Recommendation: That, on the
recommendation of the Executive Director of Planning, Environment and
Engineering Services, the following actions be taken regarding the Thames
Valley Corridor Plan to recognize that the Thames River Valley represents the
City’s most valued ecological, recreational and aesthetic resource:
a) the
Thames Valley Corridor Plan, dated December 2011, BE APPROVED for the
long-term protection and enhancement of the Thames River Valley in London;
b) the
implementation Action Plan for the Thames Valley Corridor Plan, outlining the
City’s plans for the long-term protection and enhancement Thames River Valley,
BE RECEIVED; it being noted that no additional municipal funding is
being sought for 2012, beyond that which is already included in the 2012
draft Budget, and that any new future funding that may be sought will go
through the established Business Case process;
c) staff
BE DIRECTED to initiate an Official Plan amendment to incorporate the
recommended policies into London’s Official Plan;
d) the
Corridor Advisory Committee BE THANKED for its participation in the
drafting of the Plan and BE INVITED to continue its involvement, with
regular engagement regarding Corridor issues during the implementation phase;
e) staff
BE REQUESTED to report back with an analysis, status update and
recommendations regarding the issues that contribute to poor water quality,
for potential submission to the Federal and Provincial Governments for
funding to improve water quality, in tandem with implementation of the Thames
Valley Corridor Plan;
f) staff
BE REQUESTED to report back to the Services Review Committee with
respect to the cost/benefit of transitioning the Fanshawe Conservation Area
to a public park;
it being noted that a Business Case for
additional funding for the Thames Valley Corridor Plan was submitted through
the 2012 budget process to the Service Review Committee in order to carry out
the recommended actions within a shortened timeline with enhanced features to
meet community expectations. This business case was referred to the
Investment and Economic Prosperity Committee for their consideration;
it being also noted that the Strategic
Priorities and Policy Committee (SPPC) heard verbal delegations from the
Director of Planning, the Manager of Parks Planning and Design, B. Page,
Planner and C. Marshall, Dillon Consulting, with respect to the Plan;
it being pointed out that at the public
participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals
made an oral submission in connection therewith:
- Sandy Levin –
indicating his appreciation for the involvement of the Corridor Advisory
Committee; emphasizing there are plenty of opportunities for the
community to optimize its enjoyment of the Thames Valley Corridor (citing
the South Street Campus as an example), while protecting this important resource;
and encouraging the Municipal Council to continue the Corridor Advisory
Committee as it can provide valuable input during the implementation
stage;
- Jeff Cuthbert
– providing the attached handout which depicts a possible
alternative route on the north side of the river that could mitigate
impact on the Meadowlily Woods ESA; supporting the initiatives contained
in the Plan and extending appreciation for involving the community but
emphasizing the importance of protecting the species at risk and hedge
rows within the ESA;
it being pointed
out that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee referred related communications
from S. Levin, Chair, Conservation Committee, Nature London, H. Krueger, 66
Ebury Crescent and G. Smith, Friends of Meadowlily Woods Community
Association, to staff for consideration.
|