be replaced. Water features in the pool area will be replaced. The value of this work is $2,690,630
The total value of this ICIP-CCR Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake is $4,999,882 which will
require a minimum municipal contribution of $1,333,469.
Page 516 of 564
INDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY OUTDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY
Area Rate Value Area Rate Value
Natatorium Renovation Lake Lisgar Waterpark Renovation
Demolition 0 sf $35 $0 Wave Pool Upgrades (minimum to meet code, excludes new basin)
Renovation area Lower level 0 sf $175 $0 Pool Deck $200,000
Roof restoration 10,000 sf $10 $100,000 Main Drains $6,800
Pool Upgrades (per Sept 17, Pool Audit)Main Drain body $28,000
Main drains $6,800 Contrasting Tile $1,200
Tactile Indicators $15,000 Contrasting Tile Pool Perimeter $25,000
Inlets replacement $100,000 Recirculating Piping $250,000
Protruding Step fix $17,000 Larger Recirculating Pump $15,000
Gutter drop grates cleaning $6,500 Automatic Level Controller $4,500
Recirculation Pump replacement $15,000 Flow Meter $1,500
Adding deck drains, new deck slope $37,000 Update schedule piping $20,000
Replace deck tile $300,000
Pool Tile $400,000
Recirculation piping $220,000
Chemical controller $6,000
Chemical tanks $3,000
Chemical feeds $2,500 Subtotal Wave Pool Upgrades $552,000
Tubing and chemical sensor $1,600 New waterslide $230,000
Subtotal Pool Upgrades $1,130,400 Bathhouse
Existing building upgrades 4,000 sf $200 $800,000
New Construction 0 sf $600 $0
Site development 10,000 sf $5 $50,000 Site development 15,000 sf $5 $75,000
Mechanical site Servicing 10,000 sf $4 $40,000 Mechanical site Servicing 15,000 sf $3.0 $45,000
Electrical site servicing 10,000 sf $2 $20,000 Electrical site servicing 15,000 sf $2.0 $30,000
Asebestos Removal (assumed)$275,000 Asebestos Removal (assumed)$50,000
SUBTOTAL $1,615,400 SUBTOTAL $1,782,000
General Requirements and Fees 10%$161,540 General Requirements and Fees 10%$178,200
Design Allowance 15%$242,310 Design Allowance 20%$356,400
Escalation Allowance 6.5%$105,001 Escalation Allowance 10%$178,200
TOTAL Community Centre Upgrades 20,000 sf $106 /sf $2,124,251 $2,494,800
Signage 0.50%$8,077 Signage 0.50%$8,910
FFE Allowance 3%$48,462 FFE Allowance 3%$53,460
Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$16,154 Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$17,820
Door Hardware $80,000 Door Hardware $80,000AV2%$32,308 AV 2%$35,640
Community Centre Minimum Scope $115.46 /sf $2,309,252 Waterpark Minimum Scope 10,000 sf $269 /sf $2,690,630
Total Project Value $4,999,882
Municipal contribution (26.67%)$1,333,469
Option 4: Tillsonburg Community Centre and Lake Lisgar Waterpark Renovation
Page 517 of 564
Existing footprint only
Legend
Tillsonburg Community Centre & Waterpark Renovation Project Sketch
Renovated entrance and mechanicals
New waterslide
Legend
Page 518 of 564
Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program Community, Culture & Recreation Stream Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake
Project Outline: Option 5
The Tillsonburg Community Centre and Waterpark Improvements Project will address end-of-life facility conditions in the Town’s aquatic infrastructure in order to reboot the usability of these high-
use, regionally unique facilities. Indoor facilities will be refreshed with new flooring and mechanical
systems. The project will also reinvigorate our long-serving outdoor waterpark as a regional seasonal attraction for all ages and establish a splash pad adjacent to the waterpark to serve the community. Both indoor and outdoor facilities will be augmented with new AODA-compliant family change rooms.
The tile surfaces of the indoor pool deck, pool tank, change rooms and pool office will be replaced
and the roof will undergo a full restoration. The main drain pumps, bodies and associated piping will
be replaced with new equipment that meet current standards in terms of configuration and flow rates. Drains will be installed in the deck to meet current code requirements. The diatomaceous earth filtration system will be completely replaced. Lighting will be replaced with high-efficiency, long-lasting LED fixtures with controls that turn the lights off when the spaces are empty. A small
extension to the facility footprint will house a new AODA-compliant family change room area and new
mechanicals. The value of this work is $3,583,542.
At the outdoor pool, the whole facility will be rehabilitated and the compound enlarged. The entrance building and existing change rooms will be renovated to modern finishes and layout. Additional barrier-free and family-friendly change facilities will be put in place in a new, open format structure.
The concrete deck, water filtration & heating equipment and decommissioned waterslide will be
replaced. Water features in the pool area will be replaced and augmented with new amenities. A separate splash pad area will be established to improve the experience for those with very small children. The existing canteen will be removed and replaced with a new canteen that can serve patrons both inside and outside the compound. The value of this work is $2,864,710.
In the park adjacent to the Waterpark, a 3600sf splash pad will be placed so that it can share the
mechanical systems of the Waterpark. It will provide a no-cost cooling option for park users for a much longer annual operating window. The value of this work is $414,756.
The total value of this ICIP-CCR Rehabilitation and Renovation Intake is $6,863,008 which will require a minimum municipal contribution of $3,196,508.
Page 519 of 564
INDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY OUTDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY OUTDOOR AQUATICS STRATEGY
Renovation Lake Lisgar Waterpark Improvements New splash pad
Demolition 1,000 sf $35 $35,000 Wave Pool Upgrades (minimum to meet code, excludes new basin)
Renovation area Lower level 1,000 sf $225 $225,000 Pool Deck $200,000 New splash pad 3,600 sf $75 $270,000
Main Drains $6,800
Pool Upgrades (per Sept 17, Pool Audit)Main Drain body $28,000
Main drains $6,800 Skimmers $112,000
Tactile Indicators $15,000 Contrasting Tile $1,200
Inlets replacement $100,000 Contrasting Tile Pool Perimeter $25,000
Protruding Step fix $17,000 New Sand Filters $40,000
Gutter drop grates cleaning $6,500 Recirculating Piping $250,000
Recirculation Pump replacement $15,000 Larger Recirculating Pump $15,000
Adding deck drains, new deck slope $37,000 Automatic Level Controller $4,500
Replace deck tile $300,000 Flow Meter $1,500
Pool Tile $400,000 Update schedule piping $20,000
Recirculation piping $220,000 Coping repair $62,000
Chemical controller $6,000 New water feature $25,000
Chemical tanks $3,000 Upgraded features +pump $46,000
Chemical feeds $2,500 Subtotal Wave Pool Upgrades $837,000
Tubing and chemical sensor $1,600 New waterslide $230,000
Subtotal Pool Upgrades $1,130,400 Bathhouse
Existing building upgrades 4,000 sf $50 $200,000
New Construction 2,000 sf $450 $900,000 Construct new AODA family changerooms 1,000 sf $550 $550,000
Site development 5,000 sf $5 $25,000 Site development 15,000 sf $5 $75,000 Site development 3,600 sf $5 $18,000
Mechanical site Servicing 5,000 sf $1 $5,000 Mechanical site Servicing 20,000 sf $1.0 $20,000 Mechanical site Se 3,600 sf $1.0 $3,600
Electrical site servicing 5,000 sf $1 $5,000 Electrical site servicing 20,000 sf $1.0 $20,000 Electrical site serv 3,600 sf $1.0 $3,600
Asebestos Removal (assumed)$275,000 Asebestos Removal (assumed)$50,000 SUBTOTAL $295,200
SUBTOTAL $2,600,400 SUBTOTAL $1,982,000
General Requirements and Fees 10%$260,040 General Requirements and Fees 10%$198,200 General Requirements and Fees 10%$29,520
Design Allowance 15%$390,060 Design Allowance 20%$396,400 Design Allowance 20%$59,040
Escalation Allowance 4%$104,016 Escalation Allowance 4%$79,280 Escalation Allowance 4%$11,808
TOTAL Community Centre Upgrades 3,000 sf $1,118 /sf $3,354,516 $2,655,880 $395,568
Signage 0.50%$13,002 Signage 0.50%$9,910 Signage 0.50%$1,476FFE Allowance 3%$78,012 FFE Allowance 3%$59,460 FFE Allowance 3%$8,856
Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$26,004 Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$19,820 Testing and Inspection Allowance 1.00%$2,952
Door Hardware $60,000 Door Hardware $80,000
AV 2%$52,008 AV 2%$39,640 AV 2%$5,904
Community Centre Full Scope $1,194.51 /sf $3,583,542 Waterpark 10,000 sf $286 /sf $2,864,710 Splash pad 3,600 sf $115 /sf $414,756
Total Project Value $6,863,008
Municipal contribution (26.67% of $5million + all costs over $5million)$3,196,508
Option 5: Tillsonburg Community Centre and Lake Lisgar Waterpark Improvements
Page 520 of 564
New change rooms & mechanicals
Legend
Tillsonburg Community Centre & Waterpark Improvements Project Sketch
New change pavilion & concession
Renovated entrance and mechanicals
Splash pad area
Water elements
New waterslide
Legend
Page 521 of 564
=
ATTENDANCE Bob Marsden, Patty Phelps, Marianne Sandham, Dianne MacKeigan, Sherry Hamilton, Joan Weston, Donna Scanlan, Rosemary Dean
MEMBERS ABSENT/REGRETS
Chris Rosehart
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 4:30 pm
2. Adoption of Agenda
Moved By- Joan Weston Seconded By- Marianne Sandham
Proposed Resolution #_1
THAT the Agenda for the Museum Advisory Committee meeting of September 26, 2019 be
adopted as circulated. Carried
3. Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof- none
4. Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting
4.1. Minutes of the Meeting of June 27, 2019
Moved By- Sherry Hamilton Seconded By- Donna Scanlan
Proposed Resolution #2
THAT the minutes of the meeting for the Museum Advisory Committee meeting of June
27, 2019 be adopted as circulated. Carried
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
Museum Advisory Committee
Thursday, September 26, 2019
4:30 pm
Program Room- 2nd floor Annandale NHS
30 Tillson Ave., Tillsonburg MINUTES
Page 522 of 564
5. Delegations and Presentations-none
6. General Business & Reports
6.1. Financial- There is a balance of $152,005.81 in the Annandale House Trust
account. $10,000 estate settlement has come through.
6.2. Tour Guides-Guides remain as is. A guided tour last week on short notice done by
Joe Matisz.
6.3. Curator- The curator’s report was circulated and discussed.
Moved By-Patty Phelps Seconded By-Dianne MacKeigan
Proposed Resolution #3
THAT the reports be accepted as discussed. Carried
7. Correspondence- none
8. Other Business
8.1. Concerns were raised about viability of some of the trees on the property of
Annandale House. A letter will be sent to the Parks, Beautification and Cemetery
Committee expressing our concerns and requesting a copy of the Arborist’s report on
the status of the trees.
8.2. Questions were answered about the Annandale House Trust Fund.
8.3. An RFP has gone out for the work on the loading dock. Tenders have been
received but council has not yet awarded the contract yet.
8.4. Tillson Ave. porch has been looked at and the painting is to be done.
8.5. Kitchen eaves and overflow need to be inspected to make sure they are working
properly.
8.6. Painting of the storm windows is to be included in the 2020/21 capital budget.
8.7. Proposed budget- covered in the curator’s report.
Page 523 of 564
8.8. The advisory committee has MAJOR CONCERNS about the safety of staff working
alone in the building. We are not sure how this can be resolved.
9. Next Meeting- Thursday, October 24, 2019
10. Adjournment
Moved By- Dianne MacKeigan
Proposed Resolution #4
THAT the meeting be adjourned at 5:32 pm Carried
Page 524 of 564
Page 525 of 564
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
Economic Development Advisory Committee
September 10, 2019
7:30 a.m. Boardroom, Customer Service Centre 10 Lisgar Ave, Tillsonburg MINUTES
Present: Andrew Burns, Councillor Deb Gilvesy, Lisa Gilvesy, Jesse Goossens, Jim Hayes (Left at 9:23 a.m.), Kirby Heckford (Arrived at 8:22 a.m.), Lindsay Morgan-Jacko, Ashton
Nembhard, Steves Spanjers, Collette Takacs, Randy Thornton, Cedric Tomico, Jeff Van
Rybroeck (Left at 9:31 a.m.) and John Veldman (Arrived at 7:40 a.m.). Regrets: Lindsay Tribble.
Also Present: Amelia Jaggard, Legislative Services Coordinator Cephas Panschow, Development Commissioner Ron Shaw, Chief Administrative Officer
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:34 a.m.
2. Adoption of Agenda
Proposed Resolution #1 Moved by: Cedric Tomico Seconded by: Andrew Burns THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Economic Development Advisory Committee
meeting of October 8, 2019, be adopted. Carried. 3. Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest declared. 4. Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting Proposed Resolution #2 Moved by: Jim Hayes
Seconded by: Collette Takacs
THAT the Minutes of the Economic Development Advisory Committee meeting dated September 10, 2019, be approved. Carried.
5. Presentations/Deputations
Page 526 of 564
Committee: Economic Development Advisory Committee Page - 2 - of 5 Date: October 8, 2019
6. Information Items 7. General Business & Reports
7.1. Monthly Project Updates
Staff noted that the Van Norman Innovation Park is anticipated to be completed soon and the lands are expected to become available for sale in between July and September of 2020.
The Town is currently waiting for servicing and storm water management reports
for the Van Norman Innovation Park.
John Veldmin arrived at 7:40 a.m.
Staff noted that lands within the Van Norman Innovation Park can be sold prior to the project completion in 2020 under a conditional offer which would indicate
the date of sale as being such time as the Town can provide the road in front of the property. Mayor Molnar provided an update regarding Tillsonburg Hydro Inc. The Board is currently updating corporate by-laws, as well as reviewing the job descriptions of
the corporation (President, Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary). It was noted that at their meeting on September 23, 2019, Council approved a new job description for the Town of Tillsonburg CAO which does not include Hydro as a component of the role.
Development Commissioner provided an overview of the completed and outstanding tasks as identified in the 2008 Economic Development Strategy. The Economic Development Strategy will be reviewed and updated through a mix of external and internal effort. External consultants will complete data
review, community engagement and report drafting. Staff will review the 2008 Economic Development Strategy and identify relevant strategies to carry forward, data analysis, report drafting and final version. Staff noted that the Town’s intention with the Turtlefest Committee to date has
been to enable the committee to be as self-sufficient as possible. It was noted that a presentation by the Oxford Ontario Health Team regarding potential partnerships to advance a regional health team will be brought forward to County Council on October 9, 2019. Staff have requested that the Oxford
Ontario Health Team make the same presentation to Town Council at their meeting on October 28, 2019. 7.2. Community Strategic Plan 7.2.1. Excellence in Local Government
7.2.2. Economic Sustainability 7.2.3. Demographic Balance
Page 527 of 564
Committee: Economic Development Advisory Committee Page - 3 - of 5 Date: October 8, 2019
7.2.4. Culture and Community 7.3. Tillsonburg Hydro Inc
Discussed under item 7.1.
7.4. Town Hall Task Force The Committee presented an overview of Report DCS 19-29 Proposal Summary and Public Engagement Process at the Council meeting on September 23,
2019.
Council voted against moving forward with the public engagement process as outlined in the report. Staff were directed to provide a report which includes other Town Hall options including a build our own option and modifying the
current space.
Staff noted that all three proponents agreed to extend the RFP timeframe to the end of December 2019.
Kirby Heckford arrived at 8:22 a.m.
Staff will be providing Council with further information at the next regularly scheduled Council meeting. 7.5. Community Improvement Plan (Oxford Lofts Inc, 83 Rolph St – Phase 2) The developer applied to the CIP program strategic level for a proposed building
in the parking lot at the 83 Rolph Street property. Staff responded to the applicant that the project meets the medium level of the CIP program. The developer is asking for the CIP program to be reviewed and altered to allow the application to meet the strategic level.
Staff are currently reviewing the CIP program and will provide further information at the next meeting for the committee’s review and comment. 7.6. Oxford County Water and Wastewater Billing and Collections Review (Draft
Water By-Law) There was discussion about the proposed changes to the Oxford County Water By-Law. It was suggested that the proposed changes, which would shift the responsibility
of water and wastewater payments from the tenant to the landowner, is unfair as the landowner could be stuck with a huge bill if a tenant leaves or goes bankrupt. It was suggested that the proposed changes would negatively impact the
environment as tenants in multi-unit residencies would share one meter and therefore would not likely be concerned about their water usage.
Page 528 of 564
Committee: Economic Development Advisory Committee Page - 4 - of 5 Date: October 8, 2019
It was suggested that the proposed changes will negatively impact home renters as rental costs will rise due to the landlord assuming responsibility of payments. Additionally, rising rental costs could lead to a rise in poverty.
The Tillsonburg Chamber of Commerce Advocacy Committee is meeting at the end of the month to discuss this topic. Staff to confirm when the final decision on the proposed changes will be made
by County Council.
The committee passed the following resolution. Motion
Moved by: Jim Hayes
Seconded by: Kirby Heckford THAT the Committee advises Council of their objections to the County’s proposed policy changes to water and waste water billing which would shift
responsibility of water and waste water service costs to industrial, commercial
and residential landlords and will negatively impact environmental sustainability, affordability and fairness. AND THAT the committee request Council’s support for the committee to
present their opposition to the proposed policy changes to County Council.
Carried. 8. Community Organization Updates
8.1. Downtown Business Improvement Association
The BIA Award nominations have be extended to October 6, 2019. 8.2. Tillsonburg District Chamber of Commerce
8.3. Tillsonburg District Real Estate Board 8.4. Physician Recruitment Staff to reach out to the committee for an update.
It was suggested to reach out to the Tillsonburg District Memorial Hospital to ask how to encourage student residences at the hospital and how to attract specialist interns. 9. Correspondence 10. Other Business
Page 529 of 564
Committee: Economic Development Advisory Committee Page - 5 - of 5 Date: October 8, 2019
11. Round table The Toronto Home Show was successful and a Tillsonburg Home Tour is scheduled for October 26, 2019.
It was suggested to include a phone number on the competitive advantages flyer.
Jim Hayes left at 9:23 a.m.
It was suggested that other types of parking stalls (ex. maternity/family) should be incorporated into municipal parking.
Staff to follow up with the Operations Department regarding snow piling responsibilities at curb cuts.
Jeff Van Rybroeck left at 9:31 a.m.
12. Next Meeting
Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 7:30 a.m. in the Board Room at the Customer
Service Centre, 10 Lisgar Ave, Tillsonburg, ON. 13. Adjournment Proposed Resolution #3
Moved by: Steve Spanjers
Seconded by: Kirby Heckford THAT the October 8, 2019 Economic Development Advisory Committee meeting be adjourned at 9:32 a.m. Carried.
Page 530 of 564
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
Tillsonburg Transit Advisory Committee
October 15, 2019
10:00 a.m.
Suite 203, 200 Broadway, 2nd Floor MINUTES
Present: Sherry Hamilton, Kathryn Leatherland, Councillor Luciani (Arrived at 10:08 a.m.), Lynn Temoin, John Verbakel, and Mayor Stephen Molnar.
Regrets: Cindy Allen, David Brown, Carolijn Verbakel. Also Present:
Kevin De Leebeeck, Director of Operations (Arrived at 10:37 a.m.)
Amelia Jaggard, Legislative Services Coordinator Alex Piggott, Transit Coordinator 1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 10:04 a.m.
2. Adoption of Agenda Proposed Resolution #1 Moved by: Lynn Temoin
Seconded by: Kathryn Leatherland
THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Tillsonburg Transit Advisory Committee meeting of October 15, 2019, be adopted. Carried.
3. Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest declared. 4. Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting Proposed Resolution #2
Moved by: Lynn Temoin
Seconded by: John Verbakel THAT the minutes of the Tillsonburg Transit Advisory Committee dated September 17, 2019, be approved. Carried.
5. Presentations/Deputations
Page 531 of 564
Committee: Tillsonburg Transit Advisory Committee Page - 2 - of 3 Date: October 15, 2019
6. General Business & Reports 6.1. T:GO Transit
6.1.1. Action Item Summary Feedback was provided on the draft questionnaire which was sent to the committee to trial via Survey Monkey. It was suggested that there should be an option to input more than one payment type (i.e. cash and bus passes).
Councillor Luciani arrived at 10:08 a.m.
Staff to send out PDF version of the questionnaire for the Committee’s review. Staff noted that the finalized questionnaire will be made available on the Town website and social media pages, as well as promoted at ticket vendor
locations. It was suggested to make paper copies of the questionnaire available on the T:GO bus.
6.1.2. Fixed Route Service Comments 6.1.3. Ridership Stats Ridership is starting to increase.
Staff noted that information regarding alternative modes of transportation in Town has been posted on the Town website and made available on the T:GO pamphlet.
Staff continue to offer presentations to local institutions to educate residents
on the new system. 6.1.4. Christmas Saturday Bus Staff are soliciting sponsors through the Tillsonburg BIA until November 1,
2019, to support the Saturday T:GO bus service on November 30,
December 7, 14, and 21, 2019. The Tillsonburg BIA has provided a sponsorship to cover the cost of extending the T:GO bus service on the evening of the BIA’s “Lighting of
Lights” event in December.
It was suggested that the T:GO bus should enter the Santa Clause Parade on November 16, 2019.
6.1.5. Communications and Marketing update
Rogers TV has interviewed staff regarding T:GO. Staff will be interviewed again once there is more information available on the inter-community transit system.
Page 532 of 564
Committee: Tillsonburg Transit Advisory Committee Page - 3 - of 3 Date: October 15, 2019
Kevin De Leebeeck arrived at 10:37 a.m.
6.1.6. Bus Stop Winter Maintenance
Staff noted that winter maintenance is completed in accordance with a hierarchy of importance starting with roads, sidewalks and then bus stops. If a bus stop has not been cleared adequately, the bus driver should utilize an adjacent cleared walkway when possible.
6.2. Inter-Community Transit 6.2.1. RFP Transit Operations The RFP closed on October 11, 2019. Staff will review the proposals and provide a recommendation to Council on Monday, October 28, 2019.
7. Correspondence 8. Other Business
9. Next Meeting
Tuesday, November 19, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. at the Corporate Office in Suite 203, 200 Broadway, Tillsonburg, ON. 10. Adjournment
Proposed Resolution #3
Moved by: Pete Luciani Seconded by: Lynn Temoin THAT the October 15, 2019 Tillsonburg Transit Advisory Committee meeting be adjourned at 10:45 a.m. Carried.
Page 533 of 564
Tillsonburg Business Improvement Area Meeting Minutes
Board Meeting of
Thursday, September 19th, 2019
Carriage Hall 7:30 am – 9:26 am
1. CALL TO ORDER: Time: 7:36 a.m.
QUORUM: YES, 8/9 MEMBERS PRESENT
Members present: C. Tomico, C. Heutinck, M. Tedesco, J. Tilson, M. Van
Geertruyde, A. Hicks, D. Rasokas, D. Gilvesy
Members absent: W. Cameron
Guests present: S. Lamb, IOOF Lodge #50,
A. Piggott – Town of Tillsonburg,
D. Frei – Southridge Concept Renderings (FIP)
2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA:
a. moved by: M. Tedesco seconded by: C. Heutinck
and resolved that the agenda as prepared for the BIA Board of
Management meeting for Thursday, September 19th, 2019 be adopted.
“CARRIED”
3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF:
Note any disclosures: none declared
4. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES from the board meeting of July 18th, 2019
a. moved by: D. Gilvesy seconded by: M. Tedesco
and resolved that the minutes, as prepared for the meeting of
July 18th, 2019 be adopted.
“CARRIED”
1
Page 534 of 564
5. DELEGATIONS: (15 minutes)
a. David Frei – Southridge Rendering – update on 2019 Façade
Improvement Program projects – Mr. Frei presented a visual display of the
projects to date and the work plan. There was a lengthy discussion of the
projects that were undertaken or those being contemplated for the balance
of 2019.
b. Alex Piggott – Transit Co-ordinator, Town of Tillsonburg – gave a
powerpoint presentation on the transit structured routes and the proposal
to have the BIA sponsor the Saturday service extension from the last
Saturday in November until the Saturday before Christmas. The BIA
board gave direction to sponsor 2 x $600 for the gold sponsorship. The
BIA board was very supportive of the new town transit service. There was
also some discussion at to where the bus stops will be in the longer term.
The ED spoke about the inconvenience for Broadway businesses if the
mall stop is moved to the back of the mall. It makes sense to have the
main stop on Broadway for centricity to the library, banks & other
businesses.
6. TREASURER’S REPORT: There were no questions or comments on the
treasurer’s report and the board moved quickly for a discussion of the 2020
financial budget and business plans. The ED had previously highlighted a
$4,000 overpayment to Rona which was credited back to the Town of Tillsonburg
which will need to be repaid to the BIA forthwith. As of October 7th, 2019 – these
funds have not been repaid to the BIA.
7. 2020 BUDGET: Each board member was provided with a budget binder with
detailed worksheets, financial documents and the business plan documents prior
to the meeting. The Executive Director presented the budget summary. The top
line levy increase is 5.0% which includes a 4% reserve calculation. The ED
highlighted the main budget deficiencies being; a) a severe deficiency of “other
revenues” and b) the high level of debt. Also, there was discussion of reducing
the overall increase to the rate of inflation as per D. Rasokas and D. Gilvesy.
The ED spoke about the importance of ensuring compliance to all government
regulations, tax laws and the Municipal Act. The budget document ensures
compliance with all legislation. Effective January 1st, 2020; all contract
employees are converted to BIA employees. The EMC will be a full-time
position as of 01/01/2020 at an annual salary of $40,000 plus benefits (including
retirement plan, medical & life insurance). The ED will be a full-time position at
40 hours per week at an annual salary of $52,500 plus benefits (including
2
Page 535 of 564
retirement plan, medical & life insurance). All employment costs are included in
the “General & Administrative” cost center. The ED discussed the initiatives to
be undertaken to add additional revenues in 2020 including holding more events
that generate revenues; with Turtlefest; leveled sponsorships, additional events,
AGM Gala, banner sponsorship program similar to the Exeter BIA, umbrella &
table advertising, and other initiatives to increase revenues beyond those of the
municipal levy. The group made the decision to postpone the LED sign panel
replacement until 2021. D. Gilvesy asked to have the $12,000 expenditure
removed. D. Rasokas concurred with D. Gilvesy and wanted the year-over-year
levy increase at the rate of inflation or less. The ED also informed the board that
the BIA has its own CRA number (77306-8333) for both remittance and GST
accounts. One of the requirements of Summer Job Service funding is having a
CRA number for tax purposes. The BIA is exempt from WSIB premiums as per a
letter received from WSIB head office. The ED also highlighted a number of
errors and omissions relating to the BIA assessment role provided to the BIA
from the Town of Tillsonburg. There are some BIA zone properties that are not
paying the levy that should be. Any building with a business use should attract
the BIA levy. The ED will follow-up and schedule a meeting with the town’s
Revenue Manager, Denis Duguay, forthwith. A subsequent report will be brought
to the board at a future meeting. The ED will also follow-up with partners THI, 3E
Power and ERTH Corporation regarding partner funding for the 6 required
heritage fixtures on Brock Street East & West, the Broadway node power
improvements for food trucks and the refurbishment of the Broadway Plaza in
front of the Tillsonburg Town Centre Mall. The ED informed the board that the
BIA will take over full planning and control of the Turtlefest Block Party and will
run the VIP area itself. The key strategy is to monetize the value of the Block
Party as a key revenue generator for the BIA. The 2020 budget also includes the
purchase of a work truck which will be debentured and cost-recovered through
annual sponsorships. The budget details attached to these minutes drills down
into the details of the “ancillary revenues” contemplated in the overall budget.
Again, the ED stressed the importance of maximizing government funding
programs including Summer Jobs Service, Job Connect, TVDSB community
hours (40 hour per student, per calendar year), co-op placements with both
universities and colleges and grants available from the OTF (Ontario Trillium
Foundation) and others. The ED reviewed the capital plan and the importance of
having the tools to do the job. To this end, the BIA will develop virtually almost
all the operational capacity with the exception of garbage pick-up and banner
installation and removal. The budget also contains a 10-year financial forecast
which sees all debts fully retired by 2028 with no need to borrow any monies for
projects going forward. The ED also spoke about expanding the BIA zone to
3
Page 536 of 564
leverage costs and to harmonize promotions for the town so there is no conflict
between the retail areas of North Broadway, TILLCON, Simcoe Street and the
existing downtown area. This would be an initiative for 2021 and beyond. There
are also businesses on the cusp of the existing BIA boundaries which should be
in the BIA zone and this includes Verhoeve’s CJDL Engineering, Tillsonburg KIA
to name a few. The Façade Improvement Program saw heightened activity and
pay-outs in 2019. The ED spoke about the need for the rear façade details to be
finalized, (program elements), the increased costs for rear improvements due to
building and fire code requirements. To this end, the budget “asks” the Town of
Tillsonburg to increase its portion of FIP funding in 2020 to $31,000 from $25,000
to match the BIA allocation. This also provides for an inflationary adjustment
given that the town portion has been static since 2013. The ED also spoke
about the need to implement a capital cost sharing arrangement with the Town of
Tillsonburg similar to what other BIA’s do in Ontario. The ED also delivered the
budget and business plans to Ron Shaw & Dave Rushton so that they are fully in
the loop. The board will now need to present the board-approved budget at the
November AGM to gain member support and approval before being forwarded to
Tillsonburg Town Council for their consideration during the town’s budgetary
deliberations to be scheduled. The budget and business plan will be posted on
the town’s website, there will be a mailer to all BIA members and there will be a
notice in the Tillsonburg News. Management will ensure that there is full and
complete communication for all financial and governance initiatives so as to
continue to build more awareness and trust with the members. Management will
also meet with all key stakeholders including the Tillsonburg Horticultural Society,
Town of Tillsonburg, Tillsonburg Garden Gate, Oxford Small Business Centre,
Tillsonburg Chamber of Commerce, OBIAA and other partners to ensure that all
partnerships and resources area fully utilized for all BIA operations. The ED will
also be working with the Ontario Trillium Foundation for grant funding for cultural
projects in the BIA zone and to write said grant applications so that they fit and
meet all of the required criteria.
Proposed resolution #Sep-01-2020 Budget:
a. Moved by: D. Gilvesy and seconded by: J. Tilson
And resolved that the BIA Board of Management hereby approves the adjusted
2020 Budget with a levy requirement from the Town of Tillsonburg of $139,450
and total revenues of $289,561. The year-over-year levy increase is 1.0%
4
Page 537 of 564
comprised of an inflation factor while also creating reserve accounts for future
use. The actual net effect to the average BIA member assessment is a
decrease of 5.0% accounting for a correction of errors & omissions with the 2018
assessment roll. The budget includes the conversion of all contract staff to
employees as at January 1st, 2020 and the conversion of the Events and
Marketing Co-ordinator to full-time status (40 hours per week) effective January
1st, 2020. The HR changes contained in the budget will ensure compliance with
CRA, MOL/Employment Standards Act & other government legislation.
“CARRIED”
NOTE: The revised 2020 budget and business plan are attached to the minutes
at the end of this document.
8. COUNTY OF OXFORD PLANNING REPORTS: There were no comments.
9. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT: The ED presented a truncated report
given the timelines of today’s meeting. 2020 BUDGET: The ED and EMC have
been working diligently on the 2020 budget. The document draft was completed
the week of September 9th. The budget has several key structural components
and it was highlighted about the human resources being converted to salary from
contract to be compliant with CRA and mitigation of risk to the BIA Board of
Management; including allocation for health benefits & retirement plan and life
insurance & to increase EMC to full-time status as of Jan 1, 2020 to effect
heightened promotional activity, stronger social media presence, BIA to take over
100% control, planning and revenues for the Block Party, etc. The EMC & ED
will be working together to ensure the “other revenue” line of the budget is met or
exceeded. Also, the ED spoke about the need for volunteers for the clean-up
and storage of the new beautification elements. The proposed storage area is
the basement of the IOOF Lodge on south Broadway. The BIA management
team is working on the balance of year, (BOY), operational plan including the
remaining promotional events culminating in a refreshed and larger Christmas
Crawl. The ED also had a discussion with the Turtlefest Executive Committee
about a reduction in funding to Turtlefest for 2020 given that we are employing
the EMC to plan and execute the Block Party. The ED has not committed any
amounts to Turtlefest for 2020. Note: in 2019, the BIA paid a $5,000 sponsorship
fee to Turtlefest. The ED and EMC will be working on tallying the nominations
for the Downtown Awards to be presented at the upcoming AGM in November.
The AGM will have a more robust agenda to include the budget, business plans
and to celebrate the achievements of our downtown members. The EMC and
5
Page 538 of 564
ED will be working with the CEO of the Tillsonburg Chamber of Commerce about
the physical awards to be presented. The AGM will also feature a “year in
review” to highlight all BIA accomplishments and to produce a “report card” of
both positives and areas requiring improvement.
10. Façade Improvement Program business:
a. FIP: request for approval of FIP application for Jesse Goosens for the
municipal address of 58 Broadway St. (the building containing Tillsonburg
Memorials, Hurley’s and the relocation of Millard, Rouse, Rosebrugh from
Harvey Street).
Motion: Moved by: M. Van Geertruyde and Seconded by: C. Heutinck
and resolved that the Board of Management of the Tillsonburg BIA approves in
principle, the grant application in the amount of $30,000 pending successful
construction and inspection(s) of said project at 54-58 Broadway/15-19 Oxford
Street – operating as Millard’s, Hurley’s and Tillsonburg Memorials.
“CARRIED”
b. FIP: request for approval of FIP application for Wendy & John Cameron
for the rear of municipal address of 93-95 Broadway in the amount of
$10,000.
and resolved that the Board of Management of the Tillsonburg BIA approves
in principle, the grant application in the amount of $10,000 pending successful
construction and inspection(s) of said project at 93-95 Broadway.
Motion: Moved by: M. Van Geertruyde and Seconded by: C. Heutinck
“CARRIED”
11. ROUNDTABLE: there were no items brought forward for discussion.
12. NEXT MEETING – Thursday, October 24th, 2019 at Carriage Hall – 7:00 am
breakfast, 7:30 am meeting
13. MOTION TO ADJOURN :
a. moved by: D. Gilvesy b. seconded by: M. Tedesco
“CARRIED”
6
Page 539 of 564
Tillsonburg BIA - 2020 BIA Budget Financial Summary
Summary of
Revenues & Expenditures
2018 Actual
Audited
2019 Budget 2019 Projected
(forecast)
2020 Proposed
Budget
Revenues:
BIA Levy (requirement from taxation) 127,217 136,621 136,621 139,450
Town contribution to Façade Program 25,000 25,000 25,000 31,000
Other income & funding inc. SJS,
sponsorships, Turtlefest, banner program 3,525 13,264 19,137 55,220
HST rebate 13,111 15,000 20,063 14,336
Interest income 77 2,220 960 1,010
Rock Developments-Sobey’s agreement 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500
Contribution from accumulated surplus 0 0 70,000 46,000
Total Revenues: 171,722 194,605 254,281 289,516
Levy as % of total revenues 74.1% 70.2% 53.7% 47.6%
Expenditures:
General, administrative + operations
(including payroll, office and day to day expenses) 29,593 84,673 84,377 125,691
Debt principle & interest 8,989 11,628 25,067 22,504
Debt P&I payment as a % of levy: 7.1% 8.5% 18.3% 16.1%
HST (1.76%) 100% of GST, 78% of PST 14,251 20,000 21,808 15,583
Capital, repair & special projects 6,734 500 15,978 23,000
Marketing, events & advertising
(includes cost of running events) 7,806 18,250 9,191 24,000
Façade Improvement Program 25,000 50,000 81,000* 62,000
Beautifications – plants, street
furniture, umbrellas, trees, waste
containers
6,785 13,250 39,000 11,000
Capital reserve provision (*NEW) 0 0 0 2,869
Operating reserve provision (*NEW) 0 0 0 2,869
Total Expenditures: 94,158 194,605 254,281 289,516
Net Revenue/(Deficit) +77,564 0 0 0
Summary of Accumulated Surplus:
(cash based)
*timing of payment
for FIP projects
*final payment of
$4,495 due 03/31/20
from refinancing
Beginning Balance 106,284 192,783 220,345 150,345
Change in Accumulated Surplus +114,061 0 -70,000 -40,262
Ending Balance 220,345 192,783 150,345 110,083
*FIP expenses in 2019 (actual), include 3 projects carried over from 2018 (5 storefronts) & 3 storefronts (Hurley’s building)
7
Page 540 of 564
2020 BIA Budget - key objectives:
1. To develop non-levy revenues through increased event, fundraising, sponsorships,
partnerships & other sources of funding:
a. Turtle-fest Block Party to be maximized as a revenue enhancement tool
b. Banner sponsorship programs: i.e. Exeter BIA program, table, umbrella ads
c. Initiate & implement leveled sponsorship programs similar to the Chamber of
Commerce to build long-lasting relationships for stability of funding.
d. Maximize available government funding programs including Summer Jobs
Service, OMAFRA, Digital Main-street, provincial programs, etc.
e. Increase the frequency and quality of all promotional/event activities
2. Implement tools to self-finance capital projects internally & via sponsorship offset:
a. Plan for annual reserves in all budgets going forward
b. Negotiate a 50/50 capital cost-sharing agreement with the town council
c. Prepare 5 & 10 year capital project list with identified funding sources
3. To be in compliance with CRA, Municipal Act, Town Code of Conduct:
a. Conversion of human resources to employee from contract
b. Drives ability for additional grant-funding opportunities (availability of
funding) & ensures adherence to the Employment Standards Act
c. Ensures integrity of the BIA operations and reduces risk
4. To invest in our strengths & building on the pro-activity & strengths of our people:
a. Retention of existing human resources is key our future success(es)
b. Increase the EMC to 1.0 FTE (funded internally)
c. Maintain 0.4 FTE for Spring/Summer/Fall student labour (funded externally)
d. Add seasonal co-op student for Marketing & Promotions (funded externally)
e. Provide medical, life, health and retirement benefits to FTE’s
f. Continue to recruit new Board Members to improve board efficacy
5. To providing the tools necessary to do the job & developing self-sufficiencies for self-
sustaining operational capabilities within the BIA organization:
a. Watering apparatus including tank, sprayer hose & truck mounts
b. Full-size, regular cab work truck – capital cost offset 100% by sponsorships
c. Graphic design hardware & software tools (new Mac for EMC)
d. Investment in FTE’s to ensure plan execution & to increase work output
6. Preparations to expand the BIA boundary for effect on January 1st, 2021
a. Work with the Town Clerk and Legislative Services Department on the necessary
steps required for a successful implementation plan
b. Implement a communications plan for said expansion
8
Page 541 of 564
Other revenue breakdown:
Employment programs
Includes full-year allocation of part-
time student labour plus one co-op
horticultural student
Programs can be staggered or
stacked beginning with March break
2020 & Youth Job Connect
$10,500
Summer Job Service (SJS)
Youth Job Connect – (YJC)
Fanshawe/Guelph/Ridgetown
TVDSB co-op placements
Turtlefest VIP area tickets $5,000 100 tickets @ $50
All revenues to BIA
Turtlefest Block Party food
truck permits
$1,220 5 x $244
Revenue shared with Turtlefest Committee
Work truck sponsorship
(commensurate with purchase of
truck May 1, 2020)
$6,000 6 sponsors x $1,000
DeGroote-Hill, Garden Gate & 4 others
(for 5 years to cover debenture payments of
the work truck)
Leveled sponsorship
program
(similar to Chamber of Commerce)
$7,000 1 Gold sponsor - $1,500 = $1,500
2 Silver sponsors - $1,000 = $2,000
5 Bronze sponsors - $500 = $2,500
Media partner - $1,000 (1)
AGM Gala & Awards $5,000 100 tickets @ $50
Banner program
(similar to Exeter BIA)
$10,000 50 banners @ $200/each
Term: per year, per banner
Affiliate member program $5,000 20 @ $250
OMAFRA project funding $5,500 BIA will apply for various available program
funding.
*New event revenues TBD
Ideas:
Wine & Food Fest
Cruise Nights d/t
Indoor Farmer’s Market
Fashion Show(s)
$10,000
*not included in budget, will plan as
contingency to achieve “other revenue”
target
Totals: $55,220
9
Page 542 of 564
2020 Budget introduction:
The context of which the 2020 budget was written and devised is critical to
understanding the details presented. Further to this, it is the job of management to
prepare the annual budget and for the board to review, discuss, provide feedback,
suggest changes and then approve the document prior to the required member
notification & presentation at the November AGM and finally, subsequent approval by
Town Council during their 2020 budget process.
The budget was compiled after reviewing the recent financial results, however, & more
importantly, it was critical in looking forward to the future & specifically, devising a
long-term forecast & plan towards 2030. At present, there is a high level of debt caused
by an inability to finance capital improvements internally. Also, other BIA’s notably
those in the City of Toronto, have a 50/50 cost-share plan with the city for all capital
improvements. It is the view of management that long term debt is too high given the
limited resources that the BIA has to pay such debt. One of the structural improvements
of having a longer-term financial view is that by the beginning of 2028, there will be no
long term debt if the BIA adopts the recommendations in this budget document.
The 2020 budget includes a 4% reserve - comprised of 2% for each of operating
and capital expenditures. Management also recommends including this allocation
annually as shown in the attached 10-year financial forecast. The primary benefit of
having an annual reserve calculation and plan, is that by 2028, there is no debt, there
will be a significant reserve in place for any/all capital spending that is required, and the
BIA can weather any period of economic difficulty or to deal with assessment rebates
due to members. There will also be no need to finance any type of debt going
forward due to the planning & reserve calculations included therein.
The BIA and Town of Tillsonburg should have a similar, if not identical policy of a
50/50 cost share for all BIA capital improvements. With direction from the board,
management will bring a resolution forward for consideration of adopting a policy for
the BIA with Town Council/Town of Tillsonburg.
10
Page 543 of 564
The board has traditionally been an “operating board” vs. being a “governance board”.
This budget reflects the need to develop and implement the policies, procedures and an
updated constitution so that there is a sustainable platform for the BIA operations into
the longer term. Members of the board cannot and should not be expected to
perform day-to-day operational tasks of the BIA. As a point of reference, the
Uptown Waterloo BIA has gone through a similar transition during the past couple of
years.
Management has also undertaken a review of other BIA’s financial performance and one
key area where we are severely deficient, is the generation of revenue outside of the
municipal levy. To this end, management will be focused on developing sponsorships,
government funding, employment program revenues, monetization of the Turtlefest
Block Party, and where feasible; fully offset the cost of any new debt (i.e. work truck); via
100% cost recovery plan including external sponsorship(s).
Also, the board has a fiduciary responsibility to mitigate risk and to ensure compliance
with all applicable government legislation. To this end, the budget contemplates &
includes the conversion of all human resources to employees from contractors.
This ensures compliance with CRA, Ministry of Labour/ Employment Standards Act and
significantly improves access to government funding.
General & administration costs are forecast to increase by a change to the Events &
Marketing Co-ordinator to full-time status as of January 1st, 2020 in addition to
providing medical, dental and retirement benefits to both full-time employees. We are
in a digital marketplace with a heavy influence of social media. It is critical to have the
staff & team to focus on marketing & events. The budget contemplates the BIA taking
over the entire planning and operations of the Block Party to include a VIP area and to
maximize revenues for the BIA from this point forward. There is a separate tab for the
Human Resources Plan, which shows the net changes to FTE’s for 2020.
All capital items in the budget are financed internally other than the cost of the work
truck – which will be fully offset by direct sponsorships. Façade Improvement Program
funding is forecasted to be above budget in 2019 due to carryover projects from
previous years. There are outstanding FIP expenses from 2017 & 2018 from projects not
yet fully invoiced & paid with respect to Roka Billiards & Ronson’s Audio in addition to
the $30,000 payment for the old Prouse Furniture building on Brock St. E.
11
Page 544 of 564
The is a separate tab in the budget binder for the Human Resources Plan, Capital
Expenditure (CAPEX) projects, current long term debt and supporting documents as well
as the proposed governance changes contemplated, new board directory and finally, the
2020 meeting schedule which includes the 2020 Annual General Meeting.
12
Page 545 of 564
2020 Budget & Business plan key summary points:
1) Municipal levy increase to $139,450 or 1.0%; which is comprised of a 1% inflation factor
plus 4% reserve. See point #2 below.
2) Work with the town’s Revenue Manager to correct errors and omissions with the
assessment roll. This will equate to a net decrease per BIA member from $594 in 2019 to
$585 in 2020.
3) Increase non-levy revenues to $55,220 through sponsorships, government employment
programs, event sales/income, & other funding sources. See attached.
4) Increase the budget for FIP projects to 6 from 5 in anticipation of the roll-out of the rear-
façade improvement category including an inflationary adjustment.
5) Ask the Town of Tillsonburg to increase their FIP funding portion to $31,000 per annum
with a matching contribution by the BIA.
6) Developing virtually 100% internal BIA self-sufficiency with operations and maintenance
including watering, floral care and planning/implementation of all capital improvements.
7) The proposed debt required to pay for the work truck is offset by annual sponsorships.
8) The 2004 Broadway node/reconstruction debt is fully paid for as of 03/31/2020.
9) Implement monthly BIA programs and events like a fashion show in the mall; more
sidewalk sales; new website; new communication tools; new banner program; new
umbrella and table marketing materials, etc.
10) Conversion of all human resources to employees + provide medical, dental, life insurance
and retirement benefits to full-time staff.
11) Implement a change to the EMC position to salary from contract as well as full-time
status as of January 1st, 2020 @ $40,000 per year. (plus pension, medical & life)
12) Convert the ED to salary from contract as of January 1st, 2020 @$52,500 per year. (plus
pension, medical & life)
13) Re-configure the existing office to create a new work-space for the EMC.
14) Build on the successful beautification plan by implementing all learnings and continuous
improvement tactics in subsequent years.
15) Develop and implement new branding and logo for the BIA.
16) Make full use of the Summer Job Service student employment program.
17) Implement leveled sponsorships (i.e. Chamber of Commerce), to add non-levy revenues.
18) Negotiate a revised Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Town of Tillsonburg
to take effect early in 2020 including regular gross levy payments by by-law.
19) Prepare to expand the BIA boundaries for effect on January 1st, 2021.
13
Page 546 of 564
BIA Human Resource Plan - Historical & 2020 budget
*FTE analysis detail (*FTE = full-time equivalent)
BIA Staff
Position:
2018
Actual
2019
Budget
2019
Actual
2020
Budget
Net
change:
Executive Director
0.25
1.0
1.0
1.0
n/c
Events & Marketing
Co-ordinator
0
0.25
0.3
1.0
+0.7
“Keep it Beautiful” &
seasonal student labour
0
0
0.4
1.0
+0.6
Co-op student
(horticulture)
0
0
0
.4
+0.4
Totals: 0.3 1.25 1.7 3.4 +1.7
History of total
net FTE change:
-1.1 FTE
+0.9 FTE
+0.5 FTE
+1.7 FTE
Notes:
1. Seasonal student & co-op student labour is funded externally to $1,000 per
person and can begin as early as March break 2020.
2. There was no Executive Director for most of 2018.
3. There were no Community Living costs for the “Keep it Beautiful” program
associated in 2018’s fiscal year.
4. The 2020 budget proposes external funding for 1.4 FTE’s.
14
Page 547 of 564
Capital equipment & project list:
Priority: PRIORITY Item/equipment/project: How is it paid for?
1 2020 Silverado W/T
(sponsored: DeGroote-Hill, Garden Gate & 4 others)
Debentured, cost
recovered 100% for the
entire term of the
debenture (5 year term)
1 iMAC desktop & printer for EMC $4,000, funded internally
1 Purchase & installation of 6 additional heritage light
fixtures for Brock St. E & W to address lighting
concerns brought forward by BIA members
$11,250, funded internally
2 Broadway power upgrades
(Brock Street to Baldwin Street)
To facilitate proper, quiet and safe operation of food
trucks for special events
$4,000, may be sponsored
by THI & ERTH
Corporation & funded
internally
3 Watering apparatus for downtown plants/trees
This will allow for internal operational capabilities
$500, funded internally
may be sponsored by
Agrospray
4 Additional street furniture & replacement steel tables
to supplement existing capital assets and to replace
damaged/broken tables from 2019 weather events
$2,000, funded internally
Other items under consideration:
Downtown music system $4,000, may be sponsored
Wi-Fi re-implementation including hardware $6,000, may be sponsored
T-Go transit shelter for Tillsonburg Town Centre
The TTC is one of the main T-GO stops for both
routes.
$8,000, (cost-share offset
by some advertising
revenue)
Total: $23,000 (internal +$5,000
funded externally)
15
Page 548 of 564
Downtown infrastructure upgrades & capital spending plan details:
1) Procure work truck to effect daily operations including watering, maintenance,
special event operations, moving of goods and services required for daily
operations of the BIA. At present, the BIA team is using personal vehicles for
bulky and awkward event, equipment and other items.
Purchase timing: May 1st, 2020.
2) Install new hydro connections on Broadway from Baldwin/Oxford northerly to
Brock Street including availability of 220v power for food trucks.
Operational target: Prior to Turtlefest 2020
3) Refurbish the Broadway plaza including removal of the hemlock trees to be
replaced by lower maintenance species and the potential installation of LED
lighting, overhead canopy & heritage fixtures – (funded internally, with town,
sponsorship & partner support).
Operational target: May 24th, 2020
4) In conjunction with T-Go; purchase of transit/bus shelter for the front of the
Tillsonburg Town Centre Mall
Operational target: January 1st, 2020
5) Re-implementation of WiFi system in conjunction with town and county.
6) Replace focal point signage panels which are technically obsolete/unreliable.
7) Installation and test of downtown music.
8) Begin replacement of glass-top tables with steel-inlayed types.
9) Equip the Events & Marketing Co-ordinator with MAC desktop, printer &
software.
16
Page 549 of 564
Key 2019 BIA accomplishments:
1. Successful implementation of the beautification plan with learnings for 2020 and
beyond.
2. Planned and executed 6 additional events throughout the year.
3. 2020 budget planning completed in advance of end of calendar year including
approvals as required.
4. Strengthened the organization with addition of summer students
5. Completion of multi-year capital plan to 2030.
6. Completion of multi-year budget to 2030.
7. Strengthened the Board with 4 additional members.
8. Strengthened and added new members to all sub-committees.
9. Found zero cost storage for BIA assets at 79 Broadway (basement).
10. Reviewed, updated and improved assessment roll listing for BIA levy which had
several important errors.
11. Transition to a new financial institution.
12. Improved downtown cleanliness and aesthetics.
13. Successful Turtlefest Block Party.
14. Successful Canada Day activities.
15. Completed draft update for BIA constitution for approval at the AGM.
16. Worked with the Clerk’s Office to update BIA by-laws.
17. Sent numerous resolutions to Town Council for consideration and action.
17
Page 550 of 564
10 YEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST:
Summary of
Revenues & Expenditures 2021
2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenues: 150th town
anniversary
200th settlement
anniversary
BIA Levy 143,000 146,500 150,175 154,000 158,000
Town contribution to FIP 31,000 31,000 32,000 32,000 32,000
Sponsorships, events & other
funding 70,000 80,000 80,000 81,000 82,000
HST rebate 16,907 20,001 17,100 17,442 21,088
Interest income 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700
Rock Developments – Sobey’s
agreement 2,500 2,500 2,500 Agreement
expired
Agreement
expired
Contribution from surplus 0 0 0 0 0
Total Revenues: 264,707 281,401 283,275 286,042 294,788
Levy as % of total revenues 56.1% 51.7% 51.2% 52.3% 53.5%
Expenditures:
General & administrative 128,189 128,864 130,399 132,285 136,550
Debt principle & interest 20,423 20,046 19,669 19,297 12,914
HST (1.76%) 100% of GST,
78% of PST recoverable 18,377 20,631 18,587 18,800 22,004
Capital & special projects 10,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 16,500
Marketing, special events, &
general advertising 10,000 16,000 15,000 16,000 20,000
Façade Improv’t Program 62,000 62,000 64,000 64,000 64,000
Beautifications – plants, furniture,
umbrellas, trees, waste containers 10,000 13,000 14,000 14,500 16,500
Capital reserve (2% of levy) 2,859 2,930 3,004 3,080 3,160
Operating reserve (2% of levy) 2,859 2,930 3,004 3,080 3,160
Total Expenditures: 264,707 281,401 283,275 286,042 294,788
Net Revenue/(Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0
Summary of Accum’d Surplus:
Beginning Balance 110,083 115,261 121,121 127,125 133,285
Change in Accumulated Surplus +5,178 +5,860 +6,004 +6,160 +6,320
Ending Balance 115,261 121,121 127,125 133,285 139,605
18
Page 551 of 564
10 YEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST CONTINUED……
Summary of
Revenues & Expenditures 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Revenues:
BIA Levy 162,000 166,000 171,000 175,000 179,000
Town contribution to Façade
Program 33,000 33,000 33,000 34,000 34,000
Sponsorships, events & other
funding 80,000 80,000 81,000 82,000 86,000
HST rebate 22,001 22,450 22,899 23,357 23,824
Interest income 1,800 1,900 2,000 2,125 2,300
Rock Developments – Sobey’s
agreement Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
Contribution from accum’d surplus 0 0 0 0 0
Total Revenues: 298,801 303,350 309,899 316,482 325,124
Levy as % of total revenues 54.2% 54.7% 55.2% 55.3% 55.1%
Expenditures:
General & administrative 140,689 143,000 146,000 149,000 152,000
Debt principle & interest 12,914 12,159 11,784 0 0
HST (1.76%) 100% of GST,
78% of PST recoverable 23,924 24,402 24,600 24,810 25,000
Capital & special projects 16,370 16,500 17,500 18,000 19,000
Marketing, events, & general
advertising 15,370 16,500 17,500 18,500 19,500
Façade Improv’t Program 66,000 66,000 66,000 68,000 68,000
Beautifications – plants, furniture,
umbrellas, trees, waste containers 14,000 15,000 16,000 25,000 25,000
Capital reserve (2% of levy) 3,832 3,908 3,986 4,066 4,147
Operating reserve (2% of levy) 3,832 3,908 3,986 4,066 4,147
Total Expenditures: 296,931 301,377 307,356 311,442 316,794
Net Revenue/(Deficit) +1,870 +1,973 +2,543 +5,040 +8,330
Summary of Accumulated Surplus:
Beginning Balance 139,605 149,139 158,928 169,443 182,615
Change in Accumulated Surplus +9,534 +9,789 +10,515 +13,172 +16,624
Ending Balance 149,139 158,928 169,443 182,615 199,239
19
Page 552 of 564
Summary of long-term debt:
*Current balance as of September 1st, 2019:
Project: Financed by: Total
debenture:
Current
balance*:
Payment
frequency:
Final
payment:
2004
Broadway
reconstruction
(nodes)
TD Bank
London
$43,000
$8,880.78
Twice
annually
March 31,
2020
2018
heritage
streetlights &
LED
conversion
Infrastructure
Ontario
$115,000
$111,046.60
Twice
annually
December 3,
2028
20
Page 553 of 564
Governance review & recommendations:
1. Meet with Town Clerk and Legislative Service Department for guidance on adherence to the
Ontario Municipal Act; Municipal Code of Conduct; & proper handling of the AGM.
Update: first meeting held on August 22nd.
2. Update the BIA Constitution for presentation and adoption at the AGM in November.
Status: In progress.
3. Develop a voting proxy for the AGM in increase/improve participation. Town Clerk to
provide suggestion(s). Status: In progress. Will report back to the board prior to the AGM for
action.
4. Invite the Clerk and Deputy Clerk as a delegation to a board meeting to review the BIA By-
law. Status: To be scheduled.
5. Update all BIA policies and procedures for presentation at the AGM in November.
Status: In progress.
6. Appoint an Independent Meeting Investigator. This should be a motion for adoption at the
AGM. Status: To be added to the AGM agenda.
7. The chart below outlines accountability and responsibility of the partners:
TASK
BIA
STAFF
BIA
BOARD
TOWN
CLERK
TOWN
COUNCIL
BIA
MEMBERSHIP
Developing the Human Resources Plan X
Approving the Human Resources Plan X
Developing the Annual Budget & Business Plan X
Approving the Annual Budget & Business Plan X X X
Recruiting new Board Members X X
Appointing & Approving New Board Members X
Preparing Operating Plans X
Approving Operating Plans X
Cheque signing authorities X X
Presentations to Town Council X X
Public Relations & Media Spokesperson X X
Posting minutes to the Town website X
Ensuring adherence to the Municipal Act X X X
Ensuring adherence to the
Town’s Code of Conduct
X X X
Board Member resignations X X
Running the Annual General Meeting (AGM) X X
21
Page 554 of 564
2020 Marketing Introduction & Strategic Directions
The most important strategic imperative for 2020 is to increase the Events and
Marketing Co-ordinator to full-time status effective January 1st. This is critical as we
execute the following projects and events in 2020:
1. The BIA to take over full planning and operations of the Block Party.
2. The BIA will monetize the Block Party event to increase revenues.
3. The BIA will operate, itself, the VIP area including the sale of tickets.
4. Undertake a re-branding exercise including development of a new logo.
5. Invest in core marketing activities including:
a. Development of a proper & dynamic website
b. Strong management and execution of all social media channels.
c. Implement a “Shop Tillsonburg First” marketing campaign.
6. Liaise with OMAFRA & other government agencies to procure additional tourism & event
funding.
7. Run 12 monthly promotional events in addition to Turtlefest, Canada Day, Fitness Event,
Christmas Crawl & other seasonal promotions.
8. Increase the number of sidewalk sale events from 2 to 4 to cover off all of the seasons.
9. Adopt a version of the Exeter BIA banner revenue program for spring 2020.
10. Implement the tiered/leveled sponsorship program (Tillsonburg Chamber of Commerce).
11. Confirm 6 sponsors of the BIA work truck @$1,000 per annum, per sponsor.
12. Testing of Google and Facebook ads.
13. In conjunction with Rogers Community Television; continue the “Downtown Tillsonburg”
television show.
14. Continue to implement all best-practices from other BIA’s. BID’s and BIZ’s.
15. Implement regular blog posts for social media.
16. Create and post short videos to all social media channels.
By having a full-time resource in the marketing and promotions area will allow the BIA
to be more impactful throughout the year and to effect visible downtown events on a
more regular & predictable basis. There will be a reduced need to use radio, print,
newspaper or other media advertising as the EMC will be utilizing lower-cost digital
platforms. As listed above, there will be a testing of Google and Facebook ads which
will be evaluated for effectiveness. This will be at minimal cost.
22
Page 555 of 564
Executive Director Salary Analysis – September 1st, 2019
Location: Title: Employer: Annual wage: Date of survey: Index to
market value:
Woodstock
BIA
Manager
City of
Woodstock
$47,000 +
benefits + pension
Current .63
Downtown
London BIA
Executive
Director
Downtown
London BIA
$101,000 +
benefits
Current 1.35
Milton
Downtown BIA
Executive
Director
Town of
Milton
$51,783 Current .69
London, ON
regional
survey
Executive
Director
Various: all
gov’t & non-
profit agencies
$74,701 +
bonus + benefits
Current n/a
Midland
BIA
Contract
Manager
Midland
BIA
$29,000
Part-time
January 1st, 2019 .58
Leamington
BIA
Contract
Manager
Leamington
BIA
$29,000
Part-time
January 1st, 2019 .58
Cobourg
BIA
Co-ordinator
Downtown
Town of
Cobourg
$42,000
37.5 hours/week
January 1st, 2019 .56
Kingston
Downtown BIA
Managing
Director
Downtown
Kingston BIA
$83,300 January 1st, 2019 1.12
Tillsonburg
BIA current
Executive
Director
Tillsonburg
BIA
$40,000
(contract)
December 3rd,
2018
.55
Tillsonburg
BIA proposed
for 2020
Executive
Director
Tillsonburg
BIA
$52,500
(salaried +
benefits/pension)
January 1st,
2020
.70
23
Page 556 of 564
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
BY-LAW 4351
A BY-LAW To Appoint an Alternate Member of the Upper-Tier Council for the
Town of Tillsonburg.
WHEREAS Section 268 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, Council may
appoint one of its members as an alternate member of the upper-tier council (Oxford
County Council), to act in place of a person who is a member of the councils of the local
municipality (Tillsonburg Town Council) and its upper-tier municipality (Oxford County
Council), when the person is unable to attend a meeting of the upper-tier council for any
reason.
AND WHEREAS Section 268 (2) Subsection (1) does not authorize (a) the appointment
of more than one alternate member during the term of council; (b) the appointment of an
alternate member to act in place of an alternate member.
AND WHEREAS The Council of the Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg deems it is
necessary and expedient to appoint an Alternate Member of the Upper-Tier Council for
the Town of Tillsonburg.
BE IT THEREFORE ENACTED by the Council of the Corporation of the Town of
Tillsonburg as follows:
1. THAT Dave Beres be hereby appointed as an Alternate Member of the Upper-
Tier Council for the Town of Tillsonburg for the term ending December 31, 2022;
2. THAT this By-Law is passed pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.
25.
3. THAT this By-law shall come into full force and effect upon passing.
READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 28th day of OCTOBER, 2019.
READ A THIRD AND FINAL TIME AND PASSED THIS 28th day of OCTOBER, 2019.
___________________________
MAYOR – Stephen Molnar
______________________________
TOWN CLERK – Donna Wilson
Page 557 of 564
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
BY-LAW 4352
A BY-LAW to appoint a Deputy Clerk for the Town of Tillsonburg.
WHEREAS the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. C 25, allows for the appointment of officers of the
Municipality;
AND WHEREAS Section 228(2) allows the municipality to appoint deputy clerks;
AND WHEREAS The Council of the Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg deems it is
necessary and expedient to appoint a Deputy Clerk for the Corporation of the Town
of Tillsonburg;
THEREFORE the Council of the Town of Tillsonburg enacts as follows:
1. THAT Amelia Jaggard is hereby appointed as Deputy Clerk.
2. THAT this By-Law is passed pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001 S.O. 2001, C 25.
3. THAT This By-Law shall come into full force and effect on the day of passing.
READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 28th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019.
READ A THIRD AND FINAL TIME AND PASSED THIS 28th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019.
_______________________
MAYOR – Stephen Molnar
___________________________
TOWN CLERK - Donna Wilson
Page 558 of 564
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
BY-LAW NUMBER 4353
BEING A BY-LAW TO AUTHORIZE AN INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG AND THE COUNTY OF
OXFORD.
AND WHEREAS The Town of Tillsonburg is desirous of entering into an Indemnification
Agreement with the County of Oxford, to allow for the installation of an Opticom System at
traffic light signals on highways owned by The County of Oxford;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg enacts as
follows:
1. THAT the Indemnification Agreement attached hereto forms part of this by-law;
2. AND THAT the Mayor and Town Clerk be hereby authorized to execute the attached
Agreement between the Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg and the County of
Oxford;
3. AND THAT this By-Law shall come into full force and effect on the day of its passing.
READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 28th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019.
READ A THIRD AND FINAL TIME AND PASSED THIS 28th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019.
_____________________________
Mayor – Stephen Molnar
______________________________
Town Clerk – Donna Wilson
Page 559 of 564
RELEASE FROM LIABILITY
INDEMNIFICATION
WAIVER OF CLAIMS
ASSUMPTION OF RISKS
WHEREAS the Fire Department of The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg (the
“Town”) intends to install and operate traffic signal pre-emption apparatus to control
traffic light signals (the “Traffic Control Apparatus”) on highways, property and
equipment owned by The County of Oxford (the “County”);
AND WHEREAS the County has requested certain assurances regarding the
installation and operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus;
NOW THEREFORE, THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that for good and valuable
consideration, including the acceptance of the Traffic Control Apparatus on property
owned or operated by the County, the sufficiency and receipt of which consideration are
hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. Installation and Operation Permitted. The County agrees to permit the
installation and operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus on certain highways, property
and equipment owned by the County subject to the terms of this Agreement and the
prior written approval of the County of the location of such installation and operation.
Any and all Traffic Control Apparatus shall be installed, maintained, coordinated and
operated by qualified personnel as contracted by the Town and approved by the
County.
2. Definitions. As per Ontario Traffic Manual Book 12 Traffic Signals, as amended.
Traffic Control Signal: Any power operated traffic control device, whether manually,
electrically, or mechanically operated, by which traffic is alternately directed to stop and
permitted to proceed. Traffic Signal: 1) When used in general discussion, a traffic signal
is a complete installation including signal heads, wiring, controller, poles and other
appurtenances. 2) When used specifically, the term traffic signals refers to the signal
head that conveys a message to the observer.
Pre-Emption: The transfer of the normal control of signals to a special signal control
mode for the purpose of servicing railway crossings, emergency vehicle passage, transit
vehicle passage, and other special tasks, the control of which require terminating
normal traffic control to provide priority needs of the special task.
Pre-Emptor: A device or program/routine which provides pre-emption.
Page 560 of 564
- 2 -
3. Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date of execution of
this Agreement noted below and run for a period of ten (10) years (the “Term”) unless
terminated earlier pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.
4. Renewal. The Town shall have the option to renew the Agreement for a further
Term upon sixty (60) days written notice to the County prior to the expiration of the initial
Term of this Agreement provided the Town is not in default of any of the provisions of
this Agreement.
5. Release and Indemnification. The Town releases and indemnifies the County,
its officers, agents, employees, contractors, affiliates and representatives (collectively,
the “Releasees”), from any and all liability that they or any of them may have, for any
personal injury, death, property damage or other loss, sustained by any persons in
connection with, or as a result of, the installation and operation of the Traffic Control
Apparatus, due to the negligence of the Town, its officers, agents, employees,
contractors, affiliates and representatives.
6. Insurance. The Town shall, at its sole expense, obtain and keep in force,
insurance satisfactory to the County including General Liability insurance on an
occurrence basis for third party bodily injury, personal injury and property damage to an
inclusive limit of not less than $2 million per occurrence. This policy shall include the
County as additional insured with respect to liability arising in connection with this
Agreement and shall include a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation, termination
or material change.
7. Waiver of Claims. The Town waives any and all claims it may now and in the
future have against the Releasees, or any of them, and it agrees not to sue the
Releasees, or any of them, for any personal injury, death, property damage or other
loss, sustained by any person in connection with, or as a result of, the installation and
operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus, due to any cause not within the control of the
Releasees.
8. Acknowledgement of Risk. The Town acknowledges that there are certain
risks involved in its installation and operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus, in
addition to the usual risks and dangers inherent in the use of highways and control of
traffic signal equipment, including without limitation, damage to or malfunction of
equipment or facilities, vehicular collisions and physical contact or injury to pedestrians,
cyclists and other users of the highways.
9. Assumption of Risks. As between the parties, the Town hereby assumes and
accepts all of the dangers and risks connected with, or related in any way to, the
installation and operation of the Traffic Control Apparatus, and the possibility of
personal injury, death, property damage or loss resulting from any of the foregoing.
10. No Representation. In entering into this Agreement, the Town confirms that it is
not relying on any representation or statement made by the County or any of the
Page 561 of 564
- 3 -
Releasees, whether oral or in writing, to induce it to install or operate the Traffic Control
Apparatus.
11. Amendment. This Agreement may not be modified unless agreed to in writing
by the parties.
12. Notices. All notices in this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to
have been given if delivered by hand or mailed by ordinary mail, postage prepaid,
addressed to the person to whom such notice is intended to be given at the following
addressed:
For the Town:
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
ATTENTION: Donna Wilson, Town Clerk
200 Broadway, Suite 204
Tillsonburg ON N4G 5A7
Fax: 519-842-9431
Email: dewilson@tillsonburg.ca
For the County:
County of Oxford
ATTENTION: Peter M. Crockett, CAO
21 Reeve Street
PO BOX 1614
Woodstock ON N4S 7Y3
Fax: 519-537-1053
pcrockett@oxfordcounty.ca
If mailed, such notices must also be given by facsimile transmission on the date it
was so mailed. If so given, such notices shall be deemed to have been received
on the first business day following the date it was delivered or marked mailed out.
13. Binding Agreement. This Agreement constitutes a legally binding obligation
enforceable in accordance with its terms, and that it shall be binding upon and enure to
the benefit of the heirs, executors, legal personal representatives, administrators,
successors and assigns (as the case may be) of the parties hereto.
14. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the Province
of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein and each of the parties hereby
submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Province of Ontario in connection with this
Agreement.
Page 562 of 564
- 4 -
DATED this 28th day of October, 2019.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement.
The Corporation of the Town of
Tillsonburg
_________________________________
Stephen Molnar
Mayor
_________________________________
Donna Wilson
Town Clerk
We have authority to bind The
Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg.
County of Oxford
_________________________________
Peter M. Crockett, P. Eng.
CAO
_________________________________
Director of Public Works
We have authority to bind The
Corporation of the County of Oxford.
Page 563 of 564
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG BY-LAW 4354 BEING A BY-LAW to confirm the proceedings of Council at its meeting held on the 28th day of October, 2019. WHEREAS Section 5 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that the
powers of a municipal corporation shall be exercised by its council;
AND WHEREAS Section 5 (3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that
municipal powers shall be exercised by by-law;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient that the proceedings of the Council of the
Town of Tillsonburg at this meeting be confirmed and adopted by by-law;
NOW THEREFORE THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. All actions of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg at its
meeting held on October 28, 2019, with respect to every report, motion, by-law, or
other action passed and taken by the Council, including the exercise of natural
person powers, are hereby adopted, ratified and confirmed as if all such
proceedings were expressly embodied in this or a separate by-law.
2. The Mayor and Clerk are authorized and directed to do all the things necessary to
give effect to the action of the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
referred to in the preceding section.
3. The Mayor and the Clerk are authorized and directed to execute all documents
necessary in that behalf and to affix thereto the seal of The Corporation of the Town
of Tillsonburg.
4. This by-law shall come into full force and effect on the day of passing.
READ A FIRST AND SECOND TIME THIS 28th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019. READ A THIRD AND FINAL TIME AND PASSED THIS 28th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019.
________________________________ MAYOR – Stephen Molnar
________________________________ TOWN CLERK – Donna Wilson
Page 564 of 564