The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMarch 17, 2008 Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, March 17, 2008 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson (I) MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION PAGES 1. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 05-08 Pesticide Use By-law 1-117 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 05-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be received; 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted; 3. That City staff expand outreach and public education programs pertaining to healthy lawns, gardens and pesticide restrictions; and 4. That City staff prepare a pesticide use by-law enforcement strategy that itemizes the required tools, training and support services. 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 07-08 Heritage Inventory Register -Properties of Cultural Heritaqe Value or Interest - Seaton Lands 118-138 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 07-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Heritage Inventory Register - Seaton Lands, included as Attachment # 1 to this report be approved; and 3. Further, that a copy of Report CS 07-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be forwarded to the Ontario Realty Corporation, Ontario Heritage Trust and the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee for their information. r~'n' .-.jt'! .. ....~... ~... ~~,., Cil1J 0# Executive Committee Meeting Agenda Monday, March 17, 2008 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 3. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 09-08 Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information 139-140 RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 09-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information be received for information. 4. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 10-08 141-148 Statement of the Treasurer Respecting 2007 Remuneration and Expenses of Members of Council and Council Appointees to Boards, Aqencies and Other Bodies RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 10-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Statement of the Treasurer respecting Remuneration and Expenses of Members of Council and Council Appointees for the year 2007 be received. 5. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 11-08 Cash Position Report as at December 31, 2007 149-158 RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 11-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 6. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 12-08 2007 Buildinq Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund 159-161 RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 12-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. (II) OTHER BUSINESS (III) ADJOURNMENT REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Report Number: OES 05-08 Date: March 17, 2698 01 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Pesticide Use By-law - File: A-1440 Recommendations: 1. That Report DES 05-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be received; and 2. That the attached draft by-law be reviewed, received and approved; and 3. That City staff expand outreach and public education programs pertaining to healthy lawns, gardens and pesticide restrictions; and 4. That City staff prepare a pesticide use by-law enforcement strategy that itemizes the required tools, training and support services. Executive Summary: On February 19, 2007 the City of Pickering Council passed a Notice of Motion called "Healthy Community, Healthy Lawns and Gardens". The Notice of Motion directed staff to do a number of things, one of which was to draft a Pesticide Use By-law. This draft By-law was completed and on November 19, 2007 the City of Pickering Council approved staff going forth for public and stakeholder consultation and comment. The City retained the services of MMM Group to facilitate the public consultation process. Significant resources were used to engage the community in the review process. MMM Group collected and analysed the input from stakeholders and the general public about the draft Pesticide Use By-law. The MMM Group report "Pesticide Use By-law Report" is attached. The draft Pesticide Use By-law has been revised based on the feedback we received during public consultation, insight from other municipalities who have developed and or ~~, ~1 Ii ., Tn ll"," ~ .,,_.;;,; OES 05-08 March 17, 2008 Subject: Pesticide Use By-law 02 Page 2 are revising their by-laws, as well as from City staff. The City of Pickering "draft Pesticide Use By-law" is attached. The first important component to successfully implement a Pesticide Use By-law is to develop awareness within the community about the By-law and to educate residents about proper cultural practices for healthy lawns and gardens and alternative products. According to the consultants' analysis, "48 percent of homeowner respondents were very likely to use alternative products or methods of weed removal". Equally important is the ability to work with the local retailers. "93 percent of all respondents agree that stores and service companies should be asked to provide more information to consumers about alternative products and offer alternative products for sale". Planning is underway for spring 2008, however, time is required to prepare and produce materials for a "pesticide free" campaign and brand if the By-law is approved. The second important component to successfully implement a Pesticide Use By-law is enforcement. An effective strategy to enforce the By-law in Pickering needs to be determined. The enforcement officers require training, the required tools need to be purchased and support services contacted. Enforcement was identified by both stakeholders and the general public as a challenge. The strategy needs to be as simple as possible for complaints to be made and officers to respond. Since there is an exemption in the By-law for insect infestations, a simple, easy to use system also needs to be in place for these authorized properties to be able to quickly treat their problems. Between January 18, 2008 and February 17, 2008 the Province of Ontario's Environmental Registry collected comments regarding their intent to introduce legislation that would ban the cosmetic use of pesticides. Depending on the outcome of this process, legislation may be introduced in spring 2008 with a 3-year phased implementation period. This legislation may have an impact on municipal Pesticide Use By-laws, including but not limited to the ability for the Province to regulate or ban the sale of cosmetic pesticides. In general, according to the consultants' report, when respondents were asked about pesticide use in public spaces, "62 percent of all business and resident survey respondents believed that the City should implement the draft by-law to legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on commercial property". "61 percent want the draft by-law to legally restrict most outdoor uses on City property". This increased to "70 t075 percent when the areas were qualified to include a pesticide ban near parks, hospitals or properties that children frequent". . In contrast, "72 percent of industry respondents opposed the City reducing the use of pesticides outdoors". For private spaces the results differed. According to the report, "54 percent said the restriction should apply to residents". Interestingly, "46 percent of homeowners indicated they applied pesticides themselves at some point during 2005, 2006 or 2007 OES 05-08 March 17, 2008 Subject: Pesticide Use By-law Page 3 and 35 percent had hired a lawn care company to apply pesticides at some point during 2005, 2006 or 2007". 03 Financial Implications: Recommendation #1: There are no financial implications. Recommendation #2: There are no financial implications. Recommendation #3: Funding was proposed within the 2008 budget to expand the healthy lawn and garden education program. Resources will also be used to create a Pickering "pesticide free" campaign and brand if the By-law is approved. Future budgets would need to support the delivery of a "pesticide free" campaign. Recommendation #4: In order to enforce a Pesticide Use By-law, funds will need to be allocated within future budgets based on the strategy results for training, tools and services. Sustainability Implications: Pesticide restriction remains a contentious issue for many reasons, one of which is because the information pertaining to the environmental and health effects can vary depending on the source. However, as with any chemical, when misused pesticides can be a problem for both the environment and human health. With regard to the economy, by restricting pesticide use on public and private property we are reducing the amount of pesticide based products that will be purchased from retailers and eliminating the ability of lawn care service providers to offer pesticide dependent services. At the same time, there will be an increased demand for alternative pest control products and for lawn care service providers that offer non-pesticide reliant services. As a municipality, a Pesticide Use By-law would reduce our already limited purchase of pesticide products; the by-law would increase the need to use alternative products, as well as for resources to expand the current cultural practices. Background: As directed by Council in November 2007, City staff implemented a public consultation plan to solicit stakeholder and public feedback on the draft Pesticide Use By-law. The process to retain an outside consultant to facilitate this process began immediately and MMM Group was retained on December 14, 2007. In the meantime, staff put significant resources into communicating with stakeholders and the public about the importance of their involvement in this process. The following methods were used to engage the community in between November 2007 and January 2008: . information in numerous spots on the City's website posted November 21 . 200 letters issued on November 22, 2007 to stakeholders including: lawn and garden care service providers in Toronto, Region of Durham and York Region, ,,"j-' ~" f' . ' " " ',"'i' ~'-iii;i.(j':ii:' '-T ", t OES 05-08 March 17,2008 Subject: Pesticide Use By-law Page 4 04 lawn care product retailers, wholesalers and garden centres in Pickering, golf courses/driving ranges in Pickering, delegations that spoke at Council to the Notice of Motion "Healthy Community, Healthy Lawns & Gardens" in February 2007, sport field user groups, utilities, Toronto & Region Conservation Authority, Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, Durham District School Board, Durham Catholic District School Board and Region of Durham. . emailed residents who since 2004 had expressed interest in this issue on November 30 and December 13. Emailed various community groups on December 20 . media release issued December 17 . eight Community Page notices appeared between November 28 and January 23 . 200 follow up letters issued on December 17 to above indicated stakeholders . 200 final RSVP reminder letters issued on January 7 to above indicated stakeholders . community LED Board message from December 13 to January 24 . surveys available online and in hard copy from January 4 to January 31 . articles in Ajax Pickering Board of Trade e-bulletin on January 9 and January 16 . surveys distributed at screening of "Garbage, the revolution starts at home" on January 15 and to various community groups on demand . paid advertisements in Pickering News Advertiser on January 6, January 13 and January 20 and in SNAP Pickering's January edition . articles or editorials in Pickering News Advertiser on November 14, November 27 (online), December 5, December 19, January 6, January 11, January 16, January 18 (online) and February 6. Durham Daytime television interview on January 10 Members of the community could provide the City with their input by completing a surveyor by attending a consultation meeting. The survey was available for submission for the month of January. Hard copies were distributed on demand along with self-addressed postage paid envelopes. Surveys were also accessible online, to be downloaded and emailed or faxed to City staff. The City hosted one stakeholder consultation meeting on January 16 and one general public meeting on January 24. MMM Group's analysis of the results of the survey and both meetings are within their attached report "Pesticide Use By-law - Report". OES 05-08 March 17, 2008 Subject: Pesticide Use By-law Page 5 05 The draft By-law that was presented to Council in November has been revised. Revisions were based on the results of the consultation process, discussion with other municipalities and input from City staff. The revised draft Pesticide By-law is attached. The four main changes include: 1. Inclusion of an exemption for lawn bowl greens (Part II, Section 15) 2. Clarification of utility exemption for site in Ontario Power Generation - Pickering property (Part II, Section 18) 3. Revision of the by-law implementation dates to January 1, 2009 (Part IV, Section 27) for everyone 4. Inclusion of an exemption for spot spraying on warning tracks, hard surfaces and on City managed sports fields if 30 percent threshold of non-qualified sports turf is identified (Part II, Section 16 and17) Rational for Revision 1: Lawn bowling greens have the same type of unique monoculture of grass that is used on golf course greens and tees. As a result, the Pickering Lawn Bowling Club inquired as to why they were treated differently and requested the same exemption as a golf course whereby, pesticides can be applied provided it is done by a professional Integrated Pest Management (IPM) certified applicator. Based on this information, City staff revised the draft By-law. Rational for Revision 2: City staff was contacted by Ontario Power Generation (OPG). OPG has previously used herbicides to control the growth of vegetation on both sides of the Pickering site fence line. This was done at the request of the Security staff to maintain compliance with a provision of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act that requires that clear site lines be maintained along station fence lines. Site facilities staff agreed to discontinue pesticide use along all the fence lines and will instead manually remove vegetation, except for one area. They contacted the City to confirm that under the Utility Exemption they could still use pesticides beneath the power lines that exit the Powerhouse. To ensure clarity, City staff revised this portion of the draft By-law to include this site. Rational for Revision 3: It was conveyed that the March 25, 2008 effective date for commercial applicators was insufficient notice. Applicators already have some customer contracts in place for 2008 and would not have time to revise programs and product orders. Residents indicated they need additional information about alternatives. From municipal staff's perspective, the initial timeframe does not give enforcement officers time or resources to have the necessary systems in place to enforce the By- law. This process was undertaken in late 2007 therefore, funds were not requested <j J OES 05-08 March 17, 2008 Subject: Pesticide Use By-law Page 6 06 within the 2008 proposed budget for enforcement. If the By-law is approved staff will prepare a strategy outlining the required tools, training and support services. Based on the strategy an appropriate amount of funds will be requested within the 2009 budget. Budgets are historically approved in the spring which is too late for staff to take the necessary training, purchase tools and arrange support services for implementation of penalty based enforcement for that season. For this reason enforcement needs to be phased in two stages. Providing the By-law is approved, enforcement staff can implement Education-based Enforcement starting January 1, 2009 and Penalty-based Enforcement in January 1, 2010. Education-based enforcement essentially means enforcement officers respond to complaints about suspected pesticide use, provide educational materials and issue a caution letter to those in violation of the By-law. Penalty-based enforcement will start the following year when enforcement staff are able to respond to complaints about suspected pesticide use, take soil samples, photographs and issue charges under the Provincial Offences Act. This phased approach will also assist Municipal Law Enforcement Services to gauge the volume of calls and necessary staff resources that need to be directed to the initiative prior to Penalty-based Enforcement. From a marketing standpoint, time and resources will be required to produce By-law related promotional literature as well as educational materials to teach the public about alternatives. The importance of a "level playing field" was reiterated during the public consultation sessions. The lawn care providers indicated that residents who may not be knowledgeable about pesticides should not be able to use them when licensed commercial applicators cannot. For all these reasons, City staff revised the draft By- law to reflect a January 1, 2009 effective date for all persons. Rational for Revision 4: In discussion with City staff, it was communicated that failing to remove weeds from warning tracks poses a safety concern. In addition, failing to treat weeds along hard surfaces can damage the infrastructure such as walkways and result in increased repair and replacement costs. The City has a very large area of hard surfaces to maintain and do not have the resources at this time to be able to treat the weeds using alternative methods. For example, it is quite common for residents to treat weeds coming up through their driveway or patio stones with boiling water however, the large space the City is required maintain does not lend itself to well to some of these alternatives. City staff indicated that they will eliminate their already limited use of cosmetic pesticides on parks, boulevards and medians. However, specifically for sports fields, staff recommend that the spot application of pesticides remain a usable tool. Spot application is only necessary if the presence of non- qualified sports turf exceeds 30 percent. The rational for an application is not cosmetic; it is strictly for safety reasons. Failing to remove weeds increases the risk factor and liability for athletes. In addition, cost and sport field uses are factors. If a weed population in a sports field is greater than 50 percent, for safety reasons, a complete OES 05-08 March 17, 2008 Subject: Pesticide Use By-law Page 7 07 rehabilitation of all the turf on that field will be required. Depending on the rehabilitation option a field may need to be closed for up to two seasons for reseeding or two months for resodding. Spot applications will only be used as a last resort and not in place of cultural practices. For these reasons, City staff revised the By-law to allow for spot spraying in limited circumstances. To date, significant effort has gone into promoting proper lawn and garden care techniques and alternatives to pesticides using a variety of means including educational workshops, information on the City's website and within the Green Pages section of the City's Leisure Guide, Municipal Matters, and through Environmental displays. These initiatives will continue but will need to expand to engage more residents. One of the new avenues to accomplish this will be the use of the "door- knocker flyer" tool. The tool will help us request that residents voluntarily start to reduce pesticide use before the By-law comes into effect and direct them to helpful resources. If the draft Pesticide Use By-law is implemented, staff will prepare and produce a "pesticide free" geared campaign and brand. Since it is not illegal to sell pesticides, the City will need to take steps to encourage retailers and service providers to provide readily available alternatives to consumers. Alternative products should be well advertised and displayed in prominent locations within the store, their staff should be knowledgeable about the products and if possible literature should be available for the user to take home. Residents also requested for City staff prepare a list of acceptable products that may be used. Staff will also closely monitor the results of the Provincial legislation regarding the regulation or ban of cosmetic use of pesticides. For many reasons, the outcome will have an impact on the effectiveness of any municipal pesticide use by-law, including the Provinces' ability to restrict pesticide sales. It is pertinent that the City of Pickering leads by example and also become IPM Accredited by the IPM/PHC (Plant Health Care) Council of Canada through the municipal program. The City has already taken an integrated approach to managing municipal properties; this however, will not only need to continue but expand with the implementation of a By-law. In some circumstances though, pesticides are a useful tool and will need to be applied. These situations are outlined through the exemptions component of the draft Pesticide Use By-law. Further clarification was requested regarding the Utilities Exemption for hydro corridors. Staff has confirmed with John Bowen, Programs Officer for Hydro One that they do not spray all corridors and that corridors in residential areas are mown. Rural corridors may be sprayed once every 6 years using a highly selective pesticide and is only applied to the stems of individual species that may pose a safety issue. Enforcement of a Pesticide By-law is not impossible. It is, however, extremely onerous, and will require a substantial investment in staff training, and a significant rfi" .~.. -' '.~ t .,,"'.....~~~.~ OES 05-08 March 17 I 2008 Subject: Pesticide Use By-law 08 Page 8 amount of staff time. Also for consideration is the cost of providing the enforcement measured against the fines the courts may impose upon conviction. As with all by-law contraventions, Municipal Law Enforcement Services would respond to any report of a contravention by visiting the property to inform the property owner of the alleged contravention, provide a copy of the by-law, and request compliance in future. Should the contravention continue, a written warning would be issued, and finally a charge for contravening the by-law. Commercial pesticide services could be charged upon the first offence, as they have received written notification regarding the by-law. However, again, the courts may not impose a significant fine. The initial fine for a first offence by-law contravention generally ranges from $100 - $250. At an information session attended by Municipal Law Enforcement staff in January, the following enforcement issues were brought forward: . Part I tickets are not recommended, as the officer must have all evidence to support a conviction prior to issuing the ticket. The timeframe for issuance of a Part I Certificate of Offence is 30 days from the offence date. Therefore, all charges would be laid using a Part III Information, requiring a full trial for each offence, unless the defendant pleads guilty. . In all cases, a soil sample must be taken to confirm a prohibited substance has been applied. Unless the Officer is aware of the type of pesticide applied, the cost for testing for each family of pesticides is $100.00. Since there are three main families, the standard testing cost would be $300.00. Issues were raised regarding the accreditation of testing facilities and the requirement to ensure continuity of evidence. It was indicated that to obtain a conviction, the officer must prove the evidence remains untampered with from the time the sample was taken and the tools used to obtain the sample were cleaned using proper methods prior to obtaining the sample. The officer must also provide some indication of the training he or she has received to ensure the process is completed in accordance with recognized standards. . Costs for soil sampling will include the initial sampling by the Officer, the transportation of the sample to Guelph, the lab testing costs, and the costs of the soil sampling tools and corresponding cleaning fluid. This base cost, when calculating staff time in the total, is estimated at $450 - $500 initially. Any costs incurred at the trial (should the testing laboratory be required to send their technician as an expert witness) would be the responsibility of the prosecution's. (the City). Again, obtaining a fine of $500 against a residential property owner for a first conviction to offset these costs would be extremely unlikely. OES 05-08 March 17, 2008 Subject: Pesticide Use By-law Page 9 09 · While the City of Toronto has one conviction and two additional charges pending against commercial lawn care services, it has responded to over 3000 complaints. · It was also recommended that infestation thresholds be set to determine exemption status. These would include coverage per square foot, or percentage of lawn affected. Enforcement of a pesticide by-law is possible. However, consideration should be given to including provisions for staff training and purchasing necessary equipment, the amount of staff time required enforcing the by-law, and the costs incurred to enforce as compared to the recovery through fines. In Toronto, a phased in approach was used whereby allowing for education to take place and time and funds to be allocated for staff training. This would increase chances for successful enforcement in the future. Attachments: 1. MMM Group - Pesticide Use By-law - Report 2. Draft Pesticide Use By-law Prepared By: Approved I Endorsed By: -,-.-. . 'I :?-T~ /i ~"r .. "// ~ L'/, (/ Y.'/" .,.-, .' :' ---- -1 ;;'/ Everett Bun sma Director Operations & Emergency Services s~ 1"-' ^ tv' ._~'j1--- - ] OES 05-08 March 17 I 2008 Subject: Pesticide Use By-law Page 10 ," '10 (\ . "~'\:=:i d ~... j""a4} (; I t A...nO .~..~ Chantal Whitaker Coordinator, Environmental Awareness Programs fCW Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Cit~~u . /' /</ ,/' ,.I if- I II " '1 '1 ;;<:>'. Citlj (,# Jj J.' .,.~<''\'c~f'''t., .' ....1~~~ 1~_..!fII,,~ .,--t.~,;;,;.t , PICKERIlSlG ","'-~ r------ 'I<: ~- ~ 'I ---'j",i!'1j'" ,,-" T\CH MENT # --1-- TO R.EPOP.T#L~:,~- c,5- c it 'f'" A..,;r~;.;~t:,;~,:;;: r PI(=KERIN(' 1 2 ___Hm___u TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 INTRODUCTION. 1.1 METHODOLOGY 1.2 HISTORY OF BY-LAWS IN CANADA 1.3 THE DRAFT BY-LAW 1.4 STAKEHOLDERS 2.0 GOAL AND OBJECTIVES 3.0 ANALYSIS 3.1 PUBLIC REALM 3.2 PRlV ATE REALM 4.0 SUMMARY 1 1 1 3 4 6 7 7 7 9 APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C MEETING ADVERTISEMENTS MEETING PRESENT A TIONS AND MEMORANDA QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESULTS 3/3/2008 MMM Group Limited Page 0 i._.dJ! "~l " f",,:r.:B~j~"!'t.l~"-~ PICKERINC 1 3 1. INTRODUCTION This report serves to summarize the results of one public forum, one stakeholder forum and a questionnaire/survey of stakeholders and homeowners in the City of Pickering. 1.1. METHODOLOGY In December 2007, MMM Group Limited was engaged to: . Help the City Council to understand the needs of the community for pesticide use; . Prepare a questionnaire/survey of the stakeholders that use pesticides and of the general public; and, . Facilitate discussion about a pesticide by-law. Accordingly, the following elements of a work program were initiated. Questionnaire A copy of the questionnaire, stakeholder addressees and results is included in Appendix C. In addition, letters were received from Toronto Region Conservation Authority, ClubLink Corporation, Ontario Power Generation and Weedman Inc. Notes were provided by the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE). Stakeholders Meeting - January 16, 2008 was held: . To engage stakeholders including lawn care service providers, product retailers, golf courses, garden centres and utilities; . To understand the impact of pesticide reduction on the environment and commerce; . To solicit feedback for a by-law to enforce the reduction of pesticide use in Pickering; and, . To build awareness of pesticide use and its impacts. Copies of the meeting announcement and reports are included in Appendices A and B Public Meeting - January 24, 2008 was held: . To recognize the public's understanding of pesticide reduction on the environment and on commerce; . To solicit feedback for a by-law to enforce the reduction of pesticide use in Pickering; and, . To build awareness of pesticide use and its impacts. 1.2. HISTORY OF BY-LAWS IN CANADA Pesticide use can be legally and effectively regulated by a three tier regime. In accordance with a Supreme Court ruling: _ Federal legislation regulates what pesticides can be used _ Provincial legislation regulates who can use pesticides and how to use 3/3/2008 MMM Group Limited Page 1 ..,,~:jl "]'......'..1/ili 'ii]';'i"'--))L.1! 1-' -"1 , , ~~~Jir~"SsrF~ '1 4 l'IC:KERINC - Open to ffiilllicipalities to enact by-laws dealing with where and when pesticides can be applied. The use of municipal by-laws is recent. The earliest in Canada are: Hudson, Quebec (1993); and Halifax, NS (2000); and in Ontario: Waterloo (2001), and Nepean (2001). Integrated Pest Management (lPM) certification is encouraged and taught by Landscape Ontario (LO). Over 100 municipalities and public sector businesses are certified in Ontario. LO has initiated Healthy Lawns and Gardens workshops for homeowners. Pesticide By-laws vary. Now 130 municipalities in Canada have by-laws. Single pesticide applications are regulated by such by-laws. Municipal pesticide use guidelines may differ from private property guidelines. The Province of Ontario has agricultural practices guidelines. By 2009, there will be a decision on pesticide use legislation in accordance with a press release dated January 24, 2008. Currently, the pesticides are guided by the following table: Pesticide Schedules in Ontario Pesticide Characteristics ill Schedule Who Can Use It 1 . licensed applicator . certified grower only with approved permit 5 very toxic very persistent highly mobile very toxic . very persistent highly mobile less toxic or less persistent not available licensed applicator . certified grower . assistant agriculturist under supervision 2 licensed applicator certified grower . trainee or technician under supervision restrictions apply) . assistant agriculturist under supervision 3 4 . any person 6 any person . toxic persistent . moderately mobile moderately toxic . moderately persistent . slightly mobile . low toxicity non-persistent non-mobile . containers < 1 kg or < 1 L . low toxicity . non-persistent . non-mobile . containers> 1 kg or> I L 3/3/2008 MMM Group Limited Page 2 '~'~',~(:~f.""}~~ Pl(~KJ~IllN-._ 1 5 1.3 THE DRAFT BY-LAW The by-law presented to the public in 2007 is draft and includes: · Use - No person shall apply or cause or permit the application of any pesticide within the City · Exemptions - - Agriculture, - pest control in buildings, - insect infestation, - public health, - noxious weeds, - conservation authorities, - golf courses / driving ranges, - utilities, - water disinfectants, purification, - wood preservative, inj ection into trees, stumps or wooden poles, - insect repellant . Enforcement - Officers allowed to enter upon land for inspection and may - Require documents related - Inspect - Require information from any person - Make examinations, take tests, samples, photographs · Penalties - according to Provincial Offences Act · Other Legislation - - Pest Control Products Act, Canada - Ontario Pesticides Act · Effective Date - March 25,2008, Commercial applicators - January 1,2009, All persons Schedule A which includes the following suggested alternatives to pesticides: a) Soap b) Mineral oil c) Silicon dioxide 3/3/2008 MMM Group Limited Page 3 r -, ~ ", - '~"i'--~---i~tiili it r"~-' ' i C,,-':J{j,\! ~ &'i~~::~:~':::.~:;.:~~~, PI(](ERINL I " 1 6 d) Biological pesticides e) Borax f) Ferric phosphate g) Acetic acid h) Pyrethrum or pyrethrins i) Fatty acids j) Sulphur k) Com gluten meal 1.4. STAKEHOLDERS Stakeholders are those who are affected by or use pesticides within the boundaries of Pickering. The following separates stakeholders into private and public realms and descri bes their relationship to or reasons for the use of pesticides. The private realm includes: . Sports and recreation facilities whose pesticide use is affected by: - Golf greens and tees that have highest need, but only 10-15 percent of golf course land area; - Audubon requirements for the reduction of pesticide use; - Cost of spraying that keeps owners mindful of overuse; - The need to maintain a level and uniform grass surface such as for lawn bowling; - Need to market to the public; and, - Civic Pride. · Homeowners who will: - Use pesticides for lawn maintenance; - Use pesticides for pride of ownership of a weed free property; - Use pesticides for tree spraying; - Self-applicate or hire a maintenance company; - Frequently not know what questions to ask of a maintenance company; and, - Frequently not know where and how to get information. · Commercial properties \ViII use pesticides for: - Improved street presence; - Marketing to the public; 3/3/2008 MMM Group Limited Page 4 ;~:~~1;r:t;~~~ PI(~KERIN(~ 1 7 - Civic Pride; and, - Involvement in Communities In Bloom The Public Realm -What was discovered from input during public meetings and observations of public lands: · Pickering has intensively used sport facilities; · Pickering has strong turf in neighbourhood parks; · Street boulevards take the abuse of salt damage and maintenance of utilities; · Health issues are paramount; · Timing for weaning off pesticides will be an issue; · Implementing and enforcement will be a challenge; and, · There is a need to educate the public about lawn and garden care practices. 3/3/2008 MMM Group Limited Page 5 'f"n "1 ",:"'C< 1']"11,';-;;", L'.( ~ I!~~.~:'F'~":~~ 'l.,.~,.~ ;"""c~,~ud ."~~,:. i,~,~~~ 1 8PICKERIN(~ 2. GOAL AND OBJECTIVES OF THE REVIEW OF PESTICIDE USE BY-LAW The goal for this project is to solicit the public's comment on the possible implementation of a pesticide control by-law, a draft of which has been made public. The following objectives for this project are reflective of each of the City Council, stakeholders, consultants and staff of the City of Pickering. City Council · Was requested by citizens to consider a pesticide by-law for health and environmental reasons; · Responded to the request with a draft by-law; · Determined exemptions with advice of the Officer of Health and City staff; and, · Directed staff to solicit stakeholder and public input to a draft by-law. Stakeholders · Includes lawn care service providers, product retailers, golf courses, garden centres, conservation authority and utilities; · Should individually understand the impact of pesticide reduction on the environment and commerce; · Need to provide feedback and express their concerns or support of a by-law to enforce the reduction of pesticide use in Pickering; and, · Individuals need to understand the impacts of pesticide use. The Consultants' tasks an~ to: · Understand the needs of the community for pesticide use; · Prepare a questionnaire/survey of the stakeholders involved to some degree in the pesticide business and of the general public who mayor may not use pesticides; and, · Facilitate discussion about a pesticide by-law. City staff have already started reducing by: · Understanding and training in IPM; · Naturalizing open space and park areas; · Creating no spray zones; · Adapting drought tolerant species of grass; · Using natural fertilizers; · Experimenting with alternatives; · Implementing proper cultural practices; · Using chemical treatment as last resort; and, 3/312008 MMM Group Limited Page 6 """'_~'_,;_",;w,...,;~_"",_",",,><,.,.,,,,,~.",~,_...,"_,,,",,_~'"'-""'"'__#~"''''''>~>O:.!~'''''~~'''''''''i;<>.~'""~_"_""""'~""""_"_~,,,,,,,,,___,,,_" -'t ....:.;. ~~-~j~:';;:~~:~.:~.:~~~ I'I' "'['/f~r)I'Ni(' . . C, '.1'.1 '_ 1 9 · Using pest selective pesticides. 3. At~AL YSIS This analysis serves to consolidate the information received from the stakeholders meeting, public meeting and questionnaire results. Sixty-two completed questionnaires were returned to the City. Forty-four came from homeo'V\-ners and fourteen from businesses while [our came from respondents who declared both business and resident status. A summary of the results is in Appendix C. Four letters were received regarding the Pesticide Use By-law from Ontario Power Generation - Pickering Nuclear, Weedman Inc. (Chris Lemcke, Manager, sent two letters) and ClubLink Corporation. Both Weedman and ClubLink were represented at the stakeholders meeting. The information from the public forums and questionnaire results is categorized into public realm and private realm. 3.1. PUBLIC REALM City staff must address: · Intensively used sport facilities; · Turf maintenance and safety in neighbourhood parks; · Street boulevards that take the abuse of salt damage and maintenance of utilities; and, · Health and safety issues. As described in section 2, City staffhave already started reducing environmental impacts of their work. The public at the January 24, 2008 meeting seemed satisfied with the direction o[the City's maintenance practices. There were two survey comments about the proliferation of weeds in the street boulevards. There were 29 percent ofhomeo'V\-TIers opposed to further reductions of pesticide use by the City on public properties.. The industry stakeholders at the January 16,2008 meeting said they may not be impacted by the City's maintenance practices and did not comment, other than to compliment the City for its actions. However, 72 percent of the l8 industry respondents on the survey opposed the City reducing the use of pesticides outdoors. 62 percent o[ all business and resident survey respondents believed that the City should implement the draft by-law to legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on commercial property. 61 percent want the draft by-law to legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on City property. When the question was qualified to include a pesticide ban to legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on commercial property near parks, hospitals or properties that children frequent, the survey results increased to between 70 and 75 percent. 54 percent said that the restriction should be applied to residents. From these results we interpret that, the higher the impact on the public realm, the more important is the need for the pesticide reduction. 3.2 PRIVATE REALM Homeo'V\-TIers and commercial operators use pesticides to enhance their properties' appearance. In the survey of 48 homeo'V\-TIers, 46 percent applied pesticides themselves 3/312008 MMM Group Limited Page 7 ,,*,c:;Y-!ii!-~..'<:w' -, t' ~.iT i '~';fr1.~~t;:;;+~~ 2 0 Pl(](El<INC , II and 35 percent had hired a company to use pesticides in the past three years. At the public meeting, the homeowners were split between the desire to retain the use of pesticides for control of infestations and to eliminate the use of pesticides for health and environmental reasons. Common concerns were evident: · Education is needed for the public about lawn and garden care practices; · Health issues are paramount; · Timing for weaning off pesticides will be an issue; and, · Implementing and enforcement will be a challenge. Impacts Oil Stakeholders: Some proponents of a natural approach to pest control felt intimidated by the pesticide industry representatives at the public meeting. Some homeowners appear confused about the benefits of alternatives. For example, although proper watering is recommended to improve turf, how do homeowners balance the summer water shortages with good turf maintenance? Can pesticides be used less frequently to achieve improved health and environment? 48 percent of the homeowner respondents to the survey were very likely to use alternati ve products or methods of weed removal and 21 % said that they were very unlikely to do so. 93 percent of all respondents agree that stores and service companies should be asked to provide more information to consumers about alternative products and offer alternative products for sale. 54 percent of all respondents answered that pesticides should be restricted on residential property. Exemptiolls: Lawn bowling and golf courses require pesticides to maintain their greens. The Pickering Lawn Bowling Club stated they could not exist without the continual use of pesticides by professional IPM certified lawn maintenance service. In those locations, pesticide use is high. But away from tees and greens on a golf course, operators are making an effort to reduce the need for pesticides through cultural practices. The golf courses club operators seem satisfied that they will be exempt according to the draft by- law. The Lawn Bowling Club is requesting an exemption because they have the same type of mono culture of grass as a golf course green or tee, so therefore should not be treated differently. Comments were conveyed that farmers have exemptions from the draft by-law and yet they are the heaviest users of pesticides according to the survey and meeting results. Should they be controlled by municipal governance? Farmers are regulated by senior governments. Utilities have an exemption in Pickering, however, there are hydro corridors that are used for public recreation. There was discussion about limiting utilities to pesticide use in non-public accessible areas. Ontario Power Generation has requested in their letter that, for security, they be exempt from such a by-law for spraying at the security fences on their Pickering Nuclear perimeter. They are willing to discontinue pesticide use elsewhere on their property. Timeframe: Timing of the Pesticide Use By-law implementation should be reviewed. This was the response from all three methods of public input. Commercial lawn care maintenance 3/3/2008 MMM Group Limited Page 8 C'~"Jf ..if ~ j.;A,iJ;'~~.~.l::~'j;.~;- {)ICKEHINC 21 companies have established contracts with clients for 2008. Homeowners feel that they need education about alternatives and about the impact of the by-law on their own properties. With pending provincial legislation, members of the public questioned why Pickering was not waiting for the outcome/process of the provincial guidelines. The Quebec provincial legislation created a level playing field for commercial applicators that did not exist with just municipal by-laws, which could not control retails sales of pesticides. Presented at the public meeting was the evolution of the Toronto by-law, It was implemented over three years, having been introduced to the public in 2004 and enacted in 2007. This allowed for a public education process and time for the lawn maintenance industry to adapt. It was also commented that the implementation timeframe that applies to commercial applicators should apply to everyone else. 4. SUMMARY The results of the public input is presented to staff of the City of Pickering for them to make informed recommendations to Council about timing, content and impacts of the proposed Pesticide Use By-law. This report is supported by the memoranda from the stakeholder meeting and public meeting held in January 2008 and by the questionnaire results all copied in the appendices to this report. Clarifications may be sought from the consultant, MMM Group Limited. Respectfully submitted, MMM Group Limited .'~ {. Mark Inglis, MBA, CSLA Partner LVOBSILANDSCAPE\2007\14-07441-00 l-LAl_ City of Pickering - Consulting ScrvicesIReportlAnalysis report March 3 08 rev #6 rni.doc 3/3/2008 MMM GrOUp Limited Page 9 v V \'~ \..) f'\, \J ~ i.Jl ,j I ":) ?i.. I U.l. '- .. 'j :~ '\.j ',,, I , .0 H ;;j: '1 "- '2 LW ~~ C-J C'J ti ill I ami Mark your calendars. Your input is important. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION MEETING (lawn care service providers, product retailers, golf courses, garden centres, utilities, etc.) Wednesday, January 16, 2008 6:30 pm - 9:30 pm Pickering Recreation Complex, 1867 Valley Farm Rd. Use arena entrance at rear of the building. O'Brien Meeting Room A & B (Snow Date: Thursday, January 17 at Petticoat Creek Community Centre - 470 Kingston Rd. West) / "'\ GENERAL PUBLIC CONSULTATION MEETING Thursday, January 24, 2008 6:30 pm - 9:30 pm Pickering Recreation Complex, 1867 Valley Farm Rd. Use arena entrance at rear of the building. O'Brien Meeting Room A & B (Snow Date: Tuesday, January 29 at Petticoat Creek Community Centre - 470 Kingston Rd. West) \" ) City staff have prepared a draft Pesticide Use By-law. Public and stakeholder involvement is important. Attend a consultation meeting and/or complete the online questionnaire. The questionnaire is accessible from the City's website at cityofpickering.com. Upon request questionnaires can be mailed out to accommodate those without internet access. Questionnaires must be completed and returned by January 31,2008. .I~ f,q1l f\/l f\/1 G P: (j U P <' /-li,::-C(..ZJ ,[~-t'~:-Meeting Memo _.L2.,. ../C2t Date: To: From: Project Number: Subject: February 12,2008 Chantal Whitaker Mark Inglis, MEA, CSLA 14.0744LOOLLA1 Pesticide By-law Stakeholder Meeting January 16, 2008 Cc: Bob Kennedy 23 The meeting was attended by thirty stakeholders from a broad spectrum of the community including: lawn care companies, landscapers; golf courses; lawn bowling club, other municipalities, Canadian Physicians for the Environment, Hydro One, Durham Region Health Department, City staff and five Members of City Council. The meeting was initiated with an introduction of staff and councillors in attendance. Mark Inglis presented a PowerPoint presentation that outlined some of the terminology and the by- law drafted to date. During the presentation, a representative of Weedman, concerned that the work that he performs will be curtailed, expressed his views on several occasions before the presentation was completed. The attendees were divided into three breakout groups. Each was given the task of answering three questions about the potential implementation of the pesticide by-law. What is the impact of the pesticide by-law on stakeholders? What timeframe should be considered to implement the by-law ? What will be the enforcement issues? Although each of the groups was given the questions, each group responded in their own manner, not necessarily following the order or exact implication of the question. The answers from the groups are the following: 1. Group 1 Presentation · The timeline seems unrealistic to implement by March 2008 · Why are we implementing a pesticide by-law - if it is a health issue, then Has City done research? What has changed in other municipalities since the pesticide by-law was implemented? Has health improved because the by-law was put in place? What are the short term, long term health and other benefits? To whom and where should the by-law apply? o We need to identify the biggest users / rates of pesticide use o Where / what products are applied, who applies and how are they applied? What are the Exemptions? o Fairness should be considered i.e. lawn versus agriculture; pool versus lawn Any omissions or errors in these notes should be forwarded to the author immediately, r! /NA Item 24 "'- .r , j~"fr $f ,~ \ I'-/."/f:'{ a-'j(Ch-Ct, Page 2 Details Action The City staff should visit areas that employ Integrated Pest Management (IPM) or cultural practices such as: Whitevale Golf Course and compare that with the homeowner who is not trained, and not equipped Should there be a toxicity measurement? o Identify the level of toxicity o How do products now compare to products used in the past What are the thresholds o Wait until I threshold is reached or apply spot treatment. This would be similar to the Markham approach o The community needs to be pro-active Should education be part of the solution? o Licensed applicators~ o Equipment /" vs homeowner who knows little about the products o Approved products o Need more information disseminated to the community before banning outright 2. Group 2 Presentation . Timeframe seems rushed. The March timeframe to train by-law enforcement officers will be challenging . Impacts of the Pesticide By-law First couple of years, businesses in pesticide applications will be most affected Does the application of pesticides also apply to trees? . Concerns Safety -+ The City should not allow applications by the homeowner if the trained applicator is denied Financial -+ unregulated business practices or cheating may ensue -+ homeowners would not be charged Consumer information from Health Canada - their toxicologist information is better researched than the municipalities who do not have scientists . Enforcement Why exemptions -+ Exemptions are time consuming to negotiate. -+ Who makes list of product exemptions? Timelines -+ the inspector may not show up until few days later after which the pesticide has dissipated Do we allow organic pesticides versus non-organic? Signage on lawns can be confusing. Applicators may be using organics but are still obligated to sign that they are spraying . Suggestions The municipality should make the ban even for everyone. Eliminate pesticide product from out of store shelves so that homeowners have the same limited access to product as commercial applicators. Encourage public education through qualified institutions such as Landscape Ontario Pesticide sales personnel should be trained/qualified/regulated Any omissions or errors in these notes should be forwarded to the author immediately. ItA !"it, ,} " .-L:~H.:J; .Jei." icX:?-.e,i'j .-()( Page 3 25 Item Details Action No exceptions/exemption should be given for a particular type of property · Further / Additional Points City is going from controlled environment to uncontrolled i.e. homeowners are taking the political route to ban pesticides rather than educating the public about proper use In Quebec they ban sales in the following manner: o In the first stage of regulation, pesticides were under lock & key o In the second stage of regulation, pesticides were taken off store shelves o Retailers may only sell pesticides that are on exemption list Homeowners do not know the science. Homeowners may try to illegally apply pesticides at night. 3. Group 3 Presentation . Timeframe It is unrealistic to implement in March 2008. The transition time was insufficient for private operators to prepare for the change in the by-law. Each of the panelists agreed that the City should wait until the Province decides on the issue in 2009, as was proposed during the election of October 2007. - Retraining within 3 months will be difficult without products and training in IPM or alternatives use · Exemptions to consider Hydro One is exempt under the draft by-law, but their lands are used for recreation, there could be a health issue Retail sale of pesticides could lead to improper use by unqualified persons. Should there be a removal of product from store shelves? Safety of children should be considered in all exemptions · Alternatives Do alternatives such as nematodes, work? o Specific conditions need to be followed for effective use · Concerns Injury to pets from pesticides may be "systemic" Financial o Impacts to small independent companies could be greatest. Small independents may need to change their service delivery o Retrain employees ifmoving from pesticide use to IPM o Organic products are much more costly Homeowner o Can residents make a proper application? o Are they reading instruction/labels? Financial and environmental costs to reconstruct lawns if we cannot control vegetation growth such as on roads could be greater without pesticides. Enforcement o Will the City depend on residents to report other residents? o Products exempt from the by-law then should be exempt from posting signage since there is a perception by the public that a signed lawn has hazardous materials Any omissions or errors in these notes should be forwarded to the author immediately. /NA Item 26 CE-:.TC)S-C~, Page 4 ,.L4;',. .. J (;:t Details Action Education o Cultural/organic alternatives are costly! Ensure publication of what products actually do work o Look at research for the impacts of pesticide types before banning o Who decides what and who can spray and who can not? The City needs to be fair and consistent. The panel agreed that the spraying of pesticides by the Agricultural industry within the City's urban boundary is not controlled/inspected and that farmers should come under the same by-law restrictions as those in the private sector (within the City's urban boundaries). This would help to level the playing field. o City staff and residents need to know about pesticide products. For example Killex is a synthetic version of what exists in plant and breaks down to natural chemicals (it is a growth product that increases plant stress. Any omissions or errors in these notes should be forwarded to the author immediately. ItA \ _.L::L. .1f:L Ct.~,CL-)- eft, Item Details Summary Consistent comments came out of the three group presentations. The following are general summary observations from the group presentations. What is the impact of the pesticide by-law on stakeholders? · Small applicator companies will be most affected by the by-law ban because they have established clients who expect their lawns to be instantly repaired. · Each group questioned whether residents were knowledgeable enough to properly apply pesticides. · City staff and residents need to know more about pesticide products. · Applicator companies will be impacted adversely, unless there is a similar ban of the retail sales of the products that they apply · When considering the ban, health related issues seem to be the common thread. · Pesticide sales personnel should be trained/qualified/regulated. · The groups questioned who should be subject to the bylaw. Agricultural practices seem to use pesticides the most, while homeowners seem to be the least knowledgeable about applications of pesticides. Lawn bowling and golf courses require pesticides to maintain their monocultural greens. What timeframe should be considered to implement the by-law? · Each group suggested that the timeframe would be tight for implementation, training enforcement officers, and education of the public. · No specific timelines were proposed by the groups. · Consider awaiting provincial legislation due in 2009. What will be the enforcement issues? · Snitching will be a method to catch by-law violators. · By-law officers will have to be brought up to speed quickly if the draft by-law timelines are implemented. · There is likely to be cheating by companies if no enforcement is consistent. · Residents may do applications during hours when neighbours are not looking. · Education is needed to define organic products versus non-organic pesticides. Mark Inglis, M.B.A, O.A.L.A. Manager Landscape Architecture & Urban Design Any omissions or errors in these notes should be forwarded to the author immediately. Page 5 27 Action ~"". ~""- ~ik"J.i\"-n.(f,'-lC~iJi: 2B \ ..t~l' Iii,. ct:;cS-Meeting Memo i\;~ {i:.~l r~ll (1 F: {J U p' Date: To: From: Project Number: Subject: February 12,2008 Chantal Whitaker Mark Inglis, l\1BA, CSLA 14.07441.001.LAl Pesticide By-law General Public Meeting January 24,2008 Cc: Bob Kennedy The meeting was attended by 18 members of the public, City staff and four Members of City Council. The meeting was initiated with an introduction of staff and councillors in attendance. Mark Inglis presented a PowerPoint presentation that outlined some of the terminology and the by- law drafted to date. During that day, there had been a News Release by the Province of Ontario that pesticide control legislation was being considered. Following the presentation the public was invited to offer their opinion of the draft by-law and the future of a proposed pesticide ban. Using the questions from the stakeholder meeting as an organizing tool, the following are the comments and questions from the public. Summary of Questions and Comments What is the impact of the pesticide by-law on stakeholders? · Is there any city that has statistics to validate the implementation of the pesticide control by-law? There is no information available from municipalities showing baseline data versus health improvements following a pesticide control by-law. · Only 15% of golf course land uses pesticides heavily including greens and tees. Should the golf courses be exempt or is their application too small to consider? Golf courses are perceived to be more responsible with pesticide use because they will try to limit their costs of maintenance. They also have IPM certifications. Golf courses are generally regulated by the Province. · Ministry of Environment (MaE) audits weed sprayers. · One resident asked ifbed bugs were a pest whose control would be altered by this by- law. Since bed bugs do not emerge from the ground they would not be. · A Pesticide by-law has existed in Toronto since 2007, however, pesticide applications are still allowed under certain circumstances. Toronto informed the public of the by- law in 2004, then enforced it in 2007. · Information on pesticides can be obtained from Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Mfairs (OMAFRA) and University of Guelph · Inexperienced applicators overspray and are often not familiar with the product they are using. More experienced and educated applicators are not as careless and are more informed than residents. There must be education as to the health risks of application of Any omissions or errors in these notes should be forwarded to the author immediately. /NA " ct,ci:c.:- ;r::)_ C, 't i"IE!\r;' -t:'L,,:;rjQL Item Details pesticides, especially since it affects those who are already sensitive and have existing health problems . Concern was expressed about lawn care companies that do not apply properly or apply too much pesticide, . Residents should be treated the same as commercial pesticide users/applicators . Without pesticides, how does one deal with infestation of weeds such as Creeping Charlie without removing all the green and roots? Would the environmental costs be greater to remove and replace rather than use a pesticide? . What information is available about how to address issues with ants, grubs and chinch bugs in an environmentally friendly manner? What timeframe should be considered to implement the by-law? . The Province of Quebec has pesticide control legislation which provides a level playing field for applicators and homeowners. Ontario should consider this . Operators need time to adjust their service provision . There needs to be a longer period of education prior to implementation of the by-law . Homeowners should have the same timeframe as lawn care companies. Since homeowners are less knowledgeable and do not sign their properties after an application. What will be the enforcement issues? . Residents should be allowed to do spot applications. Weed and Feed is used freely by residents. Will those applications be possible under the new by-law? . Is granular application more acceptable than liquid applications? Granular pesticide can drain into the sewer system while liquids can be absorbed by plants more quickly. . An accreditation system needs to be implemented for all users of pesticides. . The City cannot be draconian in their enforcement of the by-law. . More education is needed than enforcement. . Signage is difficult to control. Because some substances used in pest control are organic, why do they need to be signed? . There was a suggestion that the frequency of application needs to be enforced but that pesticides should not be banned entirely. . There was a suggestion that a pennit system should exist with a cost associated with pesticide use. . In Toronto enforcement officer response is on a complaint basis . There is a need for a list of banned pesticides using their retail names . The City needs to work with retailers. . Infestations of weeds should also be considered, not just infestations of insects. The By-law should have exemptions for when herbicides can be applied to a address infestations. . Miscellaneous comments: . The draft by-law is Draft . Who will detennine what should or should not be included in the by-law? Any omissions or errors in these notes should be forwarded to the author immediately. Page 2 29 Action ~~":' ."~ T'lI'.'1 ~- .'~ ,.'''', j~1i ItA 30 N,j gJ,Q._,.. '.J: .lPI_ LE</('5~c'i Page 3 Item Details Action · Health of the community is the purpose for considering the by-law · Confusion reigns. For example, horticultural vinegar is a natural pesticide, but it is also dangerous to health · The by-law needs to be simple, flexible and workable · The public is open to using alternative products if the public knew which ones worked (retail names) · Consider having the City run seminars on pesticide use and alternatives to pesticides · Hydro corridors have exemptions, yet residents use the corridors for recreation. The utility company is given the exemption for removal of weeds on the basis of safety. They can also spray the grass. In Markham, they are examining tighter regulation of utilities. · Residents want to be able to do something to their properties, they need to know about proper cultural practices as well · Concern was expressed about the impact of pesticides on song birds and insects like butterflies · Questions were raised as to why the conservation authority requires an exemption Mark Inglis, M.B.A, O.A.L.A. Manager Landscape Architecture & Urban Design Any omissions or errors in these notes should be forwarded to the author immediately. I I .;-_ I 1'0 'eN \,..J I 'J"\ jP,,", : '" \ \ . ~ l- e::: g..~" 0::-,> "-', '--' :--- --I,. lq) tt ..-. Z L.l.J r."" L. ~.i.. ~ 'ir ~ -"":) 'J: :::bC\i..,\(:).>;-~ \ C{' , ()cQ C;,c)\.'E;;LL\.. -\0..:'\"\:";;-' vce'-~' ,{\.+c-::~c,t\ ~ "0 , · History of Pesticide Bylaws · Work Program · Other Municipal Examples · Stakeholders · Workshop · Next Steps "'1\.."\.."\.. MMM GROUP ,J::? '",.j ( iJl' l.J :"i ,~ \~ j ::'-1 \,1,1 '1 o . -'dJ >- q Z UJ :E I U 4: ~".",. c-:: >:"-.t 0J l'0 · Hudson, Quebec (1993); Halifax, NS (2000) · Waterloo (2001), Nepean (2001), in Ontario · IPM Certification - Landscape Ontario - Over 100 municipalities are certified · Pesticide Bylaws vary - Now 125 municipalities in Ontario have bylaws - One off pesticide applications - Municipal use guidelines - Private property guidelines · LO has initiated Healthy Lawns and Gardens workshops for homeowners · Province of Ontario - Agricultural practices guided - In 2009, decision on pesticide use ',', - " '-, '-. ,.-.>::"->:-,,..::~{. ::..';:; .-'.; "";':':(: ~( .; .. ; ,..... ",.' ,::: :, . ~ "') .~~., .-, . . '. ','., 0"-": .',' <....-._... ," t- '- .>-. -- . "',: ;" ..:',,; ;1: .. ~-;;-~:' '~j' >;"::>1',:::':'- ',~:i-;.;_::..~.;_::: ,:_<:,.~.:t:,<" '::':;~:~'.',::: ~f": .>. .i-j_X;' ,. . i'0 f'0 /"". ,'i\ L.tilf L'''~ ;'.i:) ,'~ ~~ "~.l'--A. :.':"'::'.<::"7_'.'.. _. "_~_;. _........""'. .' .8JR"---)~..'~~ (.l?-ICKElMtL~ -J... ~ ~ Stakeholders .~ -_c r="'-' ;~;: {) 0... (j t..U ...., !", 1.',- \.... ,I I 'b -To engage stakeholders including lawn care service providers, product retailers, golf courses, garden centres and utilities -To understand the impact of pesticide reduction on the environment and commerce I ,..-... i v01 ,+ ~ ......., 'l-,~~ Z I..U ...- J:_ ; -To solicit feedback for a by-law to enforce the reduction of pesticide use in Pickering -To build awareness of pesticide use and its impacts 'v ~-i. \~I Ul iJ:- .Understand the needs of the community for pesticide use .Prepare a questionnaire/survey of the stakeholders that use pesticides and of the general public · Facilitate discussion about a pesticide bylaw I '-l (~ ~ ~ (j -i~ ~ t'./") Lf) 1'0 rv~ \J \ \" .J lj, ,t'j ~ -+ Cli , , I ,"i5 i\J "9 · Cultural Practices - Mowing, watering, fertilizing, and aerification combined to reduce weed, insect, and disease problems and to produce turf of high quality · IPM, Integrated Pest Management is "Integrating practical and cultural tasks to minimize the deterioration of healthy turf." · PHe, Plant Health Care - minimizing the use of potentially harmful pest control products I'~' "'- \.-tlll (,II ill. I 'f ;;.&.; ~f!~'cC-"~ \ ).". p'" " ~'lLC'Z.IL'.""~I'f ..k. v""' ~. CKE--' -~~-~~~ , ...-,_ _, ","0,,,"7>,( IJ . -,..>~~:,~!~~.- (.-.-. --. 'So .... ~~- ...... ~, \;'1 '.V "\ .' Iji at ~ j (j 1 ~ C?f) - Intensively used sport facilities -Strong turf in neighbourhood parks -Street boulevards take the abuse of salt damage and maintenance of utilities -Health issues -Timing for weaning off pesticides will be at issue - Implementing and enforcement will be a challenge -Educate the public about lawn and garden care practices 'i"',.';"':,,,-:' . '<._'. 'n . ;r, AfA".....M, MM",G..,,-R.,,,..O,..........:.u,.p ;;;;': .i" ...,...... . ",F< '\.() r--0 , - .' -- '-. /..l:-=. -{.t., ..---;/.....,2 L' . . "": ~:PO~~.T#.~"",' .~" J \.. \-1.... 'ACHMENT#._. '~"-'""".'. ii' ( ".,,",! /" l..-/ Al I. ~Ol_'__....,,_. ,..., 3 I :""'r'~'-""n ""n~ n"'j 38 ~"I E N T F;__~~ "VL: J (J .......~._. 0: _..L_._:....L :.'I~:;t.;2J.:fJ(Ct) .r. ........ r: C. ~." .,C' C.-, ~ c'e<' ~~~ ::. ""~~_~ \ _ .r ./ , , y"" j'j r~ ... .... ..:::: ,~,,-~,. ""1 ,"" t ....," ~~4'>,ltiil1_'_I-t'- n 1(i'Ii):""I"" '- -"i"Y! "'1>T- -r-"'N'-""'n 40 "J ?:j' (";(, {;{ /~!L.". C' .L....... ..;-- ~ ~~ ~ II"' '" \ ~ ,,: \.J '\ \j .Ai 'r;1 ')~~: ' 5 "-' '---, ' \~ """, Utilities repairs - no topsoil used Salt Damage Intensive Use Tree root competition with turf v~ W I \:' " t~ . " '.J i 'v \: \Y . -; (/j .,' eCl ~ Ciill 01 ..A ~,cfcf;7'TC':.l.'..m.'~~' . ,,' ......... .'IL:..L i.,,--,,.. ',.J.. L~. JUl. ""'.--"'.~. '. I PICKERtf1(~_ '-.,;, '\,' '-oJ; '""""- , Reduce Weeds and/or Clover on sports fields because: · Failing to remove weeds increases the 'risk factor and liability when young athletes are playing soccer at a high level; and · The sports fields, depending on the percentage of the weed population, may need to be closed in order to accommodate the complete sod or seed renovation of the sports field *No pesticides for aesthetic purposes in parks or boulevards C'-l ~ tN I..) r u'" (,,J \,\ \ ! J '+J, OJ , . - "'~ .....'" ~ ~i 1'-') -q- PROPOSED WEED POPULATION THRESHOLDS ~ -..J: -......; PARKS PARKETTES BLVDS MEDIANS LEVEL ONE CULTURAL PRACTICES PROGRAM WOULD MATCH THE PILOT PROGRAM WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ENHANCE GRASS CUTTING LEVEL TWO > 50% LEVEL THREE COMPLETE REHABILITATION OF ALL TURF SEED IF BARE I SEED IF BARE I SEED IF BARE OF TURF OF TURF OF TURF AND/OR WEEDS AND/OR WEEDS AND/OR WEEDS N1A REHABILITATION OPTIONS 1. RESEEDING 2. RESODDING 3. HERBICIDE SPRAY NORMAL REHABIUTA TION PROCEDURES INCLUDE INSTALLATION OF DRAINAGE TiLE WHERE REQUIRED, APPLlCA TiON OF 100 mm TOPSOIL, AND FINE GRADING PRIOR TO SODDING OR ,:....--.,.' IA'-'- IVIMM GROUP" '..,.._'. .._.l :;. :::', ..:'i. " . :-:' :,', ~:" C\J \Y f ~) V I V\' \-U \J, '--1 f ," ~ "i-. { Capital construction projects: · Soil conditions -' 1t · Drainage . \"'i'-; · Turf species · Maturing time · School Board buy-in · Irrigation ".j ~ fJ \0 I I, \J' \~ j, \.i~ \-D V, ,- "n ~ '2~,C_ Ln ~ -....i.- :.j' '-;. · Provides water during drought conditions, extending playability · Increases/maintains root structure, and therefore sustainability · Cost: $15,000-$25,000 per field · Staff Requirement: Monitoring for damages through season, start up in spring; purging in fall 1/;':; \) } Ie' \J W '"I ~ U , " ---.: '", ' " ~ (\i · Soil conditions · Drainage · Maturing time - Field closure · Partners buy-in · Irrigation \D "<:j- [~" 7 ,:<I \;J ti ~ ):-+ ~ Policies are not just pesticide reduction !~ · Wet Field and Season Length Policy · Monitoring/enforcement of wet field and season length policy · Transient use of fields · Partnerships with user organizations and school boards "x.; "" \ (.,; I ""' J G " 'J \..0 lJ () , -. l !~ '" '" 1 ~. ! · Five year program · Total Capital Costs: $1,000,000 · Total Operating Costs $542,000 - all fields, parks, medians per year · Timing: Five years to complete program · 2007 Year 1 program: - operating budget impact - $90,000 est. - capital budget impact - $200,000 est. co <:::r )0 u ,\ 'j~ l.d ~ \,;\ \J U · Homeowners · Commercial properties · Sports and recreation facilities '-.i f-:J ~ .'-: j -}'~i , '-' ; , r<'\ vxJ , I '.V I Ii""; J i 'V' \V ~. -"';;,J) ~ ~J ,~ "-.ll ~ · Breakout groups - Spokesperson - Stenographer · Topics: - Impact of pesticide by-law on stakeholders (30 minutes) - Input on timeframe to implement (30 minutes) - How to enforce (30 minutes) ,.--'--... '---" U) ~ U) '/".j G) I 1'"\ 'IF V The City of Pickering is considering a pesticide by-law to restrict pesticide use" Please indicate whether you think these options should be included in the proposed by -law: · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on c(inunercialpropeJ'~V, that is, businesses and retail centres · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pestl" cOdes "').'9 ff- Y'!Ilf7iK'n ;-t1r !~;' '1;:' 0 :f: ",ol(;, ,(f/.; !~Of"'j)'I,. ,~ 1 (.,tti"...I~\.., ;j;"tY .f 1$,~)i ,,--_r}.. [t.t-if tt.t.Y,f' d !f...-! t- ~~.!' \1 ~d'.~ f_~.rt\l!;~l ~-1~",J 'h.'I,} _'7 ~,,:. \,j \,J V; ;;j ~ ~ --' ~.i · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pestl"cI"des on r';'ih' of' !..."l;r'f{Or';'H" n""!lrk(,> ,(';l~l ~~_I:~.:l...'f" '" F-} )J ii'.f_.!', -t.J i-ff~:l5 l/-~~V "..'~' ,>"ifJ< ""t~~ . Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of Pesticides on fiar;<~\. ,.1~' !I.....tt.".'-_" Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of " "d ,'p . . . PestlcI es on f."t}/j (Irtp'J.ff)~r t.~ ~ _ Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pestl"cI"des on t{!lH~H .... ~. ~:,* j- ';<"' ~: :;;" Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pestl"cI"des on ff;Jiilhhi '",'"",, ":-"",,, !"tt~r Imp~e~enting a ~y-Ia'Y that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pestIcIdes on r.n,." tl' 'P/,W1h t~ I ...., M.." n.,.,. E""' '; "t;I-'J't-v.~..;.~ ~,,~,€,~?,tll- fif ~Jej~R -f, .~/ -1*. ""- .. . . . . IA"" MMM GROUP . " ell,! (11 &\ ~ m. '~"fq-;;f'CC/i'./ll.'~.""..,~~ , f~,L,,"" "I~.. '=:., ". ,~,,""",'".l \j PIA-TT5nn-..&f1 I' ._.L~L,"lt~.(_ \i' ,"1 What programs do you think could be useful to make a by-law of this nature more effective? Asking stores to provide more information to consumers about alternative products and methods Asking stores to offer more alternative products for sale to the public Asking the lawn care industry to increase the number and type of alternative products and services they offer Other ideas? ~ ;::-....: .'....::,. "-': -di ..~ 0J u') iA'-'- MMM GROUP f'-I~) L1J ;~ ,J ''-!' ';y I, ,;1 'liJ 101 tt" ;;:: i,) ::s >-\. eX; -..J ", \ Cl I "Ii .:rl r~ I Z L~..~ :;:: :-\... . "'__ _ ; Ll - 5;.; ,..)0." \l..A..o..~ '::)3 -, . "LCCc~ CJcf'J-su.\ -k~~\.-\S ~?r:(' Sk\:tk;t:~-(o,t · History of Pesticide Bylaws and IPM · Work Program · Public Comparators · Private Stakeholders · Survey · Meeting F onnat · Next Steps j~ IV \ ~~~ ,~ , ..:rt ':,'. .r; , >-l. \Ji 1 \.' . ,... eillf (1~ & ~, ~. ._~ ;\~cf"-'~'""','.','..;'''O"P!~:,','''J,.. . _.. 1~..i~'I~."'~~ ,- PICKE" . .. ,. ,"------------- _.-,,-_.,."_....-..~--= · Pesticide use can be legally and effectively regulated by a three tier regime - Supreme Court ruling - Federal legislation regulates what pesticides can be used - Provincial legislation regulates who can use pesticides and how to use - Open to municipalities to enact by-laws dealing with vvhere and when pesticides can be applied · Hudson, Quebec (1993); Halifax, NS (2000) Waterloo (2001), Nepean (2001), in Ontario · IPM Certification - Landscape Ontario - Over 100 municipalities are certified · LO has initiated Healthy Lawns and Gardens workshops for homeowners ~ u) ~A"'"' M" ";'M~"";I M' '~':G':' "R""Q':'u' 'p"'!.: <iff ..... .:!j/. ;'i.ij.;;,,<ji~~~ .-..:",,:..,' .... .' -.,....., -,.,'i,., ,.',,' ,. '. "'.:. <:.:'"..:.,i:i/" ',:;' . ,::.;.,; ',>,,'r.:,)}, >/>:0\::"[ 1':<:, ~j ,~ I..;, , r, \) " ..;0 u' ::";'~ , ~ -I '\\1 :~ 1 .:ri ! i.F) W) () · Pesticide Bylaws vary - Now 130 municipalities in Canada (six provinces) have bylaws - One off pesticide applications - Municipal use guidelines - Private property guidelines · Province of Ontario - Agricultural practices guided - In 2009, decision on pesticide use i,N \J I ,r. 'j , V Jl ~ , j 1~ '~ , "-~ '~; ~" Pesticide Schedules in Ontario Schedule Who Can Use It Pesticide Characteristics . licensed applicator . very toxic 1 . certified grower . very persistent . only with approved permit . highly mobile . very toxic . licensed applicator . very persistent 5 . certified grower . highly mobile . assistant agriculturist under supervision . less toxic or less persistent alternative not available . licensed applicator . certified grower . toxic 2 . trainee or technician under supervision . pe rsistent (some restrictions apply) . moderately mobile . assistant agriculturist under supervision . moderately toxic 3 . any person . moderately persistent . slightly mobile . low toxicity 4 . any person . non-persistent . non-mobile . containers < 1 kg or < 1 L . low toxicity 6 . any person . non-persistent . non-mobile . containers> 1 kg or > I L \.[) LJ) c"" U) \;;,J \..i ;[' U () , I., j.;J z,) Council - Was requested by citizens to consider a pesticide bylaw for health and environmental reasons '-+ ( 1 .'~i ~ , J~ -Responded to the request with a draft bylaw - Determined exemptions with advice of the Officer of Health -Directed staff to solicit stakeholder and public input to a draft by law . .~ CitJl (,I ~ ,- ~ ~:-1~....'-.;...'.~.rP'~..i..'.').... . ~~i~:~~~.c :f;; PI~/T':f u _.___L~_~_~_ , 'Ji Stakeholders Meeting Jaollary16;lf\"i -To engage stakeholders includinglawnc? service providers, product retailers,go!~{j;2i:< courses, garden centres and utili~i~s'.;{>C('Yi" ~1;:JJ~.t~~tj:%:::JJ~}~: -To understand the impact ofp reduction on their commerce Photo: Ron Pietroniro/Metroland PICKERING -To solicit feedback on enforcement and timing for a by-law to enforce the reduction of pesticide use in Pickering -To build awareness of pesticide use and its impacts ~ '" 'vi \--01 W >t '<J> ~ ,,~ .~; co u; lA">;'" . "M";; M" ':,'M' ";;:""G"" 'R";": o";'~":;u'" "p"";, ". .....,.. ...... 'it:'.'i , " -' ".~-:. :,., . ,__ ' C' .'-.-', :..' .....' .. ...... -', .:,',_>'. ';':.,"-';i '.<:, '<"'::,-,.-;;~~ ' ";-.:':,'j',:,:~:,:;:, :.: . - ;~\-<,; .:,.\. .:',t: '~~.;:/.{'.:/ .'. <-;::\;~/.:. ":':"'.:~.~.).[:-:--_.;,~-,:};,.:~~ ,:.-." ,;,:;'_:::)'-!i:~' ,.,~: Q\ U;.~ ~ LillI o.{i ill ...,.. ~ ...JLh f;.i;JL"""" __l'I";;i"""'" ~"" :",;:~~- .,.>-:<;.;tf":::~~-' :7~ ,"..i"'-'> i~ ~y '~ .... .:-... .~.~j),'c,01 rICKERr1S]"~' Public Meeting - January 24 -To recognize the public's understanding of pesticide reduction on the environment and on commerce N "~ 'V \~k.,; I - ...... .. .. · ... -:. I .. - .. I! ...... :..-.-..~ I. -_I -.. II r - .. II"" -- .. III 11 · ..- 'I.JJt ... :.; -f nlll 11..- i.. -. I.... II II..... . _ II , II ... ... y ~. " ,i i\) (,): '- CJ -, . -~~ G ! -iei 51 I I -To solicit feedback for a by-law to enforce the reduction of pesticide use in Pickering -To build awareness of pesticide use and its impacts IA"" MMMGROUP . ,I ~ II " ,I ~ ~': "., t"':!:: c'-..., C:.. C'. t W-c' ~ j CJ:: ,~. v: \('.~ '---' '~c...) '-.D ...-- \.0 ,'2 '0 ,J,,,\ U (v · Cultural Practices - Mowing, watering, fertilizing, and aerification combined to reduce 'd weed, insect, and disease problems and to produce J turf of high quality ....... ( -...l 'c 1/'/-'~"" IPM, Integrated Pest Management is "Integrating L IPM practical and cultural tasks to minimize the (:(::"::=::~/ deterioration of healthy turf." · PRC, Plant Health Care - minimizing the use of potentially harmful pest control products I t\; \JJ ~" ; . I: i :~'~ rj ! u, ~. _I"'"" nl t~t';":::: '/]I\\\~".l'.' HI;"",,,,,, ~"f[:':~ ~ ./ " '1 I,. ,hJ,.' ">'" j';-\' t~t', r ( " },._,.""', =. '::>"" ilp~:-:- __'-""~',,, :", ; ~, ", ,/! 1 ~l';" ''I ' ,,'fi" ", '" )...-"'''~ ", 'l,; i,3l , ~',:,~'" . '..; \ \" (ljH:;'<".f''''''~ tj ;.' 1 ~..~."'." .., " \ '.. , " · 4k,,,., f "i",.! ". ., !. .. , 1",,- "'1 f" ',' L :<1'1 ')"j'1F, ~'II' 'i]',..' ; t'" ,,' I,~);i' 17 n'! '~' ~,~!,: ; ,i " '-J "rr . o .. "'Ie." "k '.' " · .~~i;il '; ,~ ' ')': Illll~;g)j;;' ' II': I Q iI, i' , ~ l :, ' ~ ,~,'" 'l ",lIp, ;~~ 5: 1 " "" ',' ""I, .. i '"r ''ii' I li;it; [-1' ~l' r~t i 7j j~: ~1 1.1! ',,"~Jj.. ilJ:u ~ 0., ,1 {""'\ f ~) " ~IHI Uj~ ,'" . 'f....'j. ..~.-...._~_.., ,-" - n 61. .' }})-'f~l "f -~ -r - ._,.,s~_~_ ,- " Cf:: :2' C s -- ({, S~::)., /0/ ;;,J;',;..~,. I ; III 1 ! ~ll il! ' \:1;' " :'!:jL. ,; ",i iJjE ., :""t''''-''';..- f;; , f ~ -, - -,'\h :"~,i11:ln,,,' ';.0"";' ~_.", . ,"1...".",. <.; r'" ;0 f ;"'<-,,_f ';;,.:;'" l j j ",!~ ;:/i ~r~;;:ri' -" ~l -"F. \~!, f; r Ii Illii t<. j' 'Ii I-jll tl .1:1' Ii I ~ ;1.. .i' '"t ; ~ Ll i '. ~ l !:f ;, ' Il'l " ~ - , il ~ r'0 \.0 ,-" Lit'! ;."Ji !i~ 'I' ;.:L; lv' ~--_."~~- ,roo' ,"-- "".i.,,,,-____J<'.a\.'- "(', ,,' ,m "'-:oi:J]T~"" :'.,-__!,'" .l.A.h V PD'-- I ""~."'~" , _ _" , lilt:, ,'.-"w.,- .,,- I ~ 7"""fT71:~-' ~~ \)-_.~J:'I...C_ ~"". :r\ IJl i1 I ';,j.J lJ \'1\ N ~; Rapid Risk Factor Surveillance System · 13% of households had no lawn or garden · 66% had a lawn or garden which they cared for themselves · 20% hire a lawn care company · 48% apply pesticides themselves · 74% that hire a lawn care company, have them apply pesticides · 62% used pesticides in 2003 "'-' (J ': '" '" Citlf ,,~ ~ IN ~__~~~~r~." U ;~~;;-- ';,\'~Y:}1~~7''-' ~:_",>::_:, -: :;" \ -~'~iI!'mr't:C:J.d.c.''!..~;'f''o ~iPl---'- ( ~ ____CKE_____ \fi ~ ~i : \' q V U -; G\ "" , -, · Use - No person shall apply or cause or permit the application of any pesticide within the City · Exemptions- Agriculture, pest control in buildings, insect infestation, public health, - noxious weeds, conservation authorities, golf courses / driving ranges, utilities, water disinfectants, purification, wood preservative, injection into trees, stumps or wooden poles, insect repellant i i~ ....J , /\; \\ I I ~ \.0 r,.j ,fJ \.J ir. J s J ' \~ \J Ln \.D..,. t:\ / '. .Jl <., L.tfl{ OIl' ~ ~ ~ . a". ~'~'"9",.,,).,.o;:~"'~J:'''''''''~''' ..'. ....,',.i" 'T:~<"';:~''i>'' . ,- '. "'~I~.~':':~"fF''':'.J_ ErCKE.___~u_.__ (~~ ~~ ~; '(J. · Enforcement - Officers allowed to enter upon land for inspection and may Require documents related - Inspect Require information from any person - Make examinations, take tests, samples, photographs · Penalties - according to Provincial Offences Act · Other Legislation - - Pest Control Products Act, Canada - Ontario Pesticides Act · Effective Date - March 25, 2008, Commercial applicators - January 1, 2009, All persons .--. s \rl ,.N ~i \A \J , \ ,'"\ ", \) J"\ \~ I' 'V ; "'-' r~ .......... Schedule A a) Soap b) Mineral oil c) Silicon dioxide d) Biological pesticides e) Borax f) Ferric phosphate g) Acetic acid h) Pyrethrum or pyrethrins i) Fatty acids j) Sulphur k) Com gluten meal J \1"-'; ~ '-0 \.0 ~,. ".0 Public Realm c~ - Intensively used sport facilities l~ -Strong turf in neighbourhood parks ->l: \q, -Street boulevards take the abuse of salt damage and maintenance of utilities -Health and safety issues -Grounds Staff have already started reducing :.,><;; ~ i :\1'''' iJ ~./"\ u u '-......, \",.) "- Grounds Staff have already started reducing -IPM -Naturalization of areas -No spray zones - Drought tolerant species of grass - Natural fertilizers -Experimented with alternatives: eg, vinegar - Practice cultural practices -Chemical treatment is last resort -Use pest selective pesticides \~ i"J) co '-0 C\ '--0 N '.:~...., V If' , , \J ....; , ~'\ W " "-"; Private Realm - Education needed for the public about lawn and garden care practices · Health issues -Timing for weaning off pesticides will be at . Issue · Implementing and enforcement will be a challenge ~ ~ -..~ Q' ",.::- ~.. .~ ~ '.'.....i>i., I ct~ (/ --rc i'S /' Ot, l" "Qt.) . ,i,'f" I " 70 ~'.,'~ ~' L'~- rff::--[;, /. . ".-' '.~' - L/' ? , J...(~~., .."- 7 '1 ;'''';'i~~"' ~, rJ ..... \...,j.~, :::;: .S'~'~~ t,~~ ./.. ...~.~. -?\ .)1' .'. ....~~~. ,.,r' '.,. ff;;J:Jt- .'--". :~r~ '1~ ...~;..... :i.m! r . ,"to:: ~~' '~<.f J r" ..,~;(; 'It.~~ '!....J."'".:;;:'~ .{~;} ~if..,:.:...", , ",,~ . ~o~,..~' 'f: fr",,~~,.,.... (1' 'i~ :n:i{'\'f#-t'-~ ~. ".~ 1'-- jr' ., 1~l;W'l'~ '1-"<Wv..wK 'A / .'-I.'!? 72 l ..1(/7::.. ,-,.[ ~ ~'. "-::'~~_;,l" CC-.::-ro"() r{ _.l~<_. I~ I,~ 'c..,J \ " o iJ ,,"'1 \~) <,1 ~_i :-.--r -j I j 'f'j Dt pr) r----- Utilities repairs - no topsoil used Salt Damage Intensive Use Tree root competition with turf v'\J () \ v 1"\ V \ \,1) o U Reduce Weeds and/or Clover on sports fields because: '"-' ~ · Failing to remove weeds increases the risk factor and liability when young athletes are playing soccer at a high .j " ~ level; and · The sports fields, depending on the percentage of the weed population, may need to be closed in order to accommodate the complete sod or seed renovation of the sports field *No pesticides for aesthetic purposes in parks or boulevards "<::J- t'---. .....,....,'.'",..-... ' '(":'.' " ,:,. ,; ..~t,". '. , ~: ' ;4, ~. ':':,::",~ "'. ',', i . 'i!: . ".,'c. i;, :". .,', :,<,;.:.;:"p";'.'.:: :N o .i v: '\J \U ~J; u) ~ PROPOSED WEED POPULATION THRESHOLDS N ~i , PARKS PARKETTES BLVDS MEDIANS LEVEL ONE .. CULTURAL PRACTICES PROGRAM WOULD MATCH THE PILOT PROGRAM WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ENHANCE GRASS CUTTING \^\ I LEVEL TWO 5;): NIA NlA LEVEL THREE COMPLETE REHABILITATION OF ALL TURF SEED IF BARE I SEED IF BARE I SEED IF BARE OF TURF OF TURF OF TURF ANDIOR WEEDS AND/OR WEEDS ANDIOR WEEDS REHABILITATION OPTIONS 1. RESEEDING 2. RESODDI NG 3. HERBICIDE SPRAY NORMAL REHA BILl TA TlON PROCEDURES INCLUDE INSTALLATION OF DRAINAGE TILE WHERE REQUIRED, APPLlCA TlON OF 100 mm TOPSOIL, AND FINE GRADING PRIOR TO SODDING OR ',~ \,,; j :[ ~ I " \)\ \U \,J ......... \J " If50% Weeds · Evaluate Soil Conditions · Evaluate Drainage · Understand Maturing Time - Field Closure · Attain Partners Buy-in · Review Irrigation I 9- ~ ~ r--..... c-.- r-- N "-J , \r v '...J , \J\ \~ ,J( Policies are not just pesticide reduction · Wet Field and Season Length Policy · Monitoring/enforcement of wet field and season length policy · Transient use of fields · Partnerships with user organizations and school boards >-;. \'} , ~ ~ !~ \N ~ I \.;", \~ 1\ \0 " '~ ~ \.J ."" · Five year program · Total Capital Costs: $1,000,000 · Total Operating Costs $542,000 - all fields, parks, medians per year · Timing: Five years to complete program · 2007 Year 1 program: - operating budget impact - $90,000 est. - capital budget impact - $200,000 est. ; \!~ ~ ! co r--- \~ I.J \ \ '-I ~ ~) ~~ -.,j, c' C'---- ....: (\ : '"j : " .=.. '\..;-r ~ Pho!o Ctedit Jaok Currie · Sports and recreation facilities - Golf greens and tees have highest need, but only 10% of land area - Audubon requirements - Cost of spraying keeps owners mindful of overuse - Marketing to the public - Civic Pride JA" MMMGROUP v~ \ \~ \ ,.\ \.J I \;"\ v ~ .....-.. ~ ~ \":.l " CJ \~ · Homeowners: - Lawn maintenance - Pride of ownership - Tree Spraying - Self-application or hire a maintenance company - What questions to ask of a maintenance company - Where and how can homeowners get information? co ,~ \:> \[', \~ \\ \i\ \--0 -, \J ..- co ~ ",j ~ · Commercial properties - Street presence - Marketing to the public - Civic Pride - Communities In Bloom --.; \'- Photo Credit Jack CUffic CfJ Q \ vJ ~J ,\ \.i \.' /5 '-.. ",,) " The City of Pickering is considering a pesticide by-law to restrict pesticide use, Please indicate whether you think these options should be included in the proposed by-law: · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on cOlnrnercialproper(F, that is, businesses and retail centres · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of t' 'd r:!/. '. {JJ 4-1': /;'>~tf-"-'-,1j'-ll!~,.r ~y,!..., ,_',~qr ,ril"l~". rl<t,,~,....... V-~"<\\'~f..Ir'!.1, J~-.r'''' ---~-'Qci:J~'~' ,-l~""i1; - fl, q, ,(,"~ifJ;.._~.J pes ICI es \.lOS<;;:.- ilf.l to"l-,llti.e'\, ,)~fflv("f[,,~ iH,J'Ct,L. C'i-', if"'d, $;tihl<i:.-,>.jvr .l1ft. Mbt.l~ · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of , 'd ~.< J'1';};' if ' " pestlcI es on Cj~v (~t T ICiferulg a/Hi · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pestl'cI'des on (....:!'!!" t.jJV:" 4';: ,'l,t<. ~.lt'""~/ i._:.1 t f.~~ tf',,:'.~ · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of Pesticides on 2,01/,n cours'es and or drivinf! ",-,,'t "" '\...,11' · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of Pesticides on faun bowlin!! 1!l'eenS t_:O ~~..J'1 · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on utility pN~fJerties · Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of t' 'd :r~ r:ft~,;: ~-;f:; "','? f:;-_/~!t pes ICI es on 3 Ld'i!,f!.if(.;'i;.1[,.iU Q. ~. . 1 ("J co lA" MMMGftOUP f"') co i~ I,J \ V'. ( ~ , c i\ \) . \v w '-... \:,.) '" What programs do you think could be useful to make a by-law of this nature more effective? Asking stores to provide more information to consumers about alternative products and methods Asking stores to offer more alternative products for sale to the public Asking the lawn care industry to increase the number and type of alternative products and services they offer Other ideas? -'^" . 1:"1'-, 84 1,"i , '1' -1'i'-j''::-~''1'iY- '-, '''0- ~ i~ /0/ / ~ (t) r:n ~ ~ r-+- r:n ~ ~. ~ ~ r::;) (t) o o ~ ~ (t) o r-+- (t) 0- r::;) ~ ~ PJ t:j ~ ~ W ~ -.. N o o 00 \i"---~ 1 ,lfu..~';;:J,;,-"--r,'t"I-)-::,n-l:-'--,.,-,'w..;.' c-.jC-, <'" C'C.. <~ "--~_~/ C., j ICl' .IN 'J . ~~ iIi \J ,\ \1,\ '~ \j L1) 00 ~ ,-, ',.,j :" Topics to consider: - Impact of pesticide by-law on you - Your input on timeframe to implement - Your suggestions on how to enforce Format: ~ Approach Microphone ~State Name and Address ~ Make statement or ask question ~ Information will be recorded to become part of or appendix to report to Council ~ Written comments may be provided \j"', '""1 '1 ej"1 )It Ii....){t..~ ,~.._. .....--;;-."'..-~AA,;"_."''''.,, 'f....""'...(ij.-~_.<_.j ~1.l-f<n-iiII)l...-.;rj' 86 I ._9~) cV:: C-c~t:~' -r[)V, _.\.c- .../) c riil tl.!l .. · The use should be used as an option in addition to altemative methods. Alternative methods used as a primary before pesticide use. · If altemative methods are okay for homeowners, why aren't they good enough for golf courses? I have tried "altemative" methods in the past and have found them to be much more costly and ineffective. I ended up having to pay twice to get something that finally worked (chemical). One environmentally-friendly treatment for chinch bug is over- watering your lawn daily, as chinch bugs don't like water, however with our yearly summer water restrictions, this is not a viable method! I would be breaking one by-law to accommodate another. I think taking control away from licensed applicators and I allowing homeowners to do it when they don't know what they're doing will have a reverse effect to what you are trying to accomplish. Perhaps Pickering could offer a by- law focused on reduction of pesticides rather than an all-out ban. What about those responsible homeowners who do not abuse pesticides but would still like to have a healthy lawn - are they now going to be criminals? See attached shect* for benefits of a healthy lawn. Also, my children suffer from allergies (hay fever, ragweed) and there has been a noticeable increase in their suffering since the boulevards and parks of Pickering have become a sea of yellow. The pollen produced from dandelions has had a negative effect on them. "Dandelion pollen causes severe allergic reactions in people who are sensitive to other pollens such as ragweed." I have questioned before whether the studies being looked at are Canadian studies versus American - what products? American year- round use vs. Canada's spring and faIl? Please read the attached sheet regarding the licensing and testing of products used in Canada. Also, has there been any studies done in Quebec to show if there has been any improvements in residents' health since their pesticide ban? · We have tried organic products in the past and have not received results from them and therefore have wasted a lot of money. We are seniors that rely on a lawn care company to treat our property. We only have it treated when necessary. We also have interlocking brick that has weeds that come up which we are unable to pull by hand, would this mean we cannot use a pesticide to kill those weeds? We have had a chinch bug problem the past 2 years and have been fortunate to catch it early enough and have it treated that it did not do too much damage. I am unaware of any effective alternative methods to control insects. I would hesitate to experiment with these and not get results and then lose my lawn in the meantime. · The city has been very vague about what the alternatives to pesticides are. Do the altematives work as well as pesticides, how much do they cost, where I can buy them, what do I do if! have White grub problems. The City recommends proper watering, what about water restriction. · It's not about being able to do what you want on your personal propel1y. It's about affecting others when you do it (spray). Let the children play w.ith freedom, and breathe air without hannful chemicals! Let's implement the by-law! I _ ,_~ll ,-ILL " 'E .: '. c . .'~ .' L:::._>r C'r iC't:, r~ 7 t I Com men ts\suggestions: . Most people are allergic to weeds and my family is one of them, for me not to be using pesticides would cause my family to be constantly sick in the spring and summer seasons. . Enforcement is necessary. I ! . I think that with all the gathering evidence of danlage caused by pesticides, the City should look at the stI1ctest possible ban on their use. . This is a joke. ... The Town of Pickering is ALWAYS full of dandelions. THEY DO NOT CARE what our town looks LIKE .... IT IS HORRIBLE DISGRACEFUL and I phone the works office EVERY year for the past 3 or 4 years to get it looked after and NOTHING happens but they finally come and cut down the SEEDED dandelions. We pay our hard earned money to look after our properties and the CITY lets their land look disgraceful.. PS LETS just BUILD MORE TOWN HOUSES that is what our MAYOR SUPPORTS...thank you ... Sandi. . Should the by law be passed, where in accordance, those requiring IPM accreditation and are licensed by the Province to apply chemicals should be allowed to continue to apply as long as they are enrolled to receive accreditation within a determined time. . I STRONGLY recommend to remove Pesticides which include herbicides for weeds, insecticides for insects, and fungicides for disease from the store shelves completely. That's why there isn't a choice to consumers/businesses to use these types of produces/services, this makes it easier to control the usage of these produces once the pesticide ban is in place. Also, to controllawncare companies who claim that their products are organic and then apply pesticides when homeowners aren't home or chemically change products, to give the perception of a healthy organic lawn. Homeowners thinking it was organic not knowing any differently. These typcs of companies are poisoning their customers for a quick buck not thinking of the long term effects it may have especially if they have vegetable gardens cause now they are ingesting the chemicals. A significant fine needs to be implemented especially towards lawncare companies to make them think about it twice i.e. $6,000 fine or more and homeowners another amount. As the fines are not significant enough as the penalty to a lawncare company would be the price of] customer which isn't enough. They laugh as they are getting ofT. :-1 . We feel that while pesticide companies are probably more vocal than residents over this issue, people's health should not be put in hann's way for cosmetic lawn care - we . want to ensure that resident's voices are heard. Also, we do not feel that golf courses should be given a free pass to spray as much pesticides as they wish - there are several organizations involved in natural golf sustainability such as http://'vVww.golfenvironmenteurope.org/ or http:www.usga.org/turf/index/html - Thank you. ,,~c:' :-' :'c ',r' '"~ 88 · Implementing a by-law that would restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on golf courses and or driving ranges · Implementing a by-law that would restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on lawn bowling greens · Implementing a by-law that would restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on utility properties · Implementing a by-law that would restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on residential property What programs do you think could be useful to make a by-law of this nature more effective? · Asking stores to provide more information to consumers about alternative products and methods · Asking stores to offer more alternative products for sale to the public · Asking the lawn care industry to increase the number and type of alternative products and services the offer J No J Yes J No J Yes J No J Yes J No J Yes J No J Yes J No J Yes J No J Yes J No c;(: ~7L CrtC>t:, jDt ~Lti1; .1:' ."'HILl! 15 34 28 * 33 28 * * 35 18 * 28 24 * 55 4 * 55 4 * 53 5 * Homeowner: 44 * Business: 14 Homeowner I Business: 4 * survey results that had been added on Feb 29, 08. In the future, if you needed to remove weeds or bugs that were outside, how likely are you to use an alternative product or method? The City of Pickering is exploring ways to reduce the outdoor use of pesticides in the City. Are you in favour or opposed to the City reducing the use of pesticides outdoors? t ,.:2't,. ,.Let U Topdressing with topsoil U Naturalization U Fertilization (compost or manure) U Overseeding U Hand pulled weeds U Used alternatives for insect control U Mulch gardens/tree pits U Other J Very likely J Somewhat likely J Somewhat unlikely J Very unlikely U In favour U Opposed U Neither in favour or opposed U Depends on what they do U Do not know t;-t:r- L 5-rtf2- 89 15 4 7 14 15 14 4 9 7 2 3 13 2 Section #3 Pesticide Bv-law and Implementation The City of Pickering is considering a pesticide by-law to restrict pesticide use. Please indicate whether you think these options should be included in the proposed by-law: . Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on commercial property, that is, businesses and retail centres . Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides close to hospitals, schools, daycares, and homes for the aged . Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on City of Pickering parks and greenspaces . Implementing a by-law that would legally restrict most outdoor uses of pesticides on City of Pickering sports fields J Yes J No J Yes J No J Yes J No J Yes 32 20 " * 39 14 " 37 24 " " 37 * r--:;r -, 90 In the future, if you needed to remove weeds or bugs that were outside, how likely are you to use an alternative product or method? The City of Pickering is exploring ways to reduce the outdoor use of pesticides in the City. Are you in favour or opposed to the City reducing the use of pesticides outdoors? -WIT 2) ,c.E5qc <-;--'DC / '" ~trc;) /~z 9 32 32 40 16 23 5 * * * * U Naturalization U Fertilization (compost or manure) U Overseeding U Hand pulled weeds U Used alternatives for insect control U Mulch gardens/tree pits U Other J Very likely J Somewhat likely J Somewhat unlikely J Very unlikely U In favour U Opposed U Neither in favour or opposed U Depends on what they do U Do not know 23 7 9 10 * * 25 14 1 10 * * Section #2 Businesses Please indicate your location and what type of business you operate? In the past 3 years, (2005, 2006, 2007) did you or someone else in your business use pesticides outdoors on your property? In the past 3 years, did you or someone else in your business hire a company or pay a landscaper to maintain your lawn or garden that included the outdoor use of pesticides? In the past 3 years, did you or someone else in your business use alternative products or methods on your lawn, gardens, trees, or potted plants? U Retail/Wholesale U Manufacturing U Service U Operate a business related to lawn and garden cc U Operate a business in Pickering U Operate a business outside Pickering J Yes J No U Do not know J Yes J No U Do not know U Lawn aeration U Proper watering / irrigation 2 13 4 3 3 16 1 13 4 15 16 PC';? - rLy:;>-.:e"2 .'iJ .. L{)( 91 Section #1 Number Homeowner of People How long have you lived in Pickering? J 1-5 years resident 6 J 6-10 years resident 5 J 11 + years resident 35 * J Operate a business in Pickering 1 J Do not live in Pickering 3 What is your age group? J Under 20 J 21-35 J 36-50 17 * J 51+ 31 * Gender J Male 21 * J Female 27 . What is your primary residence? U Detached single family home 39 * U Townhouse 3 U Se mi-detached 5 U Apartment within house U Apartment/Condominium Do you have a lawn? J Yes 45 * J No 3 Do you have a garden and/or trees? J Yes 48 * J No If you live in an apartment, do you have a garden on your balcony or rooftop? J Yes 1 , J No In the past 3 years, (2005, 2006, 2007) did you or someone else in your household use pesticides outdoors on your property? J Yes 22 * J No 25 U Do not know 1 In the past 3 years, did you or someone else in your household hire a company or pay a landscaper to maintain your lawn or garden that included the outdoor use of pesticides? J Yes 17 . J No 30 U Do not know 1 In the past 3 years, did you or someone else in your household use alternative products or methods on your lawn, gardens, trees, or potted plants? U Lawn aeration 32 U Proper watering / irrigation 39 . U Topdressing with topsoil 26 . -';'-j':-'i 92 I _':l!;>- 1.;E,"'/'c-CJ--:", - lei-, . -/. .--' ;cY I .T YOUR SURVEY QUESTIONS ARE ~KEWE~ IN FAVOUR ?F A BAN. IT IS i NOT A TRUE SURVEY! Further, I belIeve sectlon 19 & 20 relatmg to entry and search and seizure exceed the City's powers without a warrant. · I think the price of alternative products will be a huge factor in making this program successfhl. I presume that stores will not be banned from selling pesticides, so if there is a less expensive product to choose, then the consumer will likely purchase that one. As long as the prices are comparable, then the consumer will likely choose the environmentally friendly product. It's all about money! · The retail sector is in business to make money. Suggesting to them to make changes is not the way to go. We must bring in a low to end the sale of these poisonous products. Most alternate products provided by the nurseries are not "friendly" to the environment. Also a very obvious omission is the banning or in some way reducing the use of herbicides. Are you not considering a reduction/elimination of these products? Good luck bringing in this very welcomed by-law. I may finally be able to walk the area without crossing back and forth to eliminate the pesticideslherbicides used on lawns and maybe, just maybe, we can start the process of cleaning up our waterways and lakes. · Children should be educated in schools and at home not to use pesticides - this will help our future generations. · Wait for the provincial government to introduce their pesticide legislation so the entire province is dealing with the pesticide usage issue the same way. · I think the law bowling greens are very similar to the greens on a golf course. Weare both using the same products to protect the greens from the snow. Natural organic fertilizer, fungicide to control dollar spot etc. · Alternatives must be "registered" for control of the target pest. I strongly believe there should be a threshold for weed cover that would allow a I-off exemption one time only! The reason at state that is because having to replace your lawn is not sustainable i.e.: high water usage - power equipment used to replace lawn produces C02. · Phrase "restrict most O!) outdoor uses...." is weak. The word "Asking....." has no teeth. · Ban lawn care service spraying liquids. I never llse liquid spray - only granular pellets every 4-5 years. But I would like to be able to use it when I consider it necessary. I suggest 18 months to implement the Pesticide Use By-Law. To enforce this By-law, use a tag system - 2 tags per year for no liquid - just pellets, and restrict the lawn service companies. There should be a complete ban on liquid sprays. Driving ranges should not be exempt. Golf courses should use pellets only - no liquid spray. They should not automatically be exempt. · Save the environment. Enjoy move, I am a green person. rc.:/ECr-c:, 5- ~.fi; j'{;/ 93 · Compellawncare/landscaping contractors to end the use of liquid pesticide spraying. We put a great deal of time and effort into maintaining an attractive property, using many methods of weed and insect control. Same neighbors are not so diligent! So let them use their preferred method to keep dandelions and ragweed (to which I am terribly allergic!) under control- as long as it is not sprayed liquid! To be fair to all parties concerned the City needs to apply an 18-36 month time frame for implement Pesticide Use By-Law. Start by "policing" the lawn care/landscaping contractors to enforce this By-Law. Fools Rush In .... Please do not do anything in haste - it creates more problems than it solves! I _ . To maintain a lawn bowling green you need to use pesticides. -- · It would be impossible to maintain a bowling green in playable condition without the use of pesticides. · The by-law as now proposed would ban homeowners from using controls even in small spot while golf courses (mostly adjacent to streams and creeks) could continue use thereby contaminating these water courses by run-off. The By-Law as it is now proposed is wrong headed. Ifweed and/or insect infestation becomes severe then "professionals" would have to be brought in for major treatment thereby defeating the original interest. Private properties could become unsightly and infested while golf courses continue to use pesticides in high volume. Defer the timeframe to implement this by-law for as long as it takes to complete scientific based study would possible effects. As with many things enforcement for By-law will be almost impossible. Education as to correct use and methods of control can be more effective. Prudent use of controls can be effective; e.g. fertilize to keep grass thick and weed resistant, - dandelions, etc. are easy to spot and pull or dig, - other weeds such as chickweed, creeping char lee, can be spot sprayed. If kept in check this way full spraying of entire area would not be required. If left unchecked until completely infested then high volume treatment becomes necessary. Under the proposed by-law the use of small amounts for spot treatment would be illegal. · I really hate to see obnoxious weeds everywhere i.e. thistle, mullion. They choke everything growing. What is the answer? I don't know. · The Pickering Lawn Bowling could not exist without the continual use of pesticides professional lawn maintenance service. · Impossible to keep a lawn bowling green in playable condition without pesticides. . It would be impossible to keep bowling green in playable condition without pesticides. eProvide more education from the City on pest control. It would ne~~lybe impossible to keep a lawn bowling green in playing condition. · For those residents and businesses with lawns that are out of control, the pesticide by- law should take effect in 2009. TI1is would at least give them time to get their lawns I Illnder control. I Jive across from a conservation area where nothing has/will be done to ,;,....~"'" ," ITf"'U", c.....~~j~...'........'1.1 1l!-.'\i~"","'-l;'C'Y':.'17 ii"l?"- ..,,' 94 t ",ilLt. C.:r;; 5;;-- -c L.~~ ,C, 0~ JCY control a noxious weed problem. The two closest neighbors have done little to control weeds in their yards. These two factors contribute to weed problems in my lawn. As such, I am opposed to a complete pesticide ban until such time as alternative methods are made available that work equally as well as the pesticides I currently use. . Do it soon. I · I am totally opposed to the City regulating the use of legal pesticides on any private property. If the by-law is restricted to municipal property only I could support the proposal but certainly not in its present form. -.-....--- . Follow the Peterborough pesticide by-law. · Define "Most outdoor Uses" and legislation is not the answer. Common sense ~. · Providing there are proven alternative environmentally safe and effective products available to control weeds and pests, I would fully support the by-law. . Make a law - no pesticide (they cause cancer). . Total ban of pesticides. · Would be nearly impossible to maintain a lawn bowling green in playable condition without the use of pesticides. What is Pickering using instead of pesticides to keep our green areas attractive. · Ask lawn care companies to provide more information to consumers on alternatives . and products. . The sooner the better for reduction. . Ban aU pesticides from all uses with exception of invasive species control. · Individuals should have the right to decide for themselves whether they should use pesticides but in public areas, including golf courses, it should be restricted. But individuals should be educated in the use of pesticides. * - *.C()fuh1erttthatll~bG()11~dded..()n.FeB29.26b8. I l' ./ '- t) '-. '. -Y'-"..-,," C)E~f~rz, ..~:.:; - ,cr8 9 :J /{I_ FW Information from Statistics canada From: o'Connell, Jennifer, Councillor sent: January 24, 2008 11:48 AM To: whitaker, chantal subject: FW: Information from Statistics canada Attachments: image002.jpg Jennifer O'Connell city councillor, ward One city of pickering 905.420.4660, ext. 4609 1. 866.683.2760 Fax: 905.420.6064 joconnell@city.pickering.on.ca www.cityofpickering.com www.jenniferoconnell.ca please consider your environmental responsibility - think before you print! www.sustainablepickering.com -----original Message----- From: Chris Lemcke (mailto:clemcke@aol.com] sent: Fri1/18/2008 11:53 AM To: pickles, David, councillor Cc: Mayor Web Email; Littley, Bonnie. councillor; Mclean, Bill, councillor; Johnson. Rick. councillor; Dickerson. Doug. councillor; o'connell. Jennifer. counci 11 0 r subject: Re: Information from statistics canada Honourable Councillor pickles; I wanted to forward the information I talked about the other night at the Stake Holder Meeting regardin~ the'small change in pesticide use in the rest of canada versus Quebec. The 1nformation I was referring to came from statistics canada's report on the Lawn and the Environment. Below is the particular point that I talked about in the report: pesticide use dipped slightly at the national level, Quebec pesticide use cut i n half In spite of increased efforts to build awareness of the potential health threats of pesticides, there has been little change in canadian households' use of pesticides on their lawns and gardens. The proportion of households that used pesticides slipped only marginally from 31% in 1994 to 29% in 2005 (Table <http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/16-002-XIE/2007002/200700210336- en.ht m#table1> 1). In spite of this national trend, the proportion of households using pesticides was reduced by half in Quebec, with only 15% of households applying pesticides to their lawn or garden in 2005. The only other provinces to experience a decline in the proportion of households applying these substances were New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and British Columbia. In contrast, the proportion of households using pesticides more than doubled in Newfoundland and Labrador and increased by almost half in Manitoba. I hope that this helps you understand the information that I was speaking about and how retail sales affects our business. Until the province bans rage 1 Ii$-'ii "-~-U"a " HIi?-' '-, 96 , ,-?//. ".,."t:'>,~_ CJC[i rL,t.;-C>L, lOt. FW Information from statistics canada pesticides at the retail level you will only drive the use into the home owner's hands and if you are truly concerne~ over the possible Health effects of pesticides how can you allow homeowners not trained or wearing protective equipment to continue to apply. Having a business in Montreal we know by-laws will influence the use of pesticides and lower its use but the real difference in Quebec came after they took it of the store shelves. we were able as a business to compete and provide organic solutions but the article below still shows that it does not completely stop its use entirely it onl~ creates a black market use of pesticides where untrained home owners do lt themselves and councillors are unwilling to "harass people for pesticide use". Locals defy ban, lawns still awash in pesticides 'We don't go out harassing people' for pesticide use, city councillor says ~~r~~~~~c~~:ns~~~i'W~:k~ed in Quebec but legal in ontario, is applied t~~,~ Locals defy ban, lawns still awash in pesticides 'We don't go out harassing people' for pesticide use, city councillor says BY ANDY BLATCHFORD The chronicle At the dawn of Quebec's era of pesticide prohibition, a cluster of neighbours in Kirkland have turned to cross-border shopping for their weed and insect killer fix. Quebec's new pesticide law, which came,into effect in April, prohibits the sale and application of most domestic~lly-applied chemical lawn products. But the regulation is ignored on a sleepy street in Kirkland, where residents risk fines to grow the perfect lawn. when "stephane" - who asked not to have his real name printed - first moved into his house a couple of r,ears ago, the property was covered in weeds. He applied the "chemical stuff' and he was happily surprised when the lawn became a monoculture of grass, in only a few days. "It was scrapped. Terrible. Awful," said the self-proclaimed "neat freak," describing the state of his lawn when he bought the home. Each summer stephane sprays his grass with pesticides three to five times, making sure to follow safety instructions on the bottle. "You pay almost S400,000 for a hornet you're not going to let it go," he told The chronicle. "It'S the presentatlon of the hous e too. If you go to se 11 the house, it's nice if there's no weeds." From the lush, weedless state of the grass on his property, the liquid pesticides, which cost about $16 per bottle, appear to be effective. The he uses contains the banned herbicides 2, 4 D and Mecoprop. He tried organic weed killers, which are still legal, but said they are useless. " brand stephane goes out of his way to tell neighbours that he sprays his lawn and Page 2 e)(;.~' c- ~,;~-cfi:- 97 /[{ ./" AN Information from Statistics canada estimates that close to half the homeowners on the street - a dozen houses - use chemicals. one neighbour, who applies weed killer at night so it dries by morning, doesn't understand wh~ Quebec's ban ;s so strict. "It's par for the course," he said of using pest,cides to maintain a weedless lawn. "what do you think we're all doing?" Another resident, who doesn't use chemicals, is not bothered by his nei ghbours' 1 awn care habi ts. "It doesn't bother me," he sai d, admi tti ng he is tempted to try some of the chemicals on his own property. Quebec's environment ministry says exposure to pesticides is linked to health problems in animals and humans, especially children, according to its website. The chemicals also contaminate the soil and the air. The sale of most chemical lawn products is banished in Quebec, so stephane gets what he needs outside the province. sometimes he picks up extra bottles for fri ends. In Ontario, where the sale of many pesticides ;s still legal, garden centres have rapidly become a smuggling so~rce for lawn-conscious Quebecers. "1 can see there's more Quebec people coming (this year)," said Diane Legault, owner of Le~ault Garden Centre in Hawkesbury, ant., of her burgeoning out-of- province cllentele. she attributes this year's 20 per cent spike in sales to the swift movement of grub and weed kill products to her Quebec neighbours. Yours truly, chris Lemcke we'ed Man Technical coordinator 11 Grand Marshall Dr. ontario, M1B 5N6 office: 416-269-5754 page 3 / C:JE<.-/ ~;5-C)'i, 98 "1!Z -/{:( FW proposed pesticide BY-law From: o'connell, Jennifer, councillor Sent: January 24, 2008 11:47 AM To: whitaker, chantal subject: FW: proposed pesticide By-Law FYI Jennifer o'connell City councillor, ward One city of pickering 905.420.4660, ext. 4609 1. 866.683.2760 Fax: 905.420.6064 joconnell@city.pickering.on.ca www.cityofpickering.com www.jenniferoconnell.ca please consider your environmental responsibility - think before you print! www.sustainablepickering.com -----original Message----- From: chris Lemcke lmailto:clemcke@aol.com] Sent: Fri 1/18/~008 10:47 AM To: Mayor web Email; littley, Bonnie, councillor; MClean, Bill, councillor; Johnson, Rick, councillor: Dickerson, Doug, councillor; o'connell, Jennifer, councillor; Pickles, David, councillor Subject: Re: proposed pesticide BY-law Dear Honourable pickering council: , I would like to take the time to thank those council members whom I had the opportunity to have met on wednesday night at the Stakeholder meeting at the , pickering Recreation Center. I wanted to take the opportunity to clarify for , those councillors at the meeting and for thbse who were not able to attend where the weed Man's position is regarding the proposed pesticide Bylaw. Weed Man is canada's largest organic lawn care service provider and we have been in business in pickering for over 30 years and have been offering or9anic services for close to 15 years. We are also the leader in canada 1n helping develop and bring new organic products to our customers and in educating our customers in Integrated Pest Management and sustainable lawn care. r am involved in a number of weed Man business's located throughout canada and we presently work in a number of municipalities that have pesticide by- laws. Many of the pesticide by-laws are quite different depending on the Municipality for example; Windsor allows for pesticide applications but only when temperatures are lower than 2S degrees celsius and not over more than 20% of the landscape in a 30 day period. The Municipality of Russell, Ontario does not allow for exemptions for Golf, caledon, ontario aoes not permit applications during July and August and you must be IPM Accredited to be allowed to make applications and cobalt, ontario does not allow for an Agricultural exemption. The fact is there is a patch work of different pesticide by-laws through out Ontario that make operating a business difficult when covering many different municipalities. If pickering adopts it's own by-law, because we operate in Ajax as well, there may be confusion by our employees as to why one side of the street you can make pesticide applications and the other you cannot, not to mention the home owners. < weed Man is currently supporting the liberal Government and their position Page 1 / ~)f ,e:; ,'~ r- ,,'-r' -G c~::.--r-, ~" ''-..--'' ..._..-./' _,,) (..,---' v ft:'{ 99 FW proposed pesticide By-Law to bring in a provincial ban on Pesticides. weed Man wants a fair and even pesticide by-law that will restrict the use of ~esticides everywhere in ontario and one that will stop the patch work of by-laws. please see the link that shows that the Liberal Government has already started this process and is committed to having a provincial ban in place within the next 18 months. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080115/pesticide_ban-O 80115/20080115?hub=Health Even the Environmentalists that are trying to get pickering to ban pesticides states in this article that the~ want the ontario Government to stop the patch work of by-laws "Environmental1sts say ontario needs to replace a patchwork of local bylaws banning pesticides with province- wide legislation, along with a public awareness campaign." So why are they campaigning so hard to get pickering to add to the patch work of by-laws? Those councillors who truly believe that pesticides are a real health issue should not follow the direction of the city of Toronto. The City of Toronto still remains the largest pesticide user in Toronto and councillors who were quick to call pesticides a health issue still allowed soccer fields and golf courses to apply pesticides. Both activities of course are very popular with young children ana the councillors certainly had an opportunity to send a message that if the health of children really mattered they would have banned the use of pesticides on their golf courses and sports fields. The City of Toronto also ~ave homeowners a longer grace period to adopt a pesticide by-law, making 1t very difficult for lawn care operators to keep customers from cancelling and going to the store and doing it themselves. If you allow for a fair transition by lawn care operators and home owners then you ~ll allow the opportunity for business like Weed Man to educate the customers on proper cultural practices and organic sustainability with out losing them because they know they can just go to the store and get a quick fix. Halifax has had a ban in place for years as well as Toronto and if you think that the average home owner won't just go to the store and by it because there is a by-law: then I suggest watching the link below from Market place that shows what happens when a pesticide By-law is in place and you can still by the products in the store. . http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/lawn-and-order/ I hope that the pickering council will look at all the information that they will receive objectively and that they understand the emotion behind this su~ject and although you have the ability to make a decision on this subject I aSK1 do you have the expertise, and do you know'with out a doubt that you are maklng a fair law. Once again this is all that weed Man asks and if you feel there is no choice other than to pass a pesticide by-law that it be fair for everyone. This means a grace period at least minimum until the late fall to allow us to prepare our customers who have already signed up and pre-paid and are expecting a certain service in the spring. I will be sendinQ some more e- mails to follow that I feel will benefit everyone in understandlnQ a bit more some of the issues related to the proposed pesticide by-law and W1ll offer some insight into the issue. weed Man will not be presenting or asking any of it's customers to present at the public meeting as we feel that this 1S a health issue and should not be addressed by the public or industry or activists that have opposing views on an emotionally charged issue. weed Man feels that matters of health and pesticides are better left to Toxicologists and Health canada (pest Management Regulatory Agency) who is the regulating body and test pesticides for safety. We would ask that before any decision is made that council invite Health Canada and the PMRA to visit council and allow them to answer any questions that pertain to this health issue since they are the regulating body. Asking for public input on a health issue is like asking your friend to take your appendix out because he read a book on it. Yours truly, chris Lemcke page 2 1 00 weed Man Technical coordinator 11 Grand Marshall Dr. ontario, MIB SN6 office: 416-269-5754 ~ '::i~"" -" u c' 1~~ . I . LTC ~~~~~f-~.'.'f,.1--L:'-['-;,1\1.:'['-4"':i'-'x__':il-'fin:,-~ /D( FW proposed pesticide By-Law page 3 E-'E7,e)C~ - :[f~ ."C I (11 i ~.' c': ..'".SS-C~5 ~<<~:, 1 0 1 led City of Pickering Meeting on Pestiddes: Jan 16,1008 Gideon Forman's Soeakin2 Notes Members of council, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak. My name is Gideon Fonnan and I'm Ex.ecutive Director of the CllIladian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE). CAPE represents over 2,000 medical doctors and concerned citizens from across Canada who work: to protect human health by protecting the environment. We recently won a gold medal at the annual Canadian Environment Awards --liponsored by Canadian Geographic Magazine and the Government of Canada -. for our national pesticide education work. CAPE is here today to speak in favour of a strong pesticide bylaw for Pickering. As a doctors' organization we are pleased you are already moving in this direction. but we would like to see the draft bylaw even mQ!] protective of public health. In particular, we would like to see you remove two of the proposed exemptions. Firs~ we would like to see the exemption for "insects" removed. With so many effective, non-toxic products now available, there is simply no need to use poisons on insects. If the issue is controlling chinch b~, homeowners can aerate their lawn, water deeply Once pel' week to avoid the dry conditions these bugs prefer, and plant fescues or Iyegrass which are more resistant to chinch bugs than Kentucky bluegrass. Homeowners can also spread non-toxic soap t1akes On their lawn. 90/Z0 39\1d 3~lN3J SNOI1\1~3dO 882:SE89g06 6D:S0 800Z/0Z/2:0 p".r..--".;, , 1 0 2 I q~ fT. ~su ".-<:-'~~ <:) L.'f-..---' - (.("....-1_..> ((._'~~j /[( 2 Ifrhe issue is controlling ~ homeowners can use environmentally-friendly nematodes - which are microscopic parasites that feed on the grubs but are hannless to humans. It's worth noting that the City of Peter borough's pesticide bylaw' - which has been ill place for almost two years -- has ~ exemption for "insects" and is 'Very effective and popular. The ~ exemption that doctors would like to see removed is the one for utilities. Neither Peterborough nor Toronto have this sort of exemption and it hasn't been a problem. If pests ever posed a health hazard in a Hydro corridor or gas transmission station - for example if rats posed a threat to Hydro work crews -- a pesticide could be used. But that's already allowed under your "Public Health Exemption", There's simply no need for a further exemption. Vlhy do doctors support a strong pesticide bylaw? There are a number of reasons but the first is that the science shows some very disturbing connections between pesticide use and serious illness. There's a great deal of science in this area but I'm going to mention just two studies today. The first is from the Ontario College ofFamilv Physicians - which represents over 8,000 Ontario doctors. 90/20 39IJd 3~lN30 SNOIIIJ~3dO 8868289905 5p:S0 8006/06/60 90/170 39V'd I t:1) C ~<:.-:' r.;:-".,.-~ - <t"-- {~:~ 7~"_ ", (r. "" .-'....-- -- (.~-/ 1 0 ~ ! /01 3 In April, 2004, the College released a systematic literature review of pesticides and human health. The most comprehensive study of its kind in Canada, the review examined hundreds of scientific papers on the issue and drew some very worrying conclusions. It found, among other things, that: 1) Pesticide exposure is associated with brain cancer, prostate cancer, kidney cancer and pancreatic cancer. 2) Pesticide exposure is associated with adverse reproductive effects including birth defects and even the death of the fetus. 3) Children exposed to pesticides - especially insecticides and herbicides used on lawns, fruit trees and gardens w_ have an increased risk of leukemia. a form of childhood cancer, In April, 2006 - two years after the College released its study - another piece of landmark science came out. This time it was from the journal of The Canadian Paediatric Society, Canada's foremost authority on children's health. Thejournal published a scientific paper entitled, "Pesticide Assessment: Protecting Public Health on the Home Turf" which looked at the health effects of the most common weed killer in Canada, 2,4- D. The paper's conclusion? [And I quote] ".. .2,4-D can be persuasively linked to cancers, neurological impairment and reproductive problems." 3~lN3~ SNOI1~~3dO aaZ;8E89905 517:80 a0raZ;/0G/Z;ra . .. .. 1 04 I 1Lf L~ ~>-q::. <i- c>2; /{;( 4 So two leading health authorities have p'Ublished research showing links between pesticide exposure and serious illness, especially in children. It's important to note these are not the only health authorities that bave expressed concerns on this issue. Bylaws prohibiting pesticides are supported by numerous medical organizations including the Canadian Cancer Society, the Ontario Medical AssociatioI1 (Section on Pediatrics), the Registered Nurses' AssociatioIl of Ontario, and the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario. So when doctors now urge Pickering to pass a. strong pesticide bylaw. they do so with the backing of the most distinguished medical experts in the province. I want to conclude by saying I appreciate lawn care operators have some concerns that a pesticide bylaw may affect their business.l have a background in business myself and I understand that making it work is not easy. From 1997 10 2004, I was Vice President of a consulting (trm ~- Strategic Communications me - which was actually listed on the Profit 100 as one of Canada's fastest growing companies. So [well understand the challenges that private operato1'6 face. But I say to the lawn care industry: the future is pesticide-free. With over 120 Canadian municipalities adopting pesticide restrictions - and with major retailers like Loblaws selling only non-toxic products - smart money is embracing the alternatives. 91a/SIa 39\1d 3~lN38 SNOI1\103dO 882:8E89S1a5 5p:80 8002:/06/60 910/910 39\td I n/ li') (;1;", "f"C - /)[--,-rf6 L~-e:;:- J <- ---> ~-- ICY 105 5 Under a pesticide bylaw, the lawn care sector in Pickering should actually eXDand. VI'hat's the evidence? Well, it expanded after the City of HaIifax passed a pesticide bylaw. Halifax enacted its pesticide law in the year 2000. Ac<:ording to Statistics Canada, between 2000 and 2005 the number oflandscaping compamesin Halifax grew from 118 to 180. So in the first five years of the bylaw, the number of lawn rums in the city increased an impressive 53%, Transitioning away from harsh chemicals is not only smart for the environment, it's also smart for business. In conclusion, doctors hope Pickering will boost the local economy, protect drinking water, and safeguard children by passing a strong pesticide bylaw. 1"1 particular, we hope you will model your bylaw on the one passed in Peterborough. Peter borough I 5 bylaw is protective of human health. easy for residents to understand, and highly enforceable. Thank you for listening and I'd be happy to answer any questions. [END] 3~~N3J SNOI1~~3dO 882:BE89S95 5~:89 8902:/06/2:0 -,I 106 / Lf ~') / c,/ -- <-""'" ([~6 5'-e:~frf/"C, CLU3LIN{ CORPORATION ] anuary 16, 2008 City of Pickering Operations and Emergency Services Department Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L 1 V 6K7 Attention: Everett Buntsma, Director Operations and Emergency Services Further to your recent correspondence regarding the draft Pesticide Use By-Law, we would like to provide written comments for your consideration. We recognize that a questionnaire has been developed to obtain comments from stakeholders and the public. However, given our past, and current level of involvement regarding pesticide by-Iaws~ we felt it is more appropriate to provide more detailed input into this process. In addition, a representative from ClubLink Corporation (Mark Hammond, Superintendent, Cherry Downs Golf Club) will also be in attendance at the stakeholder meeting on January 16,2008. ClubLink Corporation is Canada's largest owner, operator and developer of golf course properties. We own Cherry Downs Golf Club, which is a valuable contributor to the local economy. With approximately 26,000 rounds of golf played in 2007, Cherry Downs employs 60 people and pays approximately $145,000 annually in municipal taxes. Over the past several years, Club Link Corporation has participated in similar consultation processes regarding the regulation of 15675 Duffcrin SucCt, King City, Ontario L7B 1 K5 Tel (905) 841-3730 Fax (905) 841-7033 wcbsirc: www.clubJink.ca t-1 ~. - ~ ",. I I ! I .---. ~..'- .,.... . _.~.- "., ""'. I j ;, ::.~ ("j ~ ,---. ~"'___~ '-_.............~_ .....~_,_. . .......~_._.,..l.,....~~....__'______ .._....._._.~..~...._,~...f':.'..~".....:..;. ...:'1:3 ... .......~li?. ~jS-e:f; .,.. /?Y 1 0 7 pesticides across Ontario, including Ottawa, Caledon, London, Seguin, and Oakville. Throughout this process, our message has remained consistent. A balanced approach must be taken when developing a by-law to regulate the use of pesticides in a municipality to ensure that the by-law is cost effective, efficiently administered, and understood by municipal tax payers. Golf course operations cannot be directly compared to a homeowner's front lawn. Not only are growing conditions and disease pressures completely different, our turf is a functional playing surface with quality requirements to remain in business. Our properties have controlled access through the charging of green fees and the monitoring of our grounds. However, like a homeowner, a golf course owner has made a significant investment in the purchase of their property. But, the return on the investment for a golf course owner is directly attributable to the playing conditions of the turf. Poor turf conditions could spell economic ruin for a golf course. It is an economic isspe, not an issue of aesthetics. . . Golf courses 'provide a recreational and social setting for'local residents and tourists to enjoy the outdoors and get some exercise. According to the Ontario Allied Golf Association, over 650 golf courses form an integral part of Ontario's recreational and tourism sectors with revenues in excess of $1.2' billion annual, employing over 23,000 people. Furthermore, golf courses directly and indirectly assist many charitable organizations to raise revenue for their causes. In fact, charity events held at ClubLink Golf Courses alone generate millions of dollars a year. From a regulatory perspective, golf courses operate within a significantly different environment from a homeowner. Anyone purchasing, storing or applying a pesticide on a golf course must comply with the regulatory requirements of the Pesticides Act. ~i~M j-' ~, .. -If -w-;p. _'1" '_~- l' T -~- -~- 1 08 / ..-......... - .. . t'>jU ~'-'--'LjI' ;(;~;c:;'2--C~S~ c~z__ . - -..-- --. --,~,_.. ---'.- ---. -P je,! Only Licensed Applicators and technicians apply pesticides on the golf course and the products are stored in a well-ventilated, secure area that is posted in accordance with the Pesticides Act. By comparison, a homeowner can go to the local hardware store, buy a pesticide off the shelf and the expectation is that the product will be stored and applied as per the label directions. Our golf course superintendents are educated in turf management at a post-secondary level and are licensed and trained to properly use, store and dispose of pesticides. It is a superintendent's responsibility to monitor the health of the turf several times throughout the day during the operating season and make educated decisions on when a disease or infestation must be treated. These decisions are based on the best management practices of Integrated Pest Management. It is our Corporate Policy that curative applications be made wherever possible. However, there are fungal organisms, such as pythiurn blight that can destroy turf overnights and and snow mould that must be treated before snowfall. In these circumstances, vulnerable areas must be pre-treated with fungicide to avoid extensive damage. Unfortunately, there are no other options. ClubLink operates in an environmentally responsible manner. It is a requirement of our Corporate Environmental Policy that all golf courses participate in the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for golf courses. Furthermore, several of our superintendents have become IPM Accredited through the Accreditation program offered by the IPM/PHC Council of Canada. Ultimately, there are instances where the use of pesticides is warranted on our golf courses to protect the significant investment that has been made on the property. There are diseases and infestations that cannot be managed at this point with cultural or I ,CjC( If)/ '--c. ...-"" c:c;./r- c/~r'f>6 biological methods and we ml,lst use the federally-approved products to protect the health of the turf. If you must move forward with a by-law, please ensure that it is reasonable to private landowners, is cost effective, efficiently administered, and easily understood by municipal tax payers. From ClubLink's perspective, the currently proposed by-law posted on the City's website is a reasonable approach to the regulation of pesticides in the municipality, compared to an outright ban. The proposed by-law recognizes the complexities of golf course operations and the regulatory environment that already governs our use of these products. We believe it is reasonable for the City to request that our superintendent be IPM Accredited and we will endeavour to fulfill this requirement within the next year. Si7~)~ r;,s... Wendy B urgess, Manag~r Corporate Environmenta~ Policy and Operations 1091 ; ":''fi'~ ~..i(-'f ' -('ft"'~ :r ...~ 11 0 / /(00 f'JC"S -- ~=--'~; --,z;fi; /l.:)( Mark Inglis From: Sent: To: Subject: Whitaker, Chantal [cwhitaker@city.pickering.on.ca] February 19,20087:24 PM Mark Inglis FW: City of Pickering By-Law to Regulate Pesticide Use Hi Mark, I was going to place this in the staff report, however, perhaps it should form part of the discussion in your report where you discuss exemptions. See below email from Ontario Power Generation. It's a safety issue and they want to make sure they are covered. Chantal -----Original Message----- From: HESTER Bob -NUCLEAR [mailto:robert.hester@opg.com] Sent: February 7, 2008 10:31 AM To: Whitaker, Chantal Subject: City of Pickering By-Law to Regulate pesticide tIse Chantal: Pickering Nuclear has, in the past, used contact herbicides to control the growth of vegetation on both sides of the site fenceline. This has been done at the request of our Security staff to maintain compliance with a provision of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act that requires that clear sight lines be maintained along station fencelines. Our site facilities staff have agreed to discontinue this pesticide use along the fence line area previously treated with pesticide, with the exception of one area. They wish to continue to use pesticide along the portion of the fenceline that is beneath the powerlines that exit the powerhouse. Can this use be considered to be covered by the utility exemption in the draft by-law that includes" . ..where the pesticide is discharged within a hydro corridor, or at any hydro substation..."? The vegetation along the remainder of the fenceline will be removed manually to maintain compliance with the Nuclear Safety and Control Act. Please let me know if this use will be covered by the current utility exemption. Thanks, Bob THIS MESSAGE IS ONLY INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY AND/OR CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying, conversion to hard copy or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify me by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Ontario Power Generation Inc. ***k*******************************************************************~***************** ******************************************************************** This electronic message and all contents contain information from which may be privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify the sender From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: / /(o! If)! Gary Bowen [GBowen@trca.on.ca] January 16,200811:35 AM Whitaker, Chantal graphitti@rogers.com City of Pickering Pesticide By-Law oE> "'".::>- ?J<:;-'Pa:~e 1 of 1 1 1 '1 Chantel I wanted to forward some intial comments from the TRCA regarding the Pickering Pesticide By-Law. On the basis of commnets received from TRCA staff, I would recommend that you consider modification to the By-Law, Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. For you information TRCA had (PM Policy and strict criteria before any pesticide are used. The Policy does allow Pesticide use on Conservation Lands! Gary Bowen 416-661-6600 ext 5385 Dave Rogalsky, B.Sc.(Agr) Manager, Resource Management Projects Restoration Services I'm concerned that the proposed by-law doesn't specifically address forestry applications - however, Xmas tree farming/horticultural crops(ie. tree/shrub nurseries) might be exempted under the #9 - Agricultural exemption. Perhaps a forestry purposes exemption could be added to allow for the use of herbcides to control competing vegetation during establishment (treatments from post-planting and up to free-to-grow status). 2. #11 - allows for applications of pesticides to address insect infestations but there is an undefined risk level involving "substantial loss or damage" - how and who decides what these are and when the condition is met? 3. Does this by-law need to address other legislated responsibilities - ie. Ministerial Orders under the auspices Plant Protection Act - Canadian Food Inspection Agency for pests like ALHB, EAB, etc.? 4. #14 - Conservation Authorities Lands - should we request to have applications in accordance with approved management plans added - or, just amend this to reflect "vegetation management" including invasive and competing species? This would allow CA's to use pesticides in combination with BMP's for forestry purposes. Mike Goodyear Conservation Land Planning From a Conservation Land Planning perspective TRCA staff would want to be sure that we can still employ efforts to treat invasive vegetation as this plan does. We suggest amending #14 to include "vegetation management" as rational for pesticide use would be helpful in broadening possible applications and uses. file://J:\Operations Centre\C. Whitaker\Property Green Up\Pesticides\Public Consultation... 31/01/2008 fT--r liTl"I"'--'-~~ i+_c.9.. I _, L., _""""""",~.-k' '""i; ,....".......!4".::.:..c......... 11 Vi;: C, C L - ( I <.: {t~F.;~~,.:;' -''-_J ' {; 11 2 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-lAW NO. A by-law to regulate pesticide use WHEREAS pursuant to paragraph 6 of subsection 11 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 municipalities may pass by-laws respecting the health, safety and well- being of persons; and WHEREAS Council deems it necessary to regulate the use of pesticides within the City; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCil OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING ENACTS AS FOllOWS: PART I-INTERPRETATION Definitions 1. In this by-law, "City" means The Corporation of The City of Pickering or the geographic area of the City of Pickering, as the context requires; "IPM accreditation" means accreditation in a recognized integrated pest management programme from the Integrated Pest Management Plant Health Care Council of Ontario, the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary System of Canada, or a similar body approved by the City; "officer" means a municipal by-law enforcement officer appointed by the City; "person" includes a corporation and the heirs, executors, administrators or other legal representatives of a person to whom the context can apply according to law; "pest" means any injurious, noxious or troublesome insect or other arthropod, fungus, bacterial organism, weed, or other plant or animal pest and includes any injurious, noxious or troublesome organic function of a plant or animal; and "pesticide" means a product, an organism or substance that is a registered control product under the federal Pest Control Products Act which is used as a means for directly or indirectly controlling, destroying, attracting or repelling a pest or for mitigating or preventing its injurious, noxious or troublesome effects, and for greater certainty only, does not include products listed in Schedule "A". _!.2, ~- REPORT#S=f~.~? C::5(C'l: _~;...__ Page 2 1 1 3 Pesticide Use By-Law No. XXXXl08 References to Legislation 2. In this by-law, reference to any Act, regulation or by-law is reference to that Act, regulation or by-law as it is amended or re-enacted from time to time. Word Usage 3. This by-law shall be read with all changes in gender or number as the context may require. 4. A grammatical variation of a word or expression defined has a corresponding meaning. Construction 5. Unless otherwise specified, references in this by-law to sections and schedules are to sections and schedules in this by-law Severability 6. Each section of this by-law is an independent section, and the holding of any section or part of any section of this by-law to be void or ineffective for any reason shall not be deemed to affect the validity of any other section or parts of sections of this by-law. Application 7. This by-law shall apply to all lands and premises within the City, including lands owned by the City. PART II - USE OF PESTICIDES Prohibitions 8. No person shall apply or cause or permit the application of any pesticide within the City. Agricultural Exemption 9. Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is applied on agricultural lands used in furtherance of a normal farm practice carried on as part of an agricultural operation pursuant to the Farming and Farm Production Protection Act, 1998. Pest Control in Buildings Exemption 10. Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is used for pest control within a residence or other building. f-'O-' 'r '* -1 -j" --: -(I TN T-i' c-::.J , F -': C. '-c- ,,- _cf<; ~ .;.;.~~__,;> ,,__'-_~ r'~/'c.j Page 3 Pesticide Use By-Law No. XXXXl08 114 Insect Infestation Exemption 11 . Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is used to diminish or control an infestation. For purposes of this section, "infestation" means the presence of pests in numbers or under conditions that involve an immediate or potential risk of substantial loss or damage to property. '7 _...:2~.. oiL__._ Public Health Exemption 12. Section 8 does not apply where the application of the pesticide is necessary in the opinion of the Medical Officer of Health for The Regional Municipality of Durham to address a health hazard. Noxious Weeds Exemption 13. Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is applied to destroy noxious weeds identified in the regulations to the Weed Control Act or any plant that has been designated as a noxious weed under a City by-law. Conservation Authorities Lands Exemption 14. Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is applied to control invasive species on lands owned or managed by a conservation authority established under the Conservation Authorities Act. Golf Course, Driving Range and Lawn Bowling Green Exemption 15. Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is applied on a golf course, golf driving range or a lawn bowling green. City Sports Fields Exemptions 16. (1) Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is applied on a sports field owned or managed by the City containing more than 30% non-qualified sports turf. (2) Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is applied to eliminate weed growth that may pose a safety concern on a baseball field warning track. Hard Surface Exemption 17. Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is applied on a City owned hard surface where a threat to infrastructure has been identified. For purposes of this section, "hard surface" means asphalt, concrete, interlocking brick or block, crushed or solid stone, gravel, slag, ground asphalt, wood or any other non- porous material. Pesticide Use By-Law No. XXXX/08 ,..:0 '1. ,'" I~, .........."...~ AO-.",-,,~< ',0 ,,..1; .....,.$..-__ "<C lEJ' ."...-_k'y ~ r~......-..:;;..__..,..~..,..,-"". (.__'__) fL._ '() Page 4 '1 1 r .J Utility Exemption 18. Section 8 does not apply where the pesticide is applied within a hydro corridor, beneath the power lines that exit the powerhouse on Ontario Power Generation property, or at any hydro substation, gas distribution station or gas transmission station. General Exemptions 19. Section 8 does not apply where pesticides are applied, (a) to disinfect swimming pools, whirlpools, spas or wading pools; (b) to purify water intended for the use of humans or animals; (c) as a wood preservative; (d) for injection into trees, stumps, or wooden poles; or (e) as an insect repellent for personal use. Exemption Qualifications 20. No person shall be entitled to the benefit of any exemption under this by-law unless the pesticide is applied, (a) by an applicator with an IPM accreditation; and (b) only to the area specifically identified as requiring the application. PART III - ENFORCEMENT Inspections 21. An officer may, at any reasonable time, enter upon any land for the purpose of carrying out an inspection to determine whether or not the provisions of this by- law have been complied with. 22. For purposes of an inspection, an officer may, (a) require the production for inspection of any document or things relevant to the inspection; (b) inspect and remove documents or things relevant to the inspection for the purpose of making copies or extracts; (c) require information from any person concerning a matter related to the inspection; and ~-. -~" . ~~-~1 ";jlitrliJ 'j T .....- 'j'_ J1 ~-fli':' ", ""l ,~, CY "I"" F <C-C' ,~'--(/'-:- h~'i>a9~ see Pesticide Use By-Law No, XXXXl08 ___5,_ Ci .,k;;..,- 11 6 (d) alone or in conjunction with a person possessing special or expert knowledge, make examinations or take tests, samples or photographs necessary for the purposes of the inspection, 23. No person shall obstruct the officer inspecting or withhold, destroy, conceal or refuse to furnish any information or thing required by the officer. Penalties 24. Every person who contravenes any provision of this by-law is guilty of an offence and upon conviction is liable to a fine pursuant to the provisions of the Provincial Offences Act. PART IV - GENERAL Other Legislation 25. The provisions of this by-law are intended to complement the provisions of the Pest Control Products Act (Canada) and the Pesticides Act, and shall be enforced consistent with this intention, Short Title 26. This by-law may be referred to as the "Pesticide Use By-law". Effective Date 27. This by-law comes into effect on January 1,2009. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this _ day of 2008. David Ryan, Mayor Debi Bentley, City Clerk V n::'"Or)~" ,.cf ~hC [:-,& _P~".'~"_ r\/... r' ~\~ I f+ _/--.. _ -'<J L/[; /] "I/--' .....~_(,.:.-..._ '.,J, ~.fL....r/~--. 11 7 SCHEDULE "A" 1. A product that uses pheromones to lure pests, sticky media to trap pests or "quick-kill" traps for vertebrate species considered pests, such as mice and rats. 2. A product that is or contains only the following active ingredients: (a) a soap; (b) a mineral oil, also called "dormant or horticultural oil", (c) silicon dioxide, also called "diatomaceous earth"; (d) biological pesticides, including 8t (bacillus thuringiensis) and nematodes; (e) borax, also called "boric acid" or "boracic acid"; (f) ferric phosphate; (g) acetic acid; (h) pyrethrum or pyrethrins; (i) fatty acids; U) sulphur; or (k) corn gluten meal. Cilq a~ REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE I . 11 8 Report Number: CS 07-08 Date: March 17,2008 From: Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Heritage Inventory Register Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest - Seaton Lands File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 07-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Heritage Inventory Register - Seaton Lands, included as Attachment # 1 to this report be approved; and 3. Further, that a copy of Report CS 07-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be forwarded to the Ontario Realty Corporation, Ontario Heritage Trust and the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee for their information. Executive Summary: Identifying properties of cultural heritage value or interest is an essential part of municipal heritage conservation. A key role of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee is to assist City staff with establishing the listing of heritage properties on the municipal register for the purpose of planning and managing cultural heritage resources at the local level. The purpose of this report is to establish the inventory register for Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest - Seaton Lands. Financial Implications: There are no financial implications at this time. Sustainability Implications: The Municipal Register of Cultural Properties is integral to achieving the City's strategic goals of providing support for natural, cultural and architectural heritage. Indirectly the Report CS 07-08 March 17,2008 Subject: Heritage Inventory Register Page 2 '1 1 9 Register will also influence the goal of managing growth in a balanced and sustainable manner. Background: The Ontario Heritage Act allows municipalities to include properties of cultural heritage value that have not been desiQnated on a Municipal Register. The Municipal Register is the official listing of cultural heritage properties identified as being important to the community. The Register includes all properties designated under Part IV (individual designation) and Part V (district designation) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The inclusion of non-designated properties is optional. Section 27 of the Act requires the Clerk of every municipality to keep a current, publicly accessible register of properties of cultural heritage value or interest. The register must include all properties in the municipality that are designated under Part IV (individual) designation and Part V (District designation) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The register must also include a legal description of the property; the name and address of the owner and a statement explaining the cultural heritage value or interest of the property and a description of the heritage attributes. As of 2005, the Ontario Heritage Act also allows municipalities to include on the municipal register properties of cultural heritage value that have not been designated. This is commonly known as a "listing". Listing is a means to formally identify properties that may have cultural heritage value or interest in the community. The listing is a key tool for planning our heritage conservation and provides a measure of interim protection. The key features of a register are: . Recognizes properties of cultural heritage value in the community . Promotes knowledge and enhances an understanding of the community's cultural heritage . Provides a planning document that should be consulted by municipal decision makers when reviewing development proposals or permit applications; and . Provides easily accessible information for land use planners, property owners, developers, tourism industry, educators and the general public. It should further be noted that amendments made to the Ontario Heritage Act in June 2006 provide interim protection from demolition for non-designated properties included on the Municipal Register. Owners of listed properties must provide the municipality with at least 60 days notice of their intention to demolish or remove a structure on the property. This allows time for a municipality to decide if it intends to formally designate a property under the Ontario Heritage Act which would provide greater protection, including prohibiting the demolition of any structures of cultural heritage significance. This additional protection is essential in light of the accelerated building permit review CORP0227-07/01 revised ~--"----'-r -- r-~- c_ ~- Report CS 07-08 March 17, 2008 Subject: Heritage Inventory Register 11'~ 2Cl Page 3 timeframes established through changes to the Ontario Building Code Act in January 2006. The Central Pickering Development Plan, passed by the Province in May 2006, recognizes the importance of cultural heritage resources and includes an objective to "protect and conserve significant cultural heritage features and integrate them into new urban and agricultural communities and the Natural Heritage System". The Plan also includes policy that provides for "integrating and conserving locally significant individual heritage buildings or related features, where appropriate, into Neighbourhood Plans, based on local or regional consultations and consideration of the Ontario Heritage Act designation provisions". Considering that the Province recently conveyed significant lands in Seaton into private ownership for development, and that these lands contain properties of cultural heritage value, it is prudent to act expeditiously to include these properties in the City's register. Statutory Requirements to Add Non-designated Properties to the Municipal Register: Under the Ontario Heritage Act, Municipal Council approval is required to add properties of cultural heritage value that have not been desiQnated to the Municipal Register. In addition Council must consult with its Municipal Heritage Committee before a non-designated property is added or removed from the Register. The only information that needs to be included in the Register is a unique identifier such as a property's street address. However, a brief rationale is helpful to explain the property's cultural heritage value. Public notification is not required but is recommended so that property owners become aware of the Register and understand the implications of listing a non-designated property. Register contents for designated properties include a legal description, owner name and address, and a statement of cultural heritage value or interest and description of heritage attributes. The Municipal Register has been compiled and broken down into four sections: 1) Designated Properties/Districts (Part IV and V) 2) Cultural Heritage Properties - Federal Lands 3) Cultural Heritage Properties - Seaton Lands 4) Cultural Heritage Properties - Other. The listed Cultural Heritage Properties - Seaton Lands requires Council approval and is listed as Attachment # 1 to this report. This listing of Seaton lands was derived from the "Seaton Built Heritage Assessment" (November 2004) which was compiled by Andre Scheinman, Heritage Preservation Consultant. It will appear as Section 3 in the Municipal Register. The listing for Cultural Heritage Properties - Other has been and continues to be a work in progress for members of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee. Due to the volunteer nature of the Committee and the level of detail/time commitment required, it is CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 07-08 March 17, 2008 Subject: Heritage Inventory Register Page 4 1 2 1 a long and arduous process. A summer student grant application has been submitted in order to receive assistance in completing the Municipal Register database. In the interim, members spend most weekends visiting potential properties and then submit the detailed inventory sheets to the Clerks Division for entry in the database. It is anticipated that a further report adding this Section will be completed by September 2008 outlining the steps for owner notification and the process for listing that will be followed. The register currently maintained by the Clerks Division includes the designated properties (Part IV and V). It includes 13 individual properties designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District, designated under Part V of the Act. The properties within the District and individually designated properties benefit from the protections in the Act regarding demolition and alteration, including the requirement for a heritage permit. This listing is provided for reference as Attachment # 2 to this report. The listed Cultural Heritage Properties - Federal Lands was approved by Council on February 21, 2005 by Resolution # 29/05. This listing is provided for reference in Attachment # 3, to this report. Summary In conclusion, the listing is being submitted for Council approval for the Seaton properties, which is included as Attachment # 1 to this report. The balance of the Municipal Register is included as Attachments # 2 and 3. Any new properties recommended for inclusion by the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee will be brought to Council for consideration, therefore the document will be revised and augmented as new information becomes available. Upon approval by Council, copies of the Municipal Register will be forwarded to City departments to facilitate consultation with the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee. All properties on the list will also be entered into the City's AMANDA system. The list will also be available on the City's website under the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee. Attachments: 1. Cultural Heritage Properties - Seaton Lands. 2. Municipal Register (Designated Properties, Part IV and Part V) 3. Municipal Register (Federal Lands) CORP0227-07/01 revised '-I 'l<\" t'lltlLIT1)"'iC -, Report CS 07-08 March 17, 2008 Subject: Heritage Inventory Register Page 5 1 22 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: ~c:!hc:0~ Debi A. Wilcox City Clerk d~...'...'.7-""-~. _.~..~\ ...., ... , ~ ,~, "-. ',~"-~,,~~...~.,--~ .; ,-=. . """",... , .' .' . - . ,,:,';::"-;;'~-~..._-- Gillis Paterson .. :> Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer DAW:ks Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended f~~e consideration ..of Pi~~ering Cit h -,.,,---- CORP0227-07/01 revised ~^",'.,,",~~~ ,"''''''' "'li:, ':i ," 1 '4Oi. Attachment # 1 to Report CS 07-08 CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE SEATON LANDS Clerk's Division March 2008 1 ') -~ LJ ~ - "~"" . ~-.cc'-" :-. 1 24 Attachment #1 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 3 City of Pickering 2008 Municipal Heritage Register Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest - Seaton Lands Municipal Address HeritaQe Value 615 Whitevale Road Built 1820's Henry Major House Farmstead, one storey frame house Stone kitchen addition built between 1851 and 1861 750 Whitevale Road Built 1861 Samuel Major House Farmstead, fine stone dwelling, large stone voussoirs at the window arches of the front and ground storey 825 Whitevale Road Built 1855 The Grange Farmstead, 1 ~ storey frame house Built on granite fieldstone foundation with shiplap siding 940 Whitevale Road Built 1822 John Major House Farmstead, course fieldstone 1 ~ storey house with a summer kitchen addition and 1 storey stone woodshed 1050 Whitevale Road Built 1861 Clergy Reserve Farmstead, 1 ~ storey house, three bay centre Qable structure 1125 Whitevale Road Built 1845 King's College/Splatt House Farmstead, 2 ~ storey red brick farmhouse Queen Anne style 1130 Whitevale Road Built 1835-1840 Nathaniel Hastings House Farmstead, 1 ~ storey stone house with one storey stone kitchen tail with verandah, frame summer kitchen, frame woodshed and English barn 1200 Whitevale Road Built 1877 Farmstead, multi-gabled, double fronted dichromatic brick structure 1255 Whitevale Road Built 1854-1859 Farmstead, 1 ~ storey stone house, hipped roof design, two barns in close proximity, example of a cottaQe ornee dwellinQ 1390 Whitevale Road Built 1851-1861 Asher Willson/Joseph Willson House Farmstead, 1 ~ storey house, 3 bay structure, saltbox roof, gambrel roofed hay barn and carriaQe shed on the property 1450 Whitevale Road Built 1857-1861 Asher Willson/Francis Linton Farmstead, main house with kitchen tail, . sheds, two English barns and remains of a silo Attachment #1 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 3 1 25 Municipal Address Heritage Value 1690 Whitevale Road Built 1840 Thomas Hubbard House Farmstead, 1 Y:z storey residence with gabled roof, large rear addition, heavy timber and frame, English barn 575 Highway 7 Built 1853 Vardon Familv Home Farmstead, Gothic Revival cottage 815 Highway 7 Built 1853 Percy Family Home Farmstead, brick house with kitchen tail with side verandah, 2 large gambrel barns with attached silos 1015 Highway 7 Built 1851 William Major Home Farmstead, 1 Y:z storey house with frame kitchen tail, a gambrel roofed barn, small shed 1335 Highway 7 Built between 1851-1861 John Pride Phillips House Farmstead, gabled frame structure, board and batten 2360 Brock Road Built between 1861-1877 Mary Elmsley Former farmstead, 2 storey gabled brick structure 3440 Brock Road Built 1870 Thomas Hubbard House Farmstead, "T' plan framed dwelling, front verandah, clad in weatherboard 3215 Sideline Road Built 1864-1865 SS #8 (Whitevale) Greek Revival school building, gable end, heavilv moulded pediment, buff brick 3250 Sideline 28 Pre-1850 William Turner House Farmstead, stone and frame dwelling, major addition to the west 3185 Sideline 26 Built 1851 Pennybank farmstead Farmstead, 1 Y:z storey frame dwelling, brick addition to the north end 1130 Taunton Road Built between 1860-1877 Robert Smith House House including centre-gabled front section grafted on to the original structure ~'.' N 'I' ...._"j'y~ Attachment # 2 to Report CS 07-08 I" 1 2 6 Citq 0# CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE PROPERTIES DESIGNATED UNDER PART IV AND PART V OF THE ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT Clerk's Division March 2008 Attachment #2 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 1 1 27 City of Pickering 2008 Municipal Heritage Register Properties Designated Under Part IV and Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act Property By-law Municipal Address Heritage Value Date Passed Under PART IV of the Ontario Heritage Act Brougham Union Easement Ag reement 4955 Brock Road Ontario Heritage Masonic Lodge October 5, 1981 Claremont Foundation determined that the Brougham Masonic Lodge, located on the property is of regional architectural sionificance. Altona Mennonite 2123/85 5475 Sideline 30 Present brick building Church & Cemetery December 16, 1985 Hamlet of Altona was constructed in 3461/90 1852. Bricks for the May 7, 1990 church were hauled from the Cherrywood brickyard. Church remains today as a reminder of the hard work and influence of the Mennonite congregation in the development of the community. In 1990, the interior of the building and cemetery were further designated as being of heritage siqnificance. No Heritage Name 2238/86 2665 6th Concession The house was built Phillips Residence June 2, 1986 Hamlet of Greenwood circa 1850 and is a storey and a half with dormers constructed of stone and timber which appear to be sourced locally. Use of hand forged nails are prominent throuohout the house. Thistle Ha 2140/86 Lots 16, 17 and 18, House is circa 1860 February 3, 1986 Concession 7 and construction Regional Road 31 commenced in 1855 to replace a 100 house ~~- 1 2 B Attachment #2 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 1 Property By-law Municipal Address Heritage Value Date Passed originally on the property. East Wing was completed in 1875 and contained a large ballroom, brick oven and a masonry ash pit. In addition to architectural interest, property is of historical significance of the Miller family and introduction of shorthorn cattle. Post Manor 2570/87 1970 Brock Road Stone farmhouse September 21, 1987 commonly known as Post Manor was built in 1841. The home is a stone foundation and cut fieldstone exterior, shake and metal roofs and verandah with gingerbread trim. Unique hardware, mortar brackets, shutters and windows compliment this century buildinq. No Heritage Name 3633/91 4810 Brock Road Constructed between Thompson Residence January 21, 1991 1845-1855 in a very unusual method. It is of vertical plan construction with no framework or support posts. Clapboard siding was applied to the front half of the house. The back addition is circa 1870 and signifies a more prosperous era. One oriqinal window and The Walkey House 3634/91 2390 Rosebank Road The house is dated January 21,1991 Hamlet of 1869 and is one of the Cherrywood few remaining residences in the hamlet of Cherrywood from earlier times. Attachment #2 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 1 1 29 Property By-law Municipal Address Heritage Value Date Passed House is painted board and batten, 1- 1/2 storey, 'L' plan structure on a rubble foundation. Palmer-Voss House 5573/99 2319 Wildwood Stone house was built November 1, 1999 Crescent in two stages, the first (previously 2101 part during the 1850's Valley Farm Road) and the second part approx. 1870. The house is a vernacular structure of the Gothic Revival architectural style with a centre gable, pointed arch window and decorative gable finials, pendants and curvilinear veraeboard. Cleve Horne House 5763/00 1940 8th Concession House was October 16, 2000 Road constructed in 1958 and was the first house in Canada to be built of thin-shell, reinforced concrete and to dispense with bearina wall supports. Dillingham-Lamorie 5763/00 1636 Arathorn Court The house is built House October 16, 2000 circa 1850, possibly in the 1840's, and is an important example of an early to mid nineteenth century rural residential buildina. Woodruff-Mackenzie 5966/02 2935 Brock Road House has been House March 18, 2002 designated for being of architectural and historical value. Willson House 6691/06 1505 Whitevale Road One of the earliest July 24, 2006 surviving farmhouses in Pickering. The building dates to 1861 and is a classic example of an Ontario vernacular farmhouse. The "i- ',' ~- ~"- 1 3 0 Attachment #2 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 1 Property By-law Municipal Address Heritage Value Date Passed exterior is Georgian in form, while the interior is representative of the mid 19th century, with a Greek revival sensibilitv. Glen House 6692/06 1690 Whitevale Road The house, barn and July 24, 2006 property are designated as a heritage site for the historical value related to the significance of the political activities that took place at the house. The house is circa 1840 and still contains the basement and its old enormous apple and vegetable bins. The house is a 1-1/2 storey house with a large rear addition with gables perpendicular to the original and a further shed roofed addition to the rear. Under PART V of the Ontario Heritage Act Hamlet of Whitevale 4074/92 District as outlined in The Whitevale June 7, 1993 Schedule 1 to the by- Heritage law Conservation District was established to ensure the preservation and enhancement of the special character of Whitevale. It is dominated by its rural setting and modest vernacular buildings, the hamlet has not changed significantly in character since the late 19th century. The building style in Whitevale is a mixture Attachment #2 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register 1 3 1 Section 1 Property By-law Municipal Address Heritage Value Date Passed of typical rural Ontario vernacular architecture combined with Victorian influences and materials in common usage at the time of construction. The overall nineteenth century village character has been retained. Attachment # 3 to Report CS 07-08 . I 1 32 Citlf o~ CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE FEDERAL LANDS Clerk's Division March 2008 Attachment #3 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 2 1 3 3 City of Pickering 2008 Municipal Heritage Register Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest - Federal Lands Approved by Council February 21, 2005 (Res#29/05) Municipal Address Heritage Value 3795 Brock Road Built 1901-1940 Ex-Pridmore 2 storey brick house, vernacular barn 3730 Brock Road Built 1860-1900 Ex-Vanderligt 1 'Y2 storey brick house, vernacular 3970 Brock Road Built 1854 Ever Green Villa (Barclay) 1 'Y2 storey, wood frame, board & batten house, vernacular 1705 Concession 7 Road Built 1840 Tullis Cottaqe (Barclay Home) 1 storey, frame house 1608 Highway 7 Built c. 1850 (Norman's Fine Art) 1 'Y2 storey house, moved from Greenwood in 1950 1585 Concession 7 Road Barn 1480 Highway 7 Built 1860-1900 1 'Y2 storey brick (under vinyl) centre qable 1503 Concession 7 Road Built 1858 1 storey brick house, association with Bill Lishman 1360 Highway 7 Built 1860-1900 1 'Y2 storey - 2 storey red brick house Notable barn 3720 Sideline 22 Built 1860-1900 1 'Y2 storey frame house Vernacular 3870 Sideline 22 Built 1860-1900 1 'Y2 storey dichromatic brick house Vernacular 1150 Highway 7 Built 1860-1900 1 'Y2 storey, white frame house with vertical boards Notable barn 1185 Concession 7 Road Built 1901-1940 1 'Y2 storey brick, qambrel roof 1050 Highway 7 Built 1901-1940 2 'Y2 storeys, red brick home, hiD roof 3750 Sideline 26 Built 1860-1900 1 'Y2 storey frame, notable outbuildinqs 865 Concession 7 Road Built 1860-1900 '" ,."~ '(j ~.."- j)'.v......':""......'{iN' 1 3 Ii Attachment #3 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 2 Municipal Address Heritaoe Value 1 Y:1 storey frame, notable outbuildinqs 3815 Sideline 28 Built 1860-1900 1 Y:1 storey frame, brick 680 Highway 7 Built 1901-1940 2 Y:1 storey, red brick house, qable front 3735 Sideline 32 Notable barns 3875 Sideline 32 Built pre-1860 2 storey frame house 3915 Markham-Pickering Townline Built 1860-1900 1 Y:1 storey frame house, central gable, metal c1addinq 4235 Brock Road Built 1901-1940 2 storey brick house, vernacular, four square 4355 Brock Road Bui It 1860-1900 1 Y:1 storey stone house Vernacular, classical revival 4040 Brock Road Built 1860-1900 1 Y:1 storey wood frame house Vernacular 4185 Sideline 20 Built 1860-1900 1 Y:1 storey wood frame house Vernacular 4280 Brock Road Bui It 1860-1900 1 Y:1 storey stone house Vernacular, classical revival 1540 Concession 7 Road Built 1860-1900 1 Y:1 storey brick, centre gable Notable barn 1370 Concession 7 Road Built 1901-1940 2 - 2 Y:1 storev frame (insulbrick) 4475 Sideline 22 Built 1860-1900 1 Y:1 storey frame, much altered 1240 Concession 7 Road Built 1858 1 Y:1 storey, dichromatic brick 1130 Concession 7 Road Notable barn 1180 Concession 7 Road Built 1890 1 Y:1 storey, dichromatic brick 850 Concession 7 Road Built 1860-1900 1 Y:1 - 2 storey brick house Notable barn 4250 Sideline 28 Built 1860-1901 Y:1 storey frame house 425 Concession 8 Road Built 1860-1900 1 Y:1 storey frame house Notable barn 555 Concession 8 Road Built 1865 1 storey brock house Attachment #3 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register1 3 5 Section 2 Municipal Address Heritaqe Value 440 Concession 7 Road Built 1860-1900 1 % storey frame house 350 Concession 7 Road Built 1870 1 % storey, dichromatic brick 305 Concession 8 Road Built 1860-1900 1 % storey frame house (vinvl) 4445 Sideline 34 Built 1875 2 storey frame home with metal cladding Notable barn 140 Concession 7 Road Built 1860-1900 Perennial Gardens 1 % storey frame house 165 Concession 8 Road Built 1860-1900 1 % storey frame house 4440 Sideline 34 Built 1860-1900 1 % storey frame house, centre gable Notable outbuildinqs 4375 Markham-Pickering Townline 1 % storey house, wattle and daub 4585 Sideline 20 Built 1860-1900 1 % storey brick house Vernacular, qothic revival 4560 Sideline 22 Built 1860-1900 1 % - 2 storey dichromatic brick 4535 Sideline 24 Built 1860-1900 1 % storey frame house Georqian, much altered 1095 Regional Road 5 Concession 9 Built 1850 1 % storey frame house Notable outbuildinas 975 Regional Road 5 Concession 9 Built 1860-1900 1 % storey brick house Greek revival, summer kitchen 871 Concession Road 8 Built 1860-1900 Stouffville Christian Fellowship School 1 % storey frame house, fan window 835 Regional Road 5 Concession 9 Built 1860-1900 1 % storey frame house, much altered 575 Regional Road 5 Concession 9 Built 1860-1900 1 % storey frame house, centre gable Porch with bell cast roof 4690 Sideline 30 Built 1850-1880 1 % storey frame house, board and batten 4675 Sideline 32 Built 1850 2 - 2 % storey house, dichromatic brick Flemish bond 355 Regional Road 5 Concession 9 Built 1860-1900 1 % storey frame house Notable barn 307 Concession 8 Road Built 1860-1900 ,<~~ -. ~.~ .~ p---y' .-.t ~.. ~'j' ir-~:--;w:--~- . .-I"J'. -(.iilf'C.....;.-. -Y i 136 Attachment #3 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 2 Municipal Address Heritage Value 1 ~ storey frame house 5165 Sideline 2 Built 1860-1900 1 ~ storey frame house Vernacular (house is empty) barn 5070 Sideline 22 Built 1901-1940 Transport Canada Site Office 2 storey brick house 5170 Sideline 22 Built 1860-1900 1 ~ storey frame house with stucco cladding Vernacular 1175 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Built 1860-1900 1 ~ storey frame house, centre gable Notable barn 5050 Sideline 24 Built 1858-1859 1 ~ storey stone house 5260 Sideline 24 Built 1860-1900 1 ~ - 2 storey frame house Notable outbuildinQs 1095 Uxbridge-Pickering T ownline Built 1860-1900 1 ~ storey frame house 5395 Sideline 26 Built 1901-1940 2 storey house, painted brick, hip roof 5240 Sideline 26 Built 1860-1900 Misty Meadows 1 ~ storey frame house, additions Notable barn 5245 Sideline 28 Built 1860-1900 1 ~ storey frame house, insulbrick, Georgian Notable barn 5305 Sideline 28 Built 1857 1 ~ storey stone house 625, 635, 645 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Built 1860-1900 1 ~ storey frame house, stucco 675, 685, 695 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Built 1860-1900 1 ~ storey frame house, metal 565 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Built 1875 Altona Christian Missionary Church 5411 Sideline 30 (North Road) Buit 1901-1940 1 ~ storey brick house, circular porch 5413 Sideline 30 (North Road) Built 1860-1900 1 ~ storey frame house, board and batten 5435 Sideline 30 (North Road) Built 1901-1940 2 ~ storey brick house, hip roof 5415 Sideline 30 (North Road) Built before 1877 2 storey brick stucco house 5250 Sideline 30 (North Road) Built 1860-1900 1 ~ storey frame house 5460 Sideline 30 (North Road) Built 1911 SS #17 (Altona), 1 storey brick 385 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Built 1872 ....' '_ ..k" ." _'-" ":s"'"t"~' "" -..,;;."" Attachment #3 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register 1 3 7 Section 2 Municipal Address Heritaae Value 1 2/2 storey brick house, oriqinal fence 5070 Sideline 32 Built 1860-1900 1 'Y2 storey frame house, metal 5095 Markham-Pickering Townline Built 1945 (original house burned down in 1944) 1 'Y2 storey brick 3515 Brock Road Location of former House of Brougham Notable barn 1725 Highway 7 Built 1860-1900 2 storey brick house 1709 Highway 7 Built 1870 Brick, commercial house 1689 Highway 7 Notable barn 3595 Brock Road Built 1890 The Standard Church (St. John's United Brick Church) 3575 Brock Road Built 1860-1900 1 -1 'Y2 storey frame house, centre cable 1689 Spring Gate Blvd Built 1860-1900 1 'Y2 storey brick house, oriqinal fence 3545 Brock Road Built 1854 Brouaham Community Hall Ex-Township of Pickering 3535 Brock Road Built 1860 1 'Y2 storey house, dichromatic brick, Georgian 3590 Brock Road Built 1860-1900 2 storey brick house 3570 Brock Road Built 1920-1940 White frame bunaalow, oriainal detail 3530 Brock Road Built 1860-1900 1 'Y2 storey stucco house 1637 Highway 7 [no description provided] 1631 Highway 7 1 'Y2 storey house, vinyl siding Notable outbuilding 1619 Highway 7 1 'Y2 storey house, vinyl siding Notable outbuildinq 1607 Highway 7 1 'Y2 storey red brick house, centre gable 1613 Highway 7 Built 1859 Gallery Brougham Red Brick, SS #10 3629 Old Brock Road 1 'Y2 storey house 3656 Old Brock Road 2 'Y2 storey house 3652 Old Brock Road Built 1835 1 'Y2 storey house, original outbuildinq 3632 Old Brock Road 1 'Y2 storey frame house, vinyl sidinq :"J:ii'(~tY""'''f ~ fl' r~:;t-:S ""-jll~-"'r-:- ' J"~, 1 3 B Attachment #3 to Report CS 07-08 Municipal Heritage Register Section 2 Municipal Address HeritaQe Value OriQinal porch 1688 Highway 7 [no description provided] [Becker's storel 1686 Highway 7 Built 1880 Temperance Hall Architect AA Post 1670 Highway 7 Annis, greatly altered 1622 Highway 7 Built 1880 2 storey house, dichromatic brick Concession 8 Road at Sideline 24 Built pre-1860 Gostick Cemetery Concession 7 Road Built pre-1860 St. John's Cemetery Sideline 20, North of Highway 7 Built pre-1860 Sharrard Cemetery Cifll o~ REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Report Number: CS 09-08 Date: March 17, 2008 1 39 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information Recommendation: That Report CS 09-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information be received for information. Executive Summary: Council approved the Purchasing By-law on November 5, 2001 which includes a request to have a summary of contract awards arising from the formal quotation process be forwarded to Council as information only on a quarterly basis. Financial Implications: Not applicable Sustainability Implications: Quotation No. Q-63-2007 (repairs to pool wall and skylight roofing) states the City of Pickering is moving forward on the journey of being sustainable Pickering, a new way of doing business. Bidders are encouraged to include information about environmentally friendly products and recycling programs offered, such as products in recyclable material and requested to provide the City for evaluation a Waste Management Plan. Background: In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 04.06, a summary of contract awards arising from the formal quotation process is provided herein for the information of Council. Quotation Nos. Q-64-2007 and Q-65-2007 were cancelled due to contractors not commencing work which was to be completed by year end. Projects will be retendered in the Spring of 2008. 'J ',-l Y -p't ~"j> . "i';r:ii -,' ~,,- Report CS 09-08 March 17,2008 Subject: Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information Page 2 r . 1-40 Formal Ouotations Summary October 1,2007 to December 31,2007 PST Included / GST Extra (unless stated otherwise) Reference No. Description Award Status Award Date 0-63-2007 Repairs Pool Wall and $76,093.16 ON GOING Nov. 26, 2007 Skyliqhts Roofinq - PRC (GST included) 0-64-2007 Asphalt/Concrete Walkways $34,418.20 CANCELLED Nov. 12, 2007 at Various Locations (GST included) 0-65-2007 Storm Sewer Flushing/Video $55,625.00 CANCELLED Nov. 21, 2007 Camera Inspection & Stormscepter Cleaninq RFP-5-2007 Consultant for Pickering $40,000.00 ON GOING Dec. 20, 2007 Official Plan Review 0-4-2008 Daily Courier Service for $28,316.08 ON GOING Dec. 21, 2007 2008 0-62-2007 Supply of SCBA parts and $77,288.17 COMPLETE Nov. 6,2007 retrofit Scott Air Pacs Attachments: Not applicable Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: r-- ~~ ;> . /L---..~ ./' / " '..... .-=: ,- /" "..- -----'; <..~ ~ --==--"'-- Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer ',---- .,' Vera A. Felgemacher // Manager, Supply & Services C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council .,.-;,; /:-', f-.'~<.~",:' --r f if ~\:~\ -~ i"-';i;!.~~~:,;,~;:l~"''''' . jt~ Thomas J. Quinn, FfDMR, CKAK1 'nf~~=t~,,_ Chief Administrative'Officer '-~'\~"u Cif11 o~ REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Report Number: CS 10-08 Date: March 17,2008 1 4 1 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Statement of the Treasurer Respecting 2007 Remuneration and Expenses of Members of Council and Council Appointees to Boards, Agencies and Other Bodies Recommendation: That Report CS 10-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Statement of the Treasurer respecting Remuneration and Expenses of Members of Council and Council Appointees for the year 2007 be received. Executive Summary: Section 284(1) of the Municipal Act 2001 states in part that the treasurer of every municipality shall, in each year, submit to the council of the municipality, an itemized statement of the remuneration and expenses paid to each member of council. The statement must also include remuneration and expenses paid to any other person who has been appointed by council to serve as a member of any body. Financial Implications: None Sustainability Implications: sustainability. This report contains no information pertaining to Background: Over the last few years this report has evolved to include various categories of expenditures that have been interpreted to be required under the new Municipal Act and/or financial reporting requirements of the Province of Ontario or professional accounting bodies. The reference in the Act to "...expenses paid...to ..." has been interpretated to also include expenses paid on behalf of a member of councilor appointee. For example, assume two councillors incur the same registration expense to attend the same conference. One puts it on his charge card and seeks reimbursement from the City while the other has the City billed directly. There should be no difference in the 'r; ,.-1/t. ~ :r Report CS 1 0-08 Date: March 17,2008 Subject: Statement of the Treasurer Respecting 2007 Remuneration and Expenses of Members of Council and Council Appointees 1 4 2 to Boards, Agencies and Other Boards Page 2 reporting treatment due to the method of payment and this interpretation will accomplish that. It also complies with what I believe is the intent of the legislation. The report excludes expenditures that are corporate in nature, for example school awards, promotional items and photography, and that are not directly associated with any individual Councillor. Council receptions, committee meeting expenses and City Hall administration and overhead expenses are also excluded. The first schedule attached to this report includes a new column for capital expenditures for computer hardware, software and telecommunicatins equipment. This reflects the Council Policy on these expenditures and the 2007 Capital Budget. Payments made by Veridian Corporation to Pickering Council appointees to the Board have been included. This comes about as a result of a review of the Act and enquiries made to Veridian and its legal counsel. While the Act refers to expenses paid, it is silent as to paid by whom. Furthermore, the Act also stipulates that any body to whom a Council appointment is made must provide the municipality with a statement of remuneration and expenses paid for the year. This has been interpreted to mean that this information must be included in the Treasurer's report to Council. Several other bodies to which Council makes appointments have also been included as an "other body" as required under the Act. However, the many community committees and groups that Councillors are appointed to have been excluded as, to the best of my knowledge, no remuneration or expenses are paid. The amounts paid by the Region of Durham to Regional Councillors are not included in this report. Attachments: 1. Remuneration and Expenses of Members of Council 2. Detailed Breakdown of 2007 Expenses 3. Remuneration and Expenses of Council Appointees 4. Remuneration and Expenses Paid by Veridian Corporation to Council Appointees ;;~....~" -)r 't"'Jll Report CS 1 0-08 Date: March 17,2008 Subject: Statement of the Treasurer Respecting 2007 Remuneration and Expenses of Members of Council and Council Appointees to Boards, Agencies and Other Boards Page 3 1 43 Prepared By: Approved I Endorsed By: ..........7 ..- ---- ~:.--....~....-. ...., ('?--5. ./....--..~ r-:.. .-/ / ....--..\j ~. ...-<'/' ..--~. ..----- (.. (--. ........- Avril Payi1e . Audit Analyst ~/// /"7 ,..-) " /'~. /. <--'P.' <.'"", ':,:\,..' <,"'" '".:., "-.:_~: .~'", ,,~"- ,,' .;~."~";~-',<,.:~_~_-..:~:~-~,;'>"'-~;;i ".' /' ~ C'- (,,_.. ..... ........ Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer GAP:ap Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Ci!y Coun,9i f . -'" STATEMENT OF TREASURER MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL 2007 REMUNERATION AND EXPENSES Remuneration (1) Per Diems (2) Benefits (3) Expenses (4) ($) ($) ($) ($) Total Current ($) Capital(5) ($) Travel ($) Mayor D. Ryan 68,188 - 17,155 11,488 15,224 112,055 4,341 68,188 - 17,155 11 ,488 15,224 112,055 4,341 Councillors D. Dickerson 28,412 2,745 10,394 18,304 9,998 69,853 40 R. Johnson 28,412 2,745 10,060 16,736 9,786 67,739 113 B. Littley 28,412 2,745 10,813 5,627 9,786 57,383 3,473 B. McLean 28,412 2,745 10,294 10,062 9,786 61,299 4,633 J. O'Connell 28,412 2,745 7,656 17,734 9,881 66,428 7,249 D. Pickles 28,412 2,745 9,692 4,512 9,835 55,196 3,255 170,472 16,470 58,909 72,975 59,072 377,898 18,763 NOTES TO MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL: (1) Authority: Resolution 214/07,12/07 and 73/05, Council Compensation and Communications Policy ADM 190 Municipal Act, 2001 Section 283 Includes one third portion deemed tax free. Excludes amounts paid to City of Pickering Regional Councillors by the Region of Durham. Such amounts are reported separately by the Region. (2) Per diem payments to Members of Council are for attendance at special meetings throughout the year. (3) Benefits include RRSP contributions (in lieu of a pension plan), health, dental and life insurance coverage, CPP and EHT costs. Benefits paid to retired Members of Council: W. Arthurs - $4,122; M. Brenner - $4,606; and K. Ashe - $438. (4) See detailed breakdown of expenses on Attachment 2. (5) Represents computer hardware, software and telecommunications equipment. Per Council Communication Policy, Members of Council are allotted $10,000 per Council term. -:>. ..;::::,. ..:;,.. ):-.-: ~ ~ () :r: ~ m Z -f F -f o =^' rn "U o q :j:t; I,~ ,\..I; (:;, , G 'Of"\; STATEMENT OF TREASURER MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF 2007 EXPENSES Pager & Cell Telephone Newsletter! Meals Outside Office Total Conferences Phones & Internet (1) Postaqe Recpt/Prom Agencies Supplies Expenses ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) Mayor D. Ryan 535 1,016 - - 9,937 - - 11 ,488 535 1,016 - - 9,937 - - 11 ,488 Councillors D. Dickerson 9,316 3,588 1,562 583 3,255 - - 18,304 R. Johnson - 2,039 2,149 6,123 2,853 3,360 212 16,736 B. Littley 796 335 568 2,931 854 - 143 5,627 B. McLean 3,625 3,154 778 896 1 ,488 40 81 10,062 J. O'Connell 8,639 2,505 948 - 1,949 3,500 193 17,734 D. Pickles - 1,865 1,138 516 993 - - 4,512 22,376 13,486 7,143 11,049 11,392 6,900 629 72,975 (1) Councillors - home telephones and internet charges .ft b ,; d ;xl m -0 o ~ _:0. ~ ~ I~ (Jl \,0\ '- ~ . v ~j ('''.11. .<'1".-', 1 46 ATTACHMENT #.3..._ TO REPORT # C:;- 10- OJ STATEMENT OF TREASURER COUNCIL APPOINTEES 2007 REMUNERATION AND EXPENSES Remuneration Expenses (7) Total $ $ $ Committee of Adjustment (1,2) K. Ashe (3) 1,040 85 1,125 D. Johnson (3) 1,280 83 1,363 S. Kular (3) 1,120 257 1,377 E. Newton (3) 1,040 66 1,106 K. Wilkinson (3) 1.120 299 1,419 5.600 790 6.390 Fenceviewers/Property Standards Committee (2) K. Bannister (3) A. Burtney (3) G. Fernandes (3) R. Fleming (3) M. O'Connor (3) 9 84 171 340 284 160 169 1.124 160 320 240 160 160 1.040 11 20 44 Livestock Valuers (2) J. Laider (3) 640 640 50 50 690 690 1 4 7 Remuneration $ Expenses (4) $ Total $ Pickering Public Library Board (2) O. Chaudhry (3) P. Irwin (3, 5) B. Littley (3) J. Lucas (3) J. O'Connell (3) J. Sabean (3) P. Savel (3) S. Van Steen (3) H. Van Leeuwen (3, 6) A. Midolo (5) A. Naqvi (6) 346 346 346 346 NOTES TO COUNCIL APPOINTEES: All payments are authorized under Council's adoption of the 2007 Current Budget. (1) Authority: By-law 5242/98 Municipal Act, 2001 Section 283 (2) Authority: By-law 6713/06 Municipal Act, 2001 Section 283 (3) Council appointees for new term commencing December 1, 2006 (4) Expenses include conferences, travel and meeting expenses (5) Resolution #116/07, M. Midolo to replace P. Irwin (6) Resolution #166/07, A. Naqvi to replace H. Van Leeuwen 1413 Idee REFORT # L$Jo- 0 t STATEMENT OF TREASURER COUNCIL APPOINTEES VERIDIAN CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2007 REMUNERATION AND EXPENSES Remuneration Expenses (4) Total $ $ $ Veridian Corporation (1,2) Board of Directors D. Ryan (3) D. Dickerson (3) 10,800 5,148 15,948 B. McLean (3,7) 1 0,800 3,490 14,290 D. Pickles (3) 10,800 395 11 ,195 R. Sutton (5) 10,800 5,604 1 6,404 S. Trepanier (6) 10,800 1,126 11 ,926 54.000 15.763 69.763 NOTES TO VERIDIAN CORPORATON BOARD OF DIRECTORS: (1) The above information was provided by the Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Veridian Corporation. (2) Remuneration and expenses are paid by Veridian Corporation as may be established by the Board of Directors. The term of office for the Board follows the calendar year therefore, the above expenses are for 12 months ending December 31,2007. (3) Appointed by Council under City of Pickering By-law 6213/06. (4) Expenses include conferences, meals and mileage. (5) Appointed by Council under City of Pickering Resolution #24/07. (6) Appointed by Council under City of Pickering Resolution #46/07. (7) Appointed by Council under City of Pickering Resolution #46/07 as Mayor's representative. REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Report Number: CS 11-08 Date: March 17, 2008 1 4 <) From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate SeNices & Treasurer Subject: Cash Position Report as at December 31 t 2007 Recommendation: It is recommended that report CS 11-08 from the Director, Corporate SeNices & Treasurer be received for information. Executive Summary: The attached schedules provide the City of Pickering's cash position, continuity of taxes receivable, outstanding investments, development charges collected and other development contribution information for the six months ended December 31,2007. Financial Implications: The cash position of the Corporation for six months ended December 31, 2007 was a net decrease in cash of $5,064,750 to $3,191,771 due mainly to settlement of the large assessment appeal. Sources of Funds totalled $118,073,389 and Uses of Funds totalled $123,138,139. Sustainability Implications: implications. This report does not contain any sustainability Background: This report presents a six-month period of activity ending December 31,2007. The discussion below describes the purpose and the information contained in each of the attached schedules. Statement of Cash Position: Attachment 1 reflects the sources and uses of funds for the second half of 2007. Subcategories have been identified to highlight those cash transactions that are significant in nature or large dollar value transactions for the City of Pickering. This schedule summarizes the decrease in cash of $5,064,750 over the last six months. The decrease is mainly due to the settlement of an outstanding assessment appeal in which a portion of prior year's taxes had to be refunded. The 'fU'j".'" ')1' 'i'f' 1- Wllil Report CS 11-08 Date: March 17, 2008 sl~eot: Cash Position Report as at December 31, 2007 Page 2 2007 year end balance is approximately $429,000 more than 2006. However, year to year periodical comparisons may not be useful due to timing of receipts and disbursements. Year end cash balances and future revenues are set to meet the cash flow requirements early in the following year. Continuity of Taxes Receivable: Attachment 2 summarizes the tax related transactions from July 1 to December 31, 2007 and provides the outstanding taxes receivable as at December 31, 2007. This balance represents all three levels of taxes billed, such as City, Region and School Boards. This has increased over the past several years but may vary where due dates and amounts for supplementary billings change from year to year. Current year's taxes receivable of $6.5 million is approximately 4.3% (2006 - 4.2%) of the $150.0 million total taxes billed as at December 31, 2007. The outstanding balance of $13.1 million is approximately 8.7% (2006 - 8.2%) of the $150.0 million total taxes billed in 2007 which is comparable to prior year. Outstandinq Investments: Attachment 3 reflects the short-term and long-term investments for both the Current and Reserve Funds outstanding as at December 31, 2007. There has been a 4.3% decrease in total investments from $49.0 million last year to $46.9 million this year due to the use of funds for the settlement of previous year's tax assessment appeal. Total investment portfolio as at December 31, 2007 is $51.1 million with $4.2 million coming from internal loans and $46.9 million from general investments. The investment portfolio continues to perform well and once again we anticipate meeting or exceeding market return indicators. Development Charqes Collected: Attachment 4 indicates the total development charges for the City, Region and School Boards, as the City is responsible for collecting development charges on behalf of all levels of government. The total amount collected of $2,002,852 agrees with the balance indicated under Sources of Funds on Attachment 1. However the remittance of development charges to the Region and School Boards indicated under the Use of Funds is different than the total collected on Attachment 4. This variance is a result of timing differences because payments to the Region and School Boards are due 25 days following the month collected. The amount collected continues to decrease reflecting the lower levels of building activity in recent years. Other Development Contributions: Attachment 5 is provided to show other significant development contributions that have been received. Multi year Receipts: The balance of the tables shows multi year receipts. The collections of the City portion of development charges have decreased by 17.8% or $332,750 from $1,870,117 in 2006 to $1,537,367 in 2007 as the City's limited growth period continues. The 592 building permits issued during 2007 is a slight increase over the 574 issued in 2006. Report CS 11 -08 Date: March 17, 2008 Subject: Cash Position Report as at December 31, 2007 Page 3 1 5 1 Attachments: 1 . Statement of Cash Position 2. Continuity of Taxes Receivable 3. Outstanding Investments 4. Statement of Development Charges Collected 5. Other Development Contributions 6. Building Permits Issued 2000 - 2007 7. City Portion of Development Charges Collected 1991-2007 Prepared By: Approved I Endorsed By: It, " IJ {i6 IL ~(Le>r.,.n/1 ,," . L<.-' {,;?/(,.c:.,- - Dennis P. Arboleda Supervisor, Accounting Services ~...~... ..,.".,.,...". -'~~...' -,-" ~ ~ .'.',' --"''''- ',',. '. .. """","> ",........- ,............ ,..... . . -'--... ......' --'" .. ,-"'",,,,../" /: _/"",,,,, -" "":::.> " C -,-~ . "" .' .... .... .....- ~ Gillis A. Paterson =~~'-'-'-'- Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer :da Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council / ~ ",/ ,/ J-----.ii'"' 1 52 I-\TTACHMENT # I Te) R;1:PO!1T# ,;1,' /1' )? -.l.-. .....;, ."'J \" .....- ~ ~-..j -. City of Pickering Cash Position Statement for six months ending December 31, 2007 Sources of Funds: Accounts Receivable collected $ 509,243 Development charges collected 2,002,852 Operating 25,322,948 Grants-in-lieu: Federal 1 ,747,442 Provincial 1 ,764,074 Ontario enterprises 3,776,238 Municipal enterprises 3,835,678 Linear Properties 2,046,389 Federal specific grants 87,919 Ontario specific grants 197,450 Interest Income 1,607,529 Sale of land 19,213 Tax payments received 75,080,891 POA Revenue 75,523 Total $ 118,073,389 Use of Funds: Operating and Capital Expenditures $ 43,834,762 Payroll 16,199,224 Region Levy 40,438,208 Regional portion of Dev. Charges 1,201,225 School Board Levies 20,707,361 School Board portion of Dev. Charges 145,040 Debenture payment to Region 612,319 Total $ 123,138,139 Net Cash Increase (Decrease) $ (5,064,750) FINANCIAL POSITION Bank Balance Net Cash Bank Balance Julv 1,2007 Provided (Used) December 31,2007 Current Fund $ 8,256,520 $ (5,064,750) $ 3,191,771 TOTAL $ 8,256,520 $ (5,064,750) $ 3,191,771 Note: Includes City, Region and School Boards Cash Position Dee 2007NET CHANGES City of Pickering Continuity of Taxes Receivable for six months ending December 31, 2007 Jun 30/07 Penalty and Taxes Supplementary Tax Payments and Dec 31/07 Receivable Interest Added Billed Taxes Billed Write Ofts Adjustments Receivable $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Current Year Taxes 55,989,022 21,768,026 1,026,937 (287,674) (72,030,902) 6,465,409 Penalty and Interest 103,649 580,109 (330,496) 353,262 2006 Taxes 3,513,993 402,560 (14,137) (1,219,419) 2,682,997 Penalty and Interest 336,832 230,737 (210,398) 357,171 2005 Taxes 1,385,799 71,738 (38,871 ) (406,792) 1,011,874 Penalty and Interest 265,920 109,559 (122,797) 252,682 Prior Years Taxes 2,022,181 (7,979) (279,729) 1,734,473 Penalty and Interest 276,206 85,593 (82,100) 279,699 TOTAL 63,893,602 1,005,998 21,768,026 1,501,235 (348,661 ) (74,682,633) 13,137,567 )~> -I -l ~ n I 3. n'~-~ ";ir Total Taxes Levied in 2007 including Region and School Boards: $150,682,172.00 :f:l:' I ( . 'iii....,., .~ o ;:0 tn ~d o ;;:J -i =It 1.'-- , . /', '-' , ~ .- 2007 Supplementary Tax Due Dates: Residential: (Interim) Commercial: (Interim) Residential: (Final) Commercial: (Final) October 30 & November 29 December 14 & December 18 February 27 & April 27, 2007 February 27 & April 27, 2007 July 11 & September 27, 2007 October 12,2007 2007 Interim Tax instalment due dates: Tax Write Offs reflects "Minutes of Settlement", Assessment Review Board Decisions and Council approved adjustments under Section 357 & 358 of the Municipal Act, 2001. CTl C CJ'.J "4 Cash Position Dec 2007T AXES RECVBL City of Pickering Outstanding Investments as at December 31, 2001 Name of Financial Purchase Maturity Interest Principal Interest #of Days Value at _ Security Institution Date Date Rate Amount Payable O/S Maturity ( SHORT TERM INVESTMENTS -~ Current & Reserve Fund Investments Nesbitt Burns FIRST BANK BA 11-0ct-07 07 -Jan-08 4.68% 4,598,152.50 51,847.50 88 4,650,000.00 Nesbitt Burns CIBC BA 29-0ct-07 25-Jan-08 4.51% 5,999,740.60 65,259.40 88 6,065,000.00 Nesbitt Burns FIRST BANK BA 05-Nov-07 29-Jan-08 4.41% 2,704,242.88 27,757.12 85 2,732,000.00 Nesbitt Burns FIRST BANK BA 14-Dec-07 14-Mar-08 4.48% 4,067,551.35 45,448.65 91 4,113,000.00 Nesbitt Burns TO BA 21-Dec-07 19-Feb-08 4.29% 2,921,406.00 20,594.00 60 2,942,000.00 TOTAL SHORT TERM INVESTMENTS $ 20,291,093.33 $ 210,906.67 $ 20,502,000.00 LONG TERM INVESTMENTS Current & Reserve Fund Investments SEMI-ANNUAL (JUN 27 & DEC 27) Nesbitt Burns FARM CREDIT CORP 27 -Jun-03 27-Jun-13 4.20% $ 250,000.00 Initial Maturity (June 27/05) $ 250,000.00 Nesbitt Burns CANADA HOUSING TRUST 02-Aug-06 15-Mar-08 4.40% 3,796,505.31 SEMI-ANNUAL (MAR 15 & SEP 15) 3,783,000.00 Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 02-Aug-06 19-Nov-08 4.40% 4,102,402.10 SEMI-ANNUAL (MAY 19 & NOV 19) 4,085,000.00 Nesbitt Burns CANADA HOUSING TRUST 02-Aug-06 15-Sep-09 4.65% 3,930,566.75 SEMI-ANNUAL (MAR 15 & SEP 15) 3,883,00000 MONTHLY (29TH DAY) Initial Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 29-0ct-04 29-0ct-14 4.50% 3,500,000.00 Maturity (Oct 29/06) 3,500,000.00 Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 21-Jun-05 21 -J u n-1 0 3.70% 4,300,000.00 SEMI-ANNUAL (JUN 21 & DEC 21) 4,300,000.00 Nesbitt Burns CIBC 10-Feb-06 10-Feb-11 4.25% 2,000,000.00 SEMI-ANNUAL (FEB 10 & AUG 10) 2,000,000.00 Nesbitt Burns RBC 25-Apr-06 25-Apr-11 4.50% 2,000,000.00 SEMI-ANNUAL (APR 25 & OCT 25) 2,000,000.00 Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 16-May-06 17-Apr-08 4.50% 1,972,052.40 ANNUAL (APR 17) 1,964,000.00 Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 09-May-06 19-May-09 4.00% 616,251.64 SEMI-ANNUAL (MAY 19 & NOV 19) 619,000.00 TOTAL LONG TERM INVESTMENTS $ 26,467,778.20 $ 26,384,000.00 :: , '. , TOTAL INVESTMENTS $ 46,758,871.53 $ 46,886,000,00 l! ~ , Internal Investments to Capital Projects Yield: 3.67 - 4.70% $ 4,184,098.00 Term: 4 - 10 years Cash Position Dec 2007SECURITIES i~ c.. ....~ , City of Pickering Development Charges Collected for six months ending December 31, 2007 Durham District Durham Catholic City's Portion Region of Durham School Board School Board Total $ $ $ $ $ AMOUNT COLLECTED July 217,962 180,175 21,076 7,414 426,627 August 38,366 27,119 3,832 1,348 70,665 September 132,426 157,349 12,454 4,381 306,610 October 278,222 394,235 33,530 11,795 717,782 November 188,238 215,415 22,034 7,751 433,438 December 29,526 14,319 2,874 1,011 47,730 TOTAL 884,740 988,612 95,800 33,700 2,002,852 ~, '.' '" :to:; f ~, h~ ! ~ h V\ --" . ~ UI \ en s.." ; City of Pickering ~ Other Development Contributions (J1 Q""\ for six months ending December 31, 2007 CONTRIBUTIONS: Cash - In - Lieu of Parkland $19,600 TOTAL CASH-IN-L1EU $19,600 ---.~ '~ t. ,).> () :r:: 3: rn ~~ :t:t 1.:\ 1 .fj:. t...... 1[/, ; -.... ....... , C ~\ Cash Position Dee 20070ther Dev.Contrbtns 900 850 800 750 700 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 o Building Permits Issued 2000 - 2007 I -- No. of Permits I ,./'''- // / ~ / "'-., '1'" ~ 'l'"' () I d~ '1:-1- ~ ","" ','J 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 :,r\ '.J\ -... ~- , (Jle Cl,f, '-J J ~ City Portion of Development Charges Collected 1991 - 2007 4,000,000 3,500,000 / 1\ / \ 7 / ---1- ) 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 / 1,000,000 / ; l / / j 500,000 c..Jl co 1--.- City Portion I '~~. \ 4,"" ~ l o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ", V\ - - \ c::, 'J Ciiq (J~ REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Report Number: CS 12-08 Date: March 17, 2008 1 59 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: 2007 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund Recommendation: That Report CS 12-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. Executive Summary: Section 7 (4) of the Building Code Act requires that "every 12 months each principal authority shall prepare a report... of building fees and related costs." This report provides this information. Financial Implications: This report contains information pertaining to the financial status of the Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund as at December 31, 2007. Provincial legislation requires an annual report on this fund be presented to Council. Sustainability Implications: implications. This report does not contain any sustainability Background: In December 2005, Council approved report PO 41-05, which enacted a new building permit process and fees under the Provincial Building Code Statue Law Amendment Act or Bill 124. The premise of Bill 124 was the requirement that municipalities will no longer be able to subsidize planning services or other City areas through building permit fees. C.N. Watson was retained to undertake a comprehensive analysis of all Planning & Development service costs fees and legislative requirements and to develop an Activity Based Costing (ABC) model for the City. Using this information, the consultant recommended a small increase in building permit fees to provide for cost recovery and to establish a building permit stabilization reserve fund. The purpose of this reserve fund is to provide a source of funds during an economic downturn to offset lower building permit revenues. Without such a reserve fund, reduced growth and permit volumes during a downturn could result in severe budgetary pressures. .- --.--~ ,--: Report CS 12-08 Date: March 17, 2008 Subject: Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund 16n Page 2 The Building Code Act requires that an annual report be prepared including total fees collected in the previous 12 month period, a summary of indirect and direct costs of delivering the service. The following statements indicate that expenses exceeded revenues and therefore there was no transfer to the reserve fund as required by the Act. Annual Report - Building Permit Fees For the year ended December 31, 2007 Building Permit Revenue $ 936,519 Costs: Direct Costs Indirect Costs ($1,142,117) (201,244) (1,343,461) ($ 406,942) Excess (Deficit) Revenue Over Costs BUILDING PERMIT STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND Opening Balance, January 1,2007 $ 2007 Contribution Closing Balance, December 31,2007 $ In 2006, the costs (direct & indirect) exceeded the building permit fee revenues and therefore, no transfer was made to the building permit stabilization reserve fund. For 2007, the similar situation occurred. The cumulative operating deficit for the years 2006 and 2007 is $992,955 and staff will explore this year the possibility of having the cumulative deficit amount charged against future years building permit excess revenues. The primary reason for the shortfall is that building permit activity has fallen short of the levels projected in the original study. Staff will be reviewing these projected levels and the building permit fee itself in conjunction with the forthcoming Development Charge Study. Attachments: None Report CS 12-08 Date: March 17,2008 Subject: Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund Page 3 1 6 1 Prepared By: Approved I Endorsed By: .__._----~~._~, Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer /" j~ ~ -::::> '/~ Stan Karwowski Manager, Finance & Taxation GAP:sk Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council ./ ,,/ N