Loading...
04 17 1996 Sp Public Minutes B:B CQRPORAIfIOB OJ' B:B IfO1IBSIIIP OJ' aao-KBDOftII SPECIAL PUBLIC lID:!'D1G 1II1DlÅ“8laY. APRIL 17. 199C , 7:00 P... - COUIICIL <:DIIBDS 8IZTY-PIRST KBBTING 1994-1997 COUNCIL (P38/95) The following members of Council were present: 8 Mayor Ian Beard Deputy Mayor Murray Martin Councillor Walter Dickie Councillor Don Bell Councillor Neil craig Councillor Larry Cotton Councillor Ron Sommers staff Present: Andria Leigh, Development Co- ordinator, Jennifer Zieleniewski, Treasurer/Acting Administrator Also Present Were: K. Christiansen, H. Quail, Elgin McMurchy, Colin and Jean Taylor, Wayne Benneyworth, Gilbert Duviner, Charles Clapham, Mr. & Mrs. Brunt, Margit Rain, Jean Mitzak, Adolf & Alice Timm, Elgin & Shanta McMurchy, Marty Rain, Sheri Rain, Gail & Peter Hayes, Aubrey & Judith Golden, David & Willy Bohme, David Edwards, L. Buchanan, shirley Woodrow, Bill Mitzak, M. Bohme, Thelma Halfacre, Howard & Sandra Quail, Kurt & Wanda Christiansen, Phil & Mary Fran Brunt. Mayor Ian Beard chaired the meeting. Mayor Ian Beard opened the meeting by explaining to those present that this Public Meeting was to receive public comments with respect to a proposed Official Plan Amendment, under provisions of section 17, of the Planning Act. The applicant has applied to remove the overlapping designation on certain lands, Part of Lots 19 and 20, Concession 2, formerly Orillia to correct a mapping error. 8 To date, the Council of the corporation of the Township of Oro- Medonte have not made a decision on this application, other than proceeding to this Public Meeting. Only after comments are received from the Public, requested agencies and Township Staff, within the appropriate time period, will Council make a decision on this application. Notice of the Public Meeting was mailed out on February 19, 1996, to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject lands. Notice of the Public Meeting was also placed in both the Barrie Examiner and Orillia Packet and Times on February 19, 1996. Mayor Beard then asked the Clerk if there had been any correspondence received on this matter. The Clerk responded by indicating that correspondence had been received from P. D. Brunt, Donald Di Pro spero , Linda Mallais, Lyle and Sharen - 2 - Johnston, Margit Rain, Gilbert Duviner, Milos Krajny, Warren Osak, William Ferguson, Mart Litwin, Charles Clapham, Walter Noble, Doris Le May, Shelley Wine, Simcoe County District Health Unit, Larry Grossman, Kathleen Johnson, and from an individual whose name was not legible as well as a telephone call from Eunice Phillip. All correspondence was read aloud but is not transcribed here. 8 The Mayor then stated that those persons present would be afforded the opportunity of asking questions with respect to the proposed Amendment. He then turned the meeting over to the Development co-ordinator, Mrs. Andria Leigh, to explain the purpose and effect of the proposed Official Plan Amendment. Andria Leigh: Thank you Mr. Mayor, as the Mayor has indicated, the purpose of tonight's meeting is to obtain public comments only with respect to the mapping error. Issues in regards to the draft plan on (inaudible) incorrect piece of information provided in the notice, we indicated that it was a redesignation of the property and that was not correct. It is a mapping error. There are two designations on the property and we are asking for one of those to be removed so we decided that a second public meeting would be held. It was scheduled for the 20th of March but due to inclement weather, we determined that we would not hold it that as we knew that most of the people coming were from Toronto and we wanted everyone to have an opportunity to comment and that is why we are here tonight. I can show you on the map here (indicated map), this map was blown up from the original map. I do have the original on the back if anybody would like to look at it more carefully. We wanted people to be able to see it from the back of the room. The subject property is located here on Lots 19 and 20, Concession 2, which means the 2nd Concession Line and the 3rd Concession Line of the former Township of Orillia. The orange areas that we have highlighted indicate all of the lands designated Shoreline Residential. The green patch lines that come through indicate the Urban Fringe designation. As we can see on all of the properties along the lake as well as Mr. piil's property, both of those designations exist on the property and as I say, there is a co loured map, the original from the By-law on the back, so if anybody would like to see that more clearly, other than the map we have hand done ourselves, you are more than welcome to do that. 8 Basically why we are here tonight is that the property, as I have indicated, has two designations on it, a Shoreline Residential designation and an Urban Fringe designation. Obviously, the By-law does not permit two designations on anybody's property. It is the intention under the new Official Plan to correct the properties within the 8 Mile Point and the other areas at that point in time. The reason we are dealing with Mr. piil's property at this point in time is that he has asked up to do that based on the Zoning Amendment and Draft Plan Amendment he provided to the municipality. This file goes back to almost a year now. I think it was the 27th of March, 1995 when an application for a Zoning Amendment was provided to this office. Because the applicant believed that the lands were already designated Shoreline Residential as per the Township of Orillia Official Plan, and they were intending to proceed with their development at that point in time. That same day, they applied to the Minister of Municipal Affairs for Draft Plan of Subdivision consideration and that was all done on the 27th of March 1995. It didn't come to light in the planning department that there was a double designation on this property - 3 - until about three to four weeks later when we went to our Planning Advisory Committee meeting and it was noted at that point in time when we got a larger scale map of the area. Andria Leigh: 8 Essentially what we are looking at, we have had correspondence both from David Scott of the Township of Severn, formerly Township of Orillia and copies of the Council meeting on October 19, 1991 which was the required public meeting under the Planning Act for Orillia Township's Official Plan that indicated that at that point in time they were changing Mr. piil's property from the City of Orillia Expansion Area to Shoreline Residential. I do have that correspondence in the file should someone wish to see that at some point in time. So there was the intention at that point in time, indicated in all the correspondence that that was what Council was doing. When they passed their amendment in November of 1991, they changed this property from City of Orillia Expansion Area to Shoreline Residential. The problem occurred when it went down to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs whereby four or five different staff members were looking at the map and making modifications and they overlayed the lines over the whole property. They thought they were suppose to extend right to the lake, all the way along, over Mr. piil's property and everybody else. So that is where the error occurred. We have had correspondence as well from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs indicating that they are in agreement with both municipali ties that it is a mapping error and that a technical official plan amendment is all that is required at this point in time to correct that mapping error.... Mayor Beard: We let Andria finish and then we will have questions. Andria Leigh: Just a few background points on the property. The property is about 62 and 1/2 acres in size, in total size, or rather 63 and a 1/2 and there is at present a draft plan subdivision proposal at the Ministry for 62 lots. Now that is not a definite at this point in time and it is being considered and would be amended once we have all agency comments to some other number or it may stay the same at 62. 8 One thing I should clarify, there has been some questions raised in some of the comments. Notification was sent to any of the property owners within 120 metres. That notification goes to the address that is in the assessment book, which in most cases for Woodland Drive residents, is Toronto, or, they are not Woodland Drive addresses and that is where we sent all correspondence, the same place all of your tax bills go. We do also post a copy of that in the local papers for anybody that is in the local area and is interested in the property. Mr. Mayor, Mr. Peter Smith, the applicant's consultant is here and would like to make a few comments prior to opening it up to the public if that is suitable for Council. Hr. smith: Mr. Mayor, members of Council and the public and residents, I think you have got to get very clear what this amendment is about. Fortunately, we do have a Planner who is on Council who perhaps may add some clarity to this. This is a technical amendment because of the drafting error. It is following due - 4 - 8 process, designation of Mr. piil's lands and other properties along the shoreline to Shoreline Residential that came through on the whole and proper process of the Orillia Official Plan. This is strictly a drafting error, so that any references to anything more than that is not going to be part of the consideration at this time. There certainly is no redesignation involved. There is a double designation involved posed by a drafting error and that was the unfortunate part I think about the February 7th notice, I think it has thrown everybody on the wrong angle. We do have a subdivision plan, we do have a zoning application file, they are under due process at this point, there will be a public meeting, obviously on the zoning and I think a great deal of the issues that the neighbourhood is expressing can be dealt with at that point. This is strictly a technical amendment. Now I wrote a letter, which I must say (inaudible) I was surprised it was not read out along with the rest. Is that not normal correspondence. Clerk: I believe the letter was on the council agenda. Hr. smith: I would like you to have read that just the same as the others. I think that is only fair. Can we have it read please? Mayor Beard: Madam Clerk, can you read the letter? Hr. smith: This letter is written from sheer fact, it really explains where exactly we are today, historically back in 1983. Clerk: It is addressed to Mayor Beard, Deputy Mayor Martin, Councillors Cotton, Sommers, craig, Bell and Dickie: 8 This letter is to reclarify and reconfirm to you that the purpose of the February 7th public meeting and the meeting rescheduled to March 20, 1996, is to correct a technical drafting error that had put a second and incorrect second designation of Urban Fringe Area on our client's lands. This occurred when the final Land Use Schedule of the Orillia Township Official Plan was drafted after the Plan's approval by the Township in November 1991. The subject lands were designated and approved for Shoreline Residential in this apprqved Official Plan. This designation was then further reconfirmed in the Ministry of Municipal Affair's approval of the orillia Township Official Plan in May 1993. Preparation of the Orillia Township Official Plan was carried out from 1989 following a comprehensive background study of the Municipality. This study and the Official Plan preparation process identified many aspects and needs of the Municipality including the need for 500 additional and dominantly permanent single family detached dwelling units in orillia Township by the year 2001 to meet its projected population growth. Designation of our client's lands for Shoreline Residential was part of this identified need and Official Plan process. Our client and ourselves participated in the Township's Official Plan public consultation process. The public was fully and properly informed in the consultation process, also. Prior to the Official Plan preparation, Orillia Township did not specifically - 5 - have an Official Plan. It was using, as a guide with no status, a segment of the former Official Plan for the former Couchiching Planning Board Area which related to the Orillia Township area. All Planning Boards have been disbanded under the provision of the 1983 Planning Act and their designations and policies had no status, including the Long Term Urban Expansion Area (Urban Fringe Area) designation in Orillia Township. The Township proceeded, therefore, on a new Official Plan preparation process in 1989 as required under the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1983. 8 We were very concerned, therefore, when the notice for the public meeting on February 7, 1996, for the technical amendment indicated that our client's lands were being redesignated from Urban Fringe Area (formerly Long Term Urban Expansion Area) to Shoreline Residential. This was incorrect and in error. We are pleased that your Township Planner, Mark stagg, clearly indicated to yourselves and the public in attendance on February 7, 1996, that the lands are designated and approved for Shoreline Residential purposes. We expect the same statement to be made and endorsed on March 20, 1996. It is unfortunate that another meeting on March 20,1996, has to be held to correct these inconsistencies. While our client is willing to co-operate in this process, it is causing delay and significant additional costs to the approval process for our client's subdivision and rezoning applications. You may hear on March 20, 1996, and be asked to receive submissions that these lands should not be designated or developed for residential uses. The truth is that they are designated residential and that to change this is not a consideration of the public meeting. You should not receive as input, therefore, anything that requests a change from what is designated and approved, i.e. Shoreline Residential. We request that Council immediately expedite the approval of the technical amendment to correct a drafting error at the earliest possible opportunity such that our client can proceed without undue pressure and unfounded concern. We request that we receive a copy of the minutes of the March 20, 1996, Public Meeting and be advised of when the Technical Amendment is to be processed. Yours truly, M.M. Dillon Limited. Mayor Beard: Mr. smith do you have further comments to add? Hr. smith: 8 only to thank you for reading the letter as I do think it is important to get some clarity to this process. We clearly would expect the technical amendment to be approved, there are a lot more things to be done in relation to the zoning and subdivision application. A lot of what has been expressed in those commenting letters on the planning idea, from tonight's correspondence relate to technical issues we could probably resolve, we can't necessarily resolve them all, but I think it is another day when that should be served. Again, I ask you to stick strictly to the intent of the amendment, that it has been a drafting error. You may need to satisfy yourself that there was a full, due and proper official plan process carried out through the orillia Township official plan. I believe the planner has probably already done all of that research already. And, if an issue is raised by someone in relation to it, I think that one does have to satisfy that designation of Shoreline Residential came through the full and proper planning process. That is what I would like to find. I would be pleased to answer questions later. - 6 - Mayor Beard: Before we take questions, Andria from this point is rezoning needed and if there is a subdivision to go on there? (inaudible) Andria Leigh: That is correct your Worship, there will be a public meeting on the by-law amendment. We have received an application and so we would expect probably later this year to have that zoning meeting so that people can address the issues on the draft plan. 8 Mayor Beard: At this point we will accept questions from the public here present or members of Council and would anybody making, asking a question or making a statement please come forward and speak into the mike and give your name and address please. Council would expect you to restrict it the subject at hand which is not, whether or not there should be houses on there but whether or not there was a mapping error. That is the only question to be questioned at this meeting. I think that should be perfectly clear. David Bohme: Mr. Chairman, my name is David Bohme, I am a resident of Woodland Drive and I have been since 1959. My roots go back much further than that, I had two great grandfathers that came to this part of the county in 1820. I have an abiding love for this area and I would make this summation on that background that I don't want to see it spoiled. 8 I am not prepared to accept that this has been designated Shoreline Residential. If one makes an application to have an area redesignated, to me there are three obvious steps: (1) there is the consideration by Council and by the public at large to consider it. (2) is the conclusion reached by Council but why are they doing this? The whole exercise is to have it set out in the Official Plan so that the'public can guide themselves accordingly. The opening words of the Official Plan clearly indicate that foots the intent. So, if you have something and I will accept that Council wanted to make it Shoreline Residential, but if it doesn't get into the plans, it is not effective. The opening words of the plan: "The whole purpose of the process is to inform the public," that is the opening words of the Official Plan. The Plan serves to reduce uncertainty for both the public and private sectors which may surround land use development alternatives. It is the intention of the plan to setforth planning policies to guide both public and private interests. Now, my friend can say what he likes but all the public knows is that when they look at that plan is that this is Urban Fringe and they guide themselves accordingly. To me, if it doesn't appear in the plan at that time, then it is ineffective. It is like a marriage that has not been consummated. It is like an offer where the person wants to accept it but the acceptance is not communicated to them. I don't know whether these plans that Andria is showing out, to me they are not available to the average person of public. I have got the book which I got, not only the plan, but the Zoning By- law and the Zoning By-law sets out very clearly in 1993 that it is shown as Urban Fringe. Let me give you an example. supposing that in the Official Plan it says that the set backs from the lake should be 100 feet, so people build accordingly. After three years, somebody comes along and says oh, that was a mistake, Council really said 60 feet. Now they start building 60 feet, what are the persons back 100 feet going to say? They are going to be looking at blank walls. - 7 - David Bohme: If you set a precedent on this that you don't have to really consummate it by putting it in the Official Plan, I think you are asking for sorts of problems. Now the other way around it, I suggest that you leave it as it is, Urban Fringe. Oro-Medonte is doing an Official Plan itself. I suggest that this should be taken in the whole picture when you are considering densities of populations, what you are going to do for other Shoreline Residential, etc. Mr. piil has not lost a lot, he has all of his professional reports and so on, he could bring those to those meetings and we will go back and we can start from scratch. 8 It may be that Orillia Township put notice of the Official Plan meeting in the Packet and Times, completely unsatisfactory. I can tell you Mr. Mayor without any quivocation, I have talked to 50 people, nobody knew this was happening. Now thank you Oro- Medonte for when something happens you send us a critical notice. But nobody knew, and if we had known, this would not be happening. Why don't you wait until you deal with it with your Official Plan and do it properly. Because I say, it has not been consummated, the public didn't know for 4 and a 1/2 years, you go and your by-law say Urban Fringe. Well, it not Urban Fringe now, you are saying it is something else. Thank you very much. Mayor Beard: On that I note I would comment that we are getting our Official Plan done and we welcome comments, that is what it is all about. Next? Dave Edwards: Thank you Mr. Mayor, my name is Edwards and I am a resident of Lot 89 Woodland Drive. Having lived there now for 40 years, I am quite familiar with the process that has taken place over the years and the Mayor invited us to go back and do some further research as of February 7th, so I did. I went and met with David Scott. Mr. Scott could not show me an Official Plan that this land was properly designated as Shoreline Residential which I am hearing tonight, with the greatest respect for my friend here. He did show me though a, I have got it here, a copy of a secondary plan for the lands between Highway #12 and the Division Road, which is the Horseshoe Valley Road extension towards Highway #11. That plan, that is in the By-law, Official Plan, for this secondary plan does show land down here, Mr. piil's to be Shoreline Residential. But I would suggest that that in itself did not create the mapping error, or didn't create proper designation for Shoreline Residential. The effect of an secondary plan does not change the rest of the Township. 8 You have heard a number of, one other point I wanted to make out, make to you sir, members of Council, was that I spoke with the former Reeve of Orillia Township, Jack Fountain, and I know to a great extent is hearsay, but Mr. Fountain irrevocably said no, they did not designate this land. We have at least 12 lawyers who are resident on Woodland Drive and I know that the residents that are there permanently would have noticed any due process if due process had of been taken to amend back in 1991. I know with the earlier Official Plan designated does, the City of Orillia Urban Expansion for the protection of the land for proper development when the City of Orillia demonstrated a need for the land. The designation at that time was that it was a very restricted designation, no severances allowed, no development whatsoever, recognized only the existing lots. At that point I took it up with the City of orillia Planning Department. The City of orillia Planning Department knew of no application to amend that land down there to Shoreline Residential. So this, prior to the notice from the Township of - 8 - Dave Edwards: Oro-Medonte, none of the residents, the city of Orillia who has a vested interest in that area or member of the council of the day that I spoke with knew anything about it so I am not certain as to how we can be satisfied that due process was involved. Thank you very much for the opportunity. Aubrey Golden: My name is Aubrey Golden and with my wife, Judith, we own 64 Woodland Drive where we have been summer residents for 31 years. 8 We also, received no notice of any sort that this land behind us was intended to be designated as anything other than what it is, Urban Renewal. This is a very difficult problem because there isn't a sole on that street who had any notice of any change or any proposed change in the use of that land either in the Official Plan or in the Zoning By-law. Now that is a very difficult hurtle to overcome. Aside from that, I should say, what is going through my mind as I point that out is welcome to Orillia Township (inaudible) and you know what? You can't get 12 lawyers to agree to anything except that notice has to be given and notice wasn't given. The other point that I think 12 lawyers would agree on is that a municipality must act through its by-laws, its resolutions and in writing. Unless municipalities act that way, there is nothing verbal about a commitment with a municipality, as you all know, that is very important in planning and the reason for that is the certainty (inaudible). So we are in a situation where the by-law, whether it is conflicting, or whether it is actually legal the way we think it is. That by-law is whatever it says it is. If someone wants to change the Official Plan, the Official Plan is the same thing, what it says it is. I hate to be literal about it and we all know that people can make mistakes but in municipal law you don't make mistakes (inaudible) with a resolution saying there is a duplication here. Of course there are important planning issues, the planner should is usually involved in all of this and that is a separate question, but addressing the question of the technical error and whether or not is should be corrected by a resolution of this Council, it is my respectful submission to you is that it can't be. The only way the Official Plan can be amended is by amending the Official Plan according to procedures set out in the Planning Act. That would also be true of a Zoning By-law. This is not a small map. This is not somebody forgetting to cross a T or dot an I, this is 63 acres of land in very, very prime residential areas in which we all have an incredible large emotional and historical investment. I don't think this council would start governing our part of Simcoe County by taking something like this at face value and saying, alright, we are going to correct a technical error and face you with an Official Plan of which you have never of before, which would involve the construction of any number of residences. 8 There is a subdivision to the south of us on the next concession, on the 2nd Concession; I am sorry, Maplewood. When people go and buy a lot in Maplewood, they know exactly what they are getting. When people buy a lakefront lot in Maplewood, they know they are buying part of the subdivision. No one on Woodland Drive is in that privileged position. This is not an area in which you would normally zone that way. The Official Plan might very well have refused to put that area of deciduous land onto what is a Shoreline designated area. I strongly urge you to stay with the precept that it is written, that is what it is and it can't be changed unless the process of your Official Plan development, you choose to bring the matter forward and I am quite sure Mr. piil and representatives would be glad to do that. - 9 - Mayor Beard: Further questions from the members of the public? forward and state your name. Please come william Mitzak: My name is William Mitzak of Lot #74, Woodland Drive. I believe that this does go beyond a mapping error. I mean, letters were written here showing general concern and I think that the concern should also be voiced now. 8 I have taken a few notes here and taken a look at a few things and it is quite evident that whatever errors have been made over a period of time, be it from the Township of Orillia or whatever. I believe that this is a new day now, I believe that the Township of Oro-Medonte has gained control of this area and I don't believe it is worthy to maintain errors in the past and for you to continue those. I really believe that you have a huge outcry here. And, you also represent our interests and based on that, I think that it is a new day and it should be taken from scratch. Thank you. Mayor Beard: Any further questions? Martin Rain: 8 My name is Martin Rain and my wife's letter has already been read earlier. I got the Committee of Adjustment Application back in 1992 to the Township of Orillia. At no time, was there indication to make Shoreline Residential, in other words, for about six or eight months, I was back and forth to the Committee of Adjustment so that I could sever a piece of land from the back lot, and that is the little 240 x 240 parcel, which is excluded. The intent was that you cannot develop that land. We don't want it developed, we don't want it touched, we want it Open Space and whenever the Committee on any occasion, and I think we were up there 3 or 4 times, their indication was, whatever you are going to do with this land, you are not going to create a building lot. Very, very simple, you are not going to create anymore building lots in that back lot. Well that was fine, we had no intention of doing that. The severance was technical because it was owned by two owners, one of which was getting very old and feeble. We never proceeded with it because of the restrictions as the letter said, were so stringent that you probably are going to end up with a piece of land, 240 x 240 that would never, ever, and I mean ever, change from any kind of designation over the next 100 hundred years. So we didn't proceed with it. (inaudible) Mayor Beard: You don't have a problem with releasing information.. Unknown: Excuse me Chairman, I am not talking about that, I am only talking about that, I am only talking about the time it was written back then. That was correspondence, that wasn't a public thing, but if somebody is looking to find out what the situation was, they wouldn't get any enlightenment from those letters. - 10 - Mayor Beard: I was just making the point Unknown: Let me say that Mr. stagg, when he was here when I came down, was most helpful and I have no objections at all. Aubrey Golden: 8 Is it possible that the zoning didn't actually take place, because there was no water access provided. They said it was clear that they were not going to do it and there is no indication that they actually passed it, I would just like to clarify that. Mayor Beard: Your name again sir? Aubrey Golden. Mayor Beard: Thank you, I should have explained earlier, we tape these so that we get an accurate transcript and if you don't speak your name of course then we can't put your name in the transcripts. Andria Leigh: Maybe I could address that point. Just to clarify, we are dealing with the Official Plan at this point and I do have some other comments that I will talk about afterwards. That letter clearly indicates that they have redesignated it to Shoreline Residential but they were not willing to waive the requirement for the water access. So, Mr. piil is still required to provide public access as per the Shoreline Residential requirement. So it did say, yes, we will redesignate it but you have to deal with the water access issue at some point, before development occurs. Aubrey Golden: What is the water access issue. have? How much are they suppose to Andria Leigh: If I can look it up, there is a requirement within the policies, 8 unknown: I get 319 Andria. Andria Leigh: Yes, I will read it out for Council and the members of the Public. It indicates "such waterfront access shall generally be used for public use, comprised of 1 lot area, not a series of smaller lots spotted along the shoreline and located within the exterior boundaries of the proposed backlot site, extended towards the shoreline and not at some other location on the shoreline. The maximum density of this development shall not exceed 2.5 dwelling units per net hectare or may otherwise be determined by the conditions of the local authorities of ground water supply". There is a specific requirement that I will read - 11 - out. It says "the minimum waterfront access requirement shall be 1.5 metres of frontage and 30 sq. meters of beach area for each back lot where the number of back lots proposed is less than 50 units. Where the level of back lot development proposed exceeds 50 units, a waterfront access site plan shall be prepared by the applicant with respect to the location, extent and nature of the facilities and provided for review and consideration by Council. Unknown: Do they have that? 8 Unknown: No. Dave Edwards: Just on that point then, we are getting into the planning nature of the application, that the applicant doesn't have that water access that is required to be, that Mayor Beard: You are getting into the, it is not dealing with whether there was a mapping error or not. Aubrey Golden: By restricting it to a mapping error, we just can't lose site of the fact that there may be a reason why, it doesn't get into the zoning by-law, besides the fact that there is a mapping error. It may not have gotten in there because this is spot zoning, we are talking about one little piece of land and you don't do spot zoning if the people don't qualify. I have never seen a Council yet who would give you a spot zoning if you didn't meet the terms of the spot zoning, I don't think this Council and I don't think anybody would. Mayor Beard: Mr. cotton, you had a question a while ago. councillor cotton: I would like to ask a couple of questions. Are you satisfied Andria that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs created this alleged technical error? Andria Leigh: 8 Through to councillor Cotton, yes, I am satisfied. councillor cotton: So therefore, you are satisfied that at the time the Township of Orillia passed the Official Plan these lands before us tonight were designated Shoreline Residential on the adopted schedule? Andria Leigh: I can't say that specifically because the schedule shows both designations. It would be an intent to only show the Shoreline Residential designation and that I am satisfied of but the schedule clearly shows the two designations and that is why the applicants are back before Council at this point in time. - 12 - councillor Cotton: So the principal of development or for development has been established as part of the property as the schedule shows from 1991, part of the Shoreline Residential parcels. Andria Leigh: No, all of it is both. 8 councillor cotton: Based on the overlapping? Andria Leigh: Based on the overlapping designations on the map. councillor cotton: Was this done Consultants. by the Ministry or the Township Planning Andria Leigh: It was done by the Ministry. councillor cotton: Is there correspondence from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs that they are admitting that they made an error? Andria Leigh: No, not at this point in time but they would certainly be (inaudible) . councillor cotton: I am wondering if they admit that they made the mistake, why wouldn't they modify the plan if they made the mistake because tonight it is a technical issue you are allegedly dealing with, you are also, by modifying and amending that Official Plan, you are establishing principal of development on that property. Andria Leigh: 8 We asked the Ministry to look into a modification of the plan and I have to look back and see, but they did not recommend it at that point, they saw it as a time overlap, but I can check and see what Mr. Zubowski letter specifically said as to why they did not want to proceed with that route. councillor Cotton: Yes Mr. Mayor, just to the audience here, one point of information. When the Township Official Plan for Orillia was adopted by Council in November of 1991, there is no requirement under the Planning Act to circulate notification of the passage of that document to each and every ratepayer. That is regulation in the Planning Act. They do have to notify the public which is usually done through a newspaper ads, advertisements saying that we have adopted this Official Plan. But there would be no independent individual notification to ratepayers. You have a whole series of schedules and written documentation, so you have to sort of watch when things are happening with the Public Notices in the paper. - 13 - Hr. Bohme: 8 Mr. Chairman, in answer to that Sir, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. There are seventy people along that lakefront and nobody knew about this. Now granted, it appeared in the Packet and Times, but this is a public area, people don't get the Packet and Times and after the summer months, there is less chance of getting it and I think there is an alternative, you could do it that way or else you could mail notices, to particularly the ratepayers themselves. We get the Notice of Assessment and the tax bills out, I don't know why that can't be done too. It is probably budgeting but it is obviously not advisable in these circumstances. Now I go back to your question about the department of Municipal Affairs. In the letter of Mr. stagg's dated May 18, 1995 writing to David Scott. He talks about the problem that there is and Mr. Stagg says "three possibilities seem open to correct this error. (a) Use an eraser in the back room, which may have been the best way, (b) Request Ministers modification of approval of Township of Orillia Official Plan and (c) Initiate an amendment to the Official Plan," and then he goes on to say "route (a) is not a way that is appropriate, Mr. Lou Zubowski advises route (b)" which is the one that gets Municipal Affairs to do it "Mr. Zubowski say is not acceptable and we are now discussing route (c)", which is what we are doing now. So they refused to do it. Mayor Beard: Your name sir? Hr. Bohme: Bohm, B. O. H. M. Mayor Beard: Any further questions on this particular issue of the alleged mapping error. Dave Edwards: Just one very brief matter, I am not sure what, you have read letters from almost everybody on Woodland Drive, but there was the gathering of 36 some such signatures opposing the mapping error amendment. 8 Mayor Beard: Do you wish to comment members of Councilor members of the public? There being no further questions or comments, when being called for the third time, the Mayor in closing the meeting, thanked those in attendance for their participation and advised that Council would consider all matters before reaching a decision. He then advised those present that if they wished to be notified of the passing of the proposed By-law, they should leave their name and address with the Clerk. - 14 - MOTION NO.1 Moved by Craig, seconded by Cotton Be it resolved that this Special Public Meeting of Council (Part of Lots 19 and 20, Concession 2, formerly Township of Orillia) now be adjourned at 8:25 p.m. 8 ~i~ð-J ÞL~! MAYOR IAN BpJARD DEPUTY CLERK LYNDA AIKEN 8