HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Lucknow Sentinel, 1986-12-31, Page 3Alex Simpson of Ashfield Township, left, a finalist in the Lucky Million Sweeps Show,
receives his $10,000 cheque from the Honorable John Eakins, Minister of � Tourism and
Recreation. The show was televised on December 11 in' Toronto. (Ontario Lottery Corp.
photo)
Lueknow sewer project...
• from page 1
Eldon Mann George Anderson, and project
engineer Steve Burns from B.M. Ross and
Associates of Goderich.
...Mr. Clark said council advised the
minister that the MOE proposal, which
Balled for the core area of the village to be
serviced with individual upgradingof sep- •
tic systems was unacceptable to the
village. In their presentation, council
outlined a number of reasons why sewers
for the entire village was the route to take
for the project.
300 answer questionaire
In January 1986, Luckriow ratepayers
overwhelmingly supported council's wish
to install a sewage system to service the
whole .village, according to estimates be-
ing
eing tallied at the town hall.
Clerk -treasurer Bertha Whitcroft said
that of the approximately 410 ques-
tionaires, sent out, about 300 have been
returned. Of the 300 odd replies, "20 at the
most" reject council's -goal to have all of
the village's buildings connected to the
system rather than just two-thirds com-
prised of the core and problem areas.
Lucknow gets sewers grant'
In May, village council received a reply
from the project engineer of the Ministry
of the Environment (MOE) regarding the
request by the village to giver serious con-
sideration to the installation of sanitary
sewers throughout the entire village,
•
Lucknow receives
°$603, 000 grant
According to Reeve Herb Clark, the re-
quest for the communal sewage collection
treatment system has been rejected by the
MOE. However, a grant allocation of
$603,000 has been approved to install
sanitary seweers in the core area of the
village.
In a letter dated February 13, from the
village to the MOE, council identified 67
probelm sites lying outside the core area
as reported by residents. The MOE project
engineer stated they couldn't support a
communal " sewage collection system
because of the recommended program and
current policy within the ministry.
Two sites chosen
In June of 1986, tivo possible sites were
chosen for the proposed sewage disposal
and treatment plant for Lucknow, says a
recent report issued by the village's
engineering firm.
In the latest summary report updating
the Lucknow sewage works project, B.M.
Ross and Associates, after investigating.
nine possible sites have identified the Mar-
tin property, located southwest of
Lucknow on Concession 12 of Ashfield
Township, and the Brooks property,
located east of Lucknow 4in Kinloss
Township, as suitable sites for the treat-
ment plant and winter storage lagoon,
In choosing the preferred properties for
the project, project engineer Steve Burns
said both properties possessed sand and
gravel soils, were both located within a 4
km radius of Lucknow and both properties
were large enough to accommodate the
treatment plant and the lagoon.
...The summary report also found rapid
infiltration to .be used as a method of
sewage disposal. Under this system,
sewage treatment would be. pumped into
infiltrating basins, or a shallow lagoon,
where it would be allowed to percolate into
the ground through the granular soils.
During the winter months the sewage
would be stored in the lagoon and, in the
summer months, would be infiltrated into
the soil.
• Open House
The village's engineering firm # says
preliminary studies have shown the
Brooks property in Kinloss Township as
the better property for the sewage treat-
ment plant, said a spokesman with B.M.
Ross and Associates at an open house in
Lucknow on June 25.
' "Based on the tests, the Brooks property
looks like the better site. But we've in no
way made a decision yet," said project
engineer Steve Burns.
Tour of Markdale system
To see the workings of a rapid infiltra-
tion sewage system, a delegation made up
of Lucknow, Kinloss paid a visit to the
sewage works in Markdale on July 9 to see,
first hand, how the system worked.
The rapid infiltration system is meeting
with great success in Markdale where the
system has been in use since the spring of
this year, says one of the town's officials.
"We're pretty happy with it," said
Markdale Clerk G.A. Barlow, in an inter-
view. "We're getting everything finalized
right now. The Ministry (of the Environ-
ment) is still doing some testing. Since it's
the first rapid infiltration system this side
of the southern states, they're still seeing
how it works."
According to Steve. Burns, of B.M Ross
and Associates, who also accompanied the
councillors on the trip, the Markdale
system is almost "directly comparable" to °
'the proposed 'Lucknow system, only the
Markdale system is geared to handling
much more waste than the Lucknow
system,
He said the Markdale system currently
handles 300 gallons of treated sewage per
minute, a rate which is 21/z times what the
Lucknow system would carry, even if the
Whole village was included in the system.
Council options property
In October of 1986, an agreement was
signed with Floyd Milne to option .addi-
tional land adjoining the parcel optioned
from Gordon. Brooks, east of Lucknow in
Kinloss Township, for the proposed in-
stallation of a sewage treatment facility,
Lucknow Reeve Herb . Clark announced
this week.
The village now has approximately 50
acres under option, an. area large enough'
to' service the entire village of Lucknow.
Mr. Clark said the village's engineers,
B.M..Ross and'Assoeiates of Goderich, in-
formed council that the soil tests carried
out late last summer are favorable, Coun-
cil will now be getting in touch with Kinloss
Township council and the Bruce County
Planning Board.
0
Lelcknow Sentinell, Wednesday, December 311, 2986 ---Page 3
• i
Ontario
. 4
Qntario Municipal Board
iN THE MATTER OF Section 34 of the Planning Act, 1983,
r
AND IN THE MATTER OF appeals by Lionel Reeves, M.1.. Lahn, Jim Kalbfleisch, Raymond
Young and, others against Zoning By-law 5-1986 of the Corporation of the Township
of Ashfield.
APPQINTMENT FOR HEARING
THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD hereby appoints Thursday, the 29th day of January,
1987 at the hour of ten o'clock (local time) in the forenoon in the Assessment Board •
Room, Assessment •Building, 46 Gloucester Terrace, Goderich, for the hearing of these
appeals.
If you do not attend and are not represented at this hearing, the Board may proceed
in your absence and you will not be entitled to any further notice of the proceedings.
In the event the decision is reserved, persons wishing, a copyof the written decision
may ask the presiding Board Member at the hearing or contact the Board's Offices.
The decision will,be mailed when available.
DATED at Toronto, this 24th day of November, 1986.
J.G. MALCOLM
SECRETARY
EXPLANATORY NOTE
The Township of Ashfield passed a Comprehensive Zoning By-law (By-law 5-1986) on
February 18. 1986. The zoning by-law affects all lands in the Township of Ashfield by
regulating the use of lands and the character. location. and use of buildings and struc-
tures in various defined areas of the Township. The zoning by-law implements the
Township of Ashfield Secondary Plan and provides specific land use zones cgnd provi-
sions to ensure that the policies of the Secondary Plan are realized. •
Several objections were received to the by-law' as outlined below, although many ob-
jections were resolved by" an amending by-law (By-law 10-1986).
The following objections were received •
1 . Mr. and Mrs. Lionel Reeves - to correct the shape of their land holding: resolved
by By-law 10-1986,,and objection withdrawn.
2. M.L. Lahn - to zone lands to VR1 between Russell and Victdria•Street in Port
Albert; resolved by By-law 10-1986, and objection withdrawn,
3 . Jim Kalbfleisch to recognize cottage on Lot 25, R.P. 579 in Port Albert; resolv-
ed by By-law 10-1986, and objection withdrawn.
4 . Raymond Young - to recognize cottages. on Lot 29, 30 and 31, R,P. 581; to clarify
• that accessory structures are permitted with cottages; to correct the. Key. Map
56A reference on Key Map•.56. resolved by By -law -10-1986, and objection
withdrawn. '
5 . Gail Puddicombe - to permit a cottage on Lot 22, R.P. 585, which'has deficient
lot area; resolved by By-law 10.1986, but objection. outstanding.
6 . Paul Spittal - to zone Lot 7, R.P. 585, to permit a cottage; resolved by By-law
101986, and objection withdrawn.
7 . • -W. Sylvester - to zone an existing residence In Port Albert south of Melbourne
Street to NE1-2; to zone an existing residence east of Wellington Street to
• . VR1; to zone the steep bank and gully south of the unopened road allowance
Of Melbourne. Street from VR1 to NE1; resolved by By-law 10-1986,.and ob-
jection withdrawn.
8. Jarka Hradecky - to zone Lot 12,, R.P. 589, from NE1 to ME1-1 to permit the
establishment of a cottage; objection outstanding.
9. Ken Selling - to verify the zoning on KeyM'Map 528; objection withdrawn.
10... Viola Petrie - to zone Part Lot 1, south of Melbourne Street, R.P. ,136. from
NE1 to VR1; resolved by By-law 10-1986, and objection withdrawn.
1 1 . Ronald Hodges - to clarify the meaning of thedefined areas on, Key Map 10A.
to zone the residence on Lets 36,37 and Part Lot..38, east of Wellington Street,
• R.P, 136, from NE1-1 to VR1; to zone lands behind the 'residence from NE1 to
VR -1; to zone lands behind the residence from NE1 to VR1; to zone Part Lot
2, south of Melbourne Street, R.P. 136, from NE1 to NE1-1 to recognize a trailer;
resolved by Bylaw 10-1986, and objection withdrawn. •
12 . Harold and Isobel Adams - to zone Part of Los 39 and 40, east of Sydenham
R.
Street, P. 136, from NE1 to, VR1; to zone Part .of Lots 39 and 40, west of
Sydenham Street, R.P. 136 from NE1 to NE1.2; objection outstanding.
13. Joan Dierolf - to amend the definition of Tourist Home such that farm vaca-
tion homes are permitted in the agricultural area; resolved by By-law 10-1986,
and objection withdrawn.
14. . Winston and Lennie Karr to permit a cottage on Lot 14, R.P. 585, which' has
deficient lot area; resolved by By-law 10-1986, but objection outstanding.
15 , • Ministry of Natural Resources - to permit a wayside pit or quarry in'the NE1
*one; to zone Part Lots•10 and 11 and Part Lot 9, Concession 5, E.D., as ER1
as licensed under the Pits and quarries Control Act; resolved by By-law
10-1966,, end objection Withdrawn. -
16. billion Simpson -.to zone Part Lot 20, Front Concession, from FD to RC1; objec-
tion outstanding.
17.` Michael Garvey . to reference the RCI zona provisions in the NE1.1 zone; to
extend the RC1 zone easterly from R.D. 11 on Lot 9, Front Concession; to ;time
Mots 2, 5.10, R.P. 589 and Lots 1-3, 13, R.D. 8 front NE1 to NE1-1; objection
outstanding.
18. Paul Bees* - to zone Part Lot 20, Front Concession, from NE1.1 to NE1-2 td
recognize a permanent residence; obMectian outstanding.
19 , WM. Brown : to zone Part Lot 4, Concession 3, E.D., from AG1 to C4 to recognize
an auto wrecking business; objection outstanding.
206 Margaret Ferguson - to zone Part Lot 16, Front. Concession. from FD RC1;
objection outstanding. •'
21 Joseph Dzhver . to zone Part Lot 2, Front Concession, from FD to RC1 objec-
tion outstanding. •
2 2 . Orietje Snaith . to zone Part Lot 3, Front Concession, to peer;nit a retail v.getable•
stand; objection outstanding.
23. Harold and•Lisa Eldridge • tb zone Lot 4. R.P. 389, from NE1 to NE1.1; oiijec.
'24. Don 'Hemtnerle - to zone Part Lots 38 and
tion outstanding*
39, Front Concession, to recognize
an existing cottage; resolved by 11y -law 10.1986, but objection outstanding.
2 3. George Brophy - to permit development ofexisting undersized' lots zoned AG4
to reduce or eliminate the required separation distance from nearby barns
for newly rstabllshlna rrsldonces in an AG4 zone; objection outstanding.
•