For the actual wording of the motions indicated, click the links where indicated.

REPORT ON COUNCIL
July 30, 2001
Committee of the Whole 10:15 am to 6:05 pm. Public meetings under the Planning Act at 7:00 pm. Council 8:02 pm to 10:34 pm.
All members of Council present

PARKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: These were distributed at the Council Meeting of August 13 and are to be made available on the Township website (http://www.township.tiny.ca). The three paragraph at the end of the distributed sheets concerning the 'Community Beach Statement' Initiative contain an unsettling veiled threat. The site specific recommendations are for Tripp Lane, Concession 4 and vicinity, Concession 5, Concession 6, Concession 7, Concession 8, Concession 9, Concession 11, Concession 12, Concession 13, Concession 14, Concession 17, Sandy Bay Road. For the recommendations and threat as they appear on the distributed sheets [with additional material in square brackets, that was part of the original report and noted as it was read out at Council], click HERE.

DISSENTING PARKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT: In this minority report, Andrew Chomentowski observed that The Planning Partnership had recommended that only the major shoreline parks should have open parking and that smaller road allowances should receive only passive use. He said that a range of factors--factors carefully worked out by the committee--were to have been taken into consideration when assigning parking to each site--among them residential density, quality of the municipal land, quality of the swimming area. These factors were ignored when the committee opted for high density. This made a mockery of much of the work that the committee had done during its site visits and in the series of meetings leading up to the site visits. He also said that correspondence was largely simply received and filed. For the full text of his report, click HERE.

PARKING DEPUTATIONS: David White of Nottawaga Beach spoke passionately in support of permit parking for Township residents commensurate with the amount of Township owned land at the end of the 12th and 13th Concession Roads. He spoke equally vigorously in opposition to the large numbers of cars parking in and near the 12th and 13th Concession Roads in areas beyond the "No Parking" signs and in unlicenced parking lots.
Doug Moles of Nottawaga Beach expressed deep concern with regard to the reinstatement of shoulder parking on Tiny Beaches Road between the 12th and 13th Concession Roads -- a main artery used by shore emergency vehicles -- as an unnecessary hazard to public safety. He complimented Deputy Mayor Gordon Salisbury and Councillor Gordon Hughes for championing the motion during the last Council that resulted in the installation of No Parking Signs on that stretch of Tiny Beaches Road and expressed the hope that they would maintain the same position in furtherance of public safety.

MIKE VALLEE'S SALVAGE YARD ON THE 14TH CLOSED: There is a great deal of support for the recycling of building materials, but considerably less for Mr. Vallee's inability to conform to rules and conditions. Council has not been happy with the way he had been managing his site; neighbours were anguished (and spoke tellingly of their concerns). Most damning of all was the Fire Chief's report. Mr. Vallee's temporary use permit was not extended.

PROPOSED BOATING RESTRICTION: The Small Watercraft Committee is seeking an extension of the 10 kph speed limit for small water craft from the current 30 metres to 200 metres off shore for the entire length of Tiny’s shoreline. Expressions of public support are needed if an application under the Canada Shipping Act is to be successful. Submissions will be received up until August 24, 2001, mailed, faxed or delivered to: Small Water Craft Committee, c/o Township of Tiny, 130 Balm Beach Road West, R.R. #1, Perkinsfield, Ontario L0L 2J0. The Committee requests that all submissions include a means of contacting the person making the submission (name, address and telephone number).

$2,500 BUDGET AUTHORIZED FOR SMALL WATER CRAFT COMMITTEE: The Committee plans to enforce the small watercraft regulations with volunteer patrols in a sea-doo loaned by Bombardier. 10-12 volunteers are envisioned. The cost of training is $115 per person.

FUNDING FOR WATER TESTING PROGRAM CANCELLED: Council withdrew its offer of $3000 matching funds for the water program. See Partial Council Update.

SUBSTANTIAL OVER EXPENDITURE ON FIRE STATION #1 IN LAFONTAINE: The construction of the fire station came in $36,271.21 over budget.

CLOSED SESSION: 5:05 pm - 5:51 pm re "Personal matters about an identifiable individual…" and "Litigation or potential litigation…".





Parking Advisory Committee Recommendations and Discussion

……..
- Township Engineer to ensure any changes comply with safety requirements
- Tiny residents have first priority
- 24 locations remain unchanged; recommendations would add 33 parking spots spread across 6 locations
-
These recommendations were received by Council, who will review them before any changes are implemented. The parking chaos that occurred on Sunday August 5th must also be examined prior to making any decisions.

[Note that high density is 100 square feet per person. Number of cars = 1 car per 3.5 persons]

Tripp Lane

1. The Township Engineer should review the junction of Tripp Lane and Tiny Beaches Road South to determine if there would be a safety concern resulting from the creation of parking spaces on Tripp Lane

[7,100 square feet beach
from Planning Partnership 8 permit to 15 permit and 5 open spaces if safety allows (may not be safe even for 8)]

Concession 4 & Vicinity

1. No change at the end of the road allowance
2. Township Engineer to determine safety with respect to parking on this section of Tiny Beach Road
3. 'No Parking' for all of James Street and Ridgevale Road
4. 'No Parking' on Laurel Street west of Monica Road
5. Township Engineer to review the safety of parking on Monica Road

[no change in the number of spaces -- 34 in all
the high density number was not established
area of the beach unclear, survey needed
recommended the removal of the wooden privy]

Concession 5

No changes pending survey of area.

[survey needed with regard to encroachments
road allowance to be opened]

Concession 6

No further parking capability on concession 6.

[6,450 square feet beach]

Concession 7 & Road Allowance between Lots 18 & 19

Possible opportunity for limited parking associated with Concession 7 (adjacent to store and between the two motels)

[allowable spaces at high density = 47
survey needed re encroachments
a need to open concession 7 to the water]

Concession 8

Township Engineer to review:
a. Rearrange handicap parking to create a 'drop-off zone
b. Current layout of parking adjacent to Stott park, bearing in mind entrances to the park area
c. Possibility of picnic tables/park benches at end of road allowance west of Tiny Beaches Road
d. Drainage ditch at end of Concession 8 with a view to improving the quality of the beach area
e. 'STOP' signs at junction of Concession 8 and Tiny Beaches Road
f. Signs to direct overflow to parkette at Birchdale Avenue [possibly 12 or 13]
g. Purpose of 'Tow-Away' sign on north side of Concession 8 east of Tiny Beaches Road

[7,500 square feet beach, 22 spaces allotted for beach
does not include parking for Stott Park, parking arrangement there to be reviewed
open space parking beyond Boy Scout Camp well utilized]

Concession 9

No changes recommended.

[6,450 square feet at high density = 18 spaces
survey needed, open parking well utilized, no change until survey completed]

Concession 11

1. Little capability to increase parking. Recommend 12 permit (from 8), 5 open (from 9) & 2 handicap (same).
2. A number of suggested safety improvements including a 'STOP' sign when exiting parking area.
3. May be limited additional parking on Lefaive Road

[6,900 square feet of beach = 20 parking spots at high density
in future parking on Lefaive, using beach walkway from Lefaive?]

Concession 12

1. Additional 6 permit and 5 open spaces on east side of Tiny Beaches Road North of Concession 12 by adjusting current signage. Township Engineer to consider any safety issues.
2. Adjust signs to accommodate 2 handicap spaces.

[6,500 square feet of beach = 18 parking spaces at high density]

Concession 13

1. Additional 9 permit and 6 open spaces on west side of Tiny Beaches Road south of Concession 13 by adjusting current signage. Township Engineer to consider any safety issues.

[7,900 sq. feet beach = 23 cars at high density
create more parking spaces at end of concession road allowance perhaps by moving the barriers toward the water

Concession 14

1. Additional 4 permit and 2 handicap spaces; all parking moved from north to south side of Concession 14.

[3,000 square feet beach
5 permit spaces increased to 9 plus 2 handicapped]

Concession 17 (excluding Asselin/Sandcastle area)

No Changes at this time.

[needs survey]

Sandy Bay Road (Road allowance between lots 23 & 24)

Township Engineer to examine possibility for angle parking and additional picnic tables

[needs survey
is popular, has potential for parking
purchase adjacent property which is for sale?]

The Township's 'Community Beach Statement' Initiative

The 'Adopt a Beach' philosophy of this initiative goes far in reducing the problems of irresponsible misuse of our beaches. Such problems will not be solved simply by further reduction of parking capability but by the presence of our by-law officers, and if need be, by OPP also; and by provision of garbage receptacles and portable toilet facilities. All of this assistance forms part of the 'Community Beach Statement' initiative which is designed to suit each beach individually, based upon the wishes of the local Beach Association and residents working together with the Township.

Everyone agrees with "take only Photographs: Leave only Footprints", but this cannot be an idle motherhood statement. It needs the active cooperation of everybody including our Beach Associations, something far beyond the mandate of the Parking Advisory Committee alone.

After six months we must shortly assume those Beach Associations electing to not actively participate in this initiative are not interested in the Township's help, which leaves Council little choice but to proceed accordingly.







Andrew Chomentowski
Member of the Tiny Parking Advisory Committee

Attn. Mayor Robert Klug and Council
The Corporation of the Township of Tiny

July 30, 2001

Counterpoint - Tiny Parking Advisory Committee Report

This Committee was described as a volunteer group that would pick up and continue the work begun by the Planning Partnership. The main recommendation of the Partnership was that The Major Parks should be developed for the use of the Public and that the smaller road allowances should receive only passive use. Open parking was not recommended. Medium density was chosen to protect the local residents. As the extent of the boundaries of municipally owned lands were identified, parking was to be adjusted.

This Committee spent a considerable amount of time reviewing the Partnership’s recommendations and then establishing terms of reference. We visited each municipal road allowance (in the residential areas), addressing safety issues, assessing the quality of the beach, noting the condition of the water bottom, recording the residential density of the area, identifying amenities, identifying buffers from residences and reviewing the capability for parking. We also checked to ensure that the current parking standards with the appropriate signage were in place. All of this was recorded and is hopefully, attached to the report.

The Committee then adopted the High Density formula for municipally owned lands to establish a calculation which would determine the absolute maximum number of parking spaces for a particular area. This formula was to be adjusted when all of the site-specific observations were gathered. Why else collect and record this information?

This report ignores most of the site-specific details. It ignores the residential density (the number of people who reside nearby and walk to the beach); it ignores the quality of the Municipal land and the water bottom conditions at the water edge (the reason for the parking). This report ignores the parking that exists beyond the signed parking areas. The report ignores the impact on the local residents. The target of this report is to deliver the maximum parking spaces, solely on the basis of parking capability. There are no recommendations for beyond the permitted parking zones. Effectively, the parking is unlimited in some areas.

There was also a provision made for open parking. The open parking provision was strongly opposed by two members of the Committee. The Committee also received several letters from individual taxpayers and Beach Associations who also objected to open parking in residential areas. The Planning Partnership recommended no open parking in residential areas.

The public was invited to participate. A number of taxpayers took the time to attend the meetings and expressed their opinions. There was also a considerable amount correspondence from ratepayers in the form of letters and Emails. Most of this was simply recorded and ignored.

All the issues that were part of our deliberation (aside from safety) have been set aside and the focus is solely on applying the maximum density of parking to each area. There is absolutely no regard for the other criteria and little consideration given to the wishes of the ratepayers who are most affected.

Applying the High-Density formula as proposed will lead to unrest in the Beach Communities.

The majority on this committee chose to ignore the site-specific observations and to ignore the wishes of the taxpayers that made submissions. I request that you, the members of Council, listen to all the taxpayers when you consider this report.

I thank you for your consideration of my comments.




Andrew Chomentowski