In light of recent complaints and concerns from residents along George St. relating to encroachment issues, the town’s mayor said the matter will return to town council for further discussion. Mayor Michael Prue acknowledged the issue during the Oct. 15 meeting, noting the reports in the River Town Times and the posts on social media.
“There are some people upset in the George and Seymour area,” said Prue. “Staff went out and did what staff is supposed to do. We have to dig up the entire two roads, we have to put in new sewers, we have to put in new roads, we probably have to put in new sidewalks, we have to do as best we can to keep all the trees and not chop any of them down and return everything back to normal.”
Prue said there are encroachment issues and staff has gone out and spoke with residents and issued letters regarding deadlines such as the end of October.
“I have tried to advise people that we will not be acting on that and staff has agreed they will not act on that until council has had an opportunity to weigh in,” said the mayor. “What I am asking is that a report comes back to the next council meeting (Oct. 28). Staff have already indicated they can do so. I talked to (manager of licensing and enforcement) Mr. (Bill) Tetler as well. He will be here for that and will describe what actions, if any, have to be undertaken.”
Prue added it is not his wish to force people to take out porches or anything else.
“Some of these houses are 100-years old. It’s a difficult circumstance but I want this to come back to council so we can have a good discussion at the next council meeting on how best to proceed,” said Prue. “I don’t think the fear that is out there, I know it’s justified, but it’s gone too far. People are talking about hiring lawyers and some have gone to lawyers and spent money but I think through good will, we can accommodate all of their concerns around this council table.”
Councillor Diane Pouget wanted comments about five-foot sidewalks and whether they are needed along those streets. She said she accepts five-foot sidewalks in newer subdivisions but noted this is an older area. She also pointed out it is identified as a heritage area.
If the sidewalks are allowed to be kept at a four-foot width, many concerns would be addressed.
A 14-page report co-authored by manager of engineering Todd Hewitt and clerk Kevin Fox is part of the Oct. 28 town council agenda and three options are listed for how council could proceed. The first option would be to replace the older infrastructure with new infrastructure with the existing dimensions. That option is not recommended by administration.
“This option would have the benefit of minimizing impacts to the natural heritage features and would continue to require the homeowners to enter into encroachment agreements wherever they make use of public lands, or to remove the elements. Even with the replacement of like for like there are some encroachments that would impact the replacement due to their proximity to the existing sidewalk as the work commenced by the contractor such as removals, form installation, etc. may require space adjacent to the new sidewalk,” the report states. “This approach would require that the Town provide a rationale for not attempting to comply with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act and knowingly create barriers on its infrastructure. While the Town could attempt to rely on exemption provisions in the Act, making no effort to comply with the legislation in any way is likely to cause the Town’s position to be vulnerable to suggestions of not having done enough to ensure accessibility remains at the forefront of its activities. Should the Town’s argument for the use of the exemptions be upheld, it could nevertheless be argued that it had failed to uphold its own commitment to accessibility and would not be acting in a manner consistent with the Town’s Multi-Year Accessibility Plan.”
The second option would be to replace infrastructure, wherever possible, with compliant widths, something the report states is the approach “administration has been proceeding with up to this point and continues to recommend as the best practice.”
“This approach would design the project to work with the existing tableau on the ground to develop a sidewalk that seeks to conform to the requirements of the Act (i.e. to build sufficient width) wherever possible, and, where not possible due to the placement of mature trees and/or porches, would continue to provide the slightly smaller existing sidewalk widths (i.e. would reduce from 1500mm to somewhere between 1200mm and 1499mm). This approach factors in the need to bump out the curb slightly to build in additional capacity for the root structure toward the road (where appropriate) and would also build up the ground around root structures and other elements to limit the impacts to the sidewalks caused by root boring, etc. or surface discontinuities,” the report indicates.
The third option would be to remove natural heritage features to achieve compliance, though the report notes that approach may not achieve the space required in all instances as utilities and other structures would remain and need to be addressed.
“Nevertheless, the removal of trees from any areas where they interfere with the need to achieve compliance would eliminate the need to apply that exemption and lower the likelihood that the Town would face a legal challenge in how it has proceeded forward. Such an approach would have significant impacts on the character defining elements of the neighbourhood and would likely have negative consequences to property values, as well as removing the canopy that provides for significant shade and the many benefits this provides to the environment. As the mature trees would take several decades to re-establish, the impact of this approach would be rather significant. On the balance of interests, this approach is not recommended,” the report states.
Regarding fees, the waiving of the encroachment fee of $475 per property may result in a loss of $5,700 in revenue, the report stated, added administration doesn’t recommend waiving the fees associated with the application or renewal.
George & Seymour St. issues expected to come back before town council
By Ron Giofu
Comments