Loading...
08 19 1992 Sp Public Minutes ,II " ~ . THB CORPORATION 01' THB TOWNSHIP OF ORO SPBCIAL PUBLIC UftING WBDNBSDAY. AUGUST 19.1992 .. 7100 P.M. - COUNCIL CHAKBBRS FORTY-SBCOND UBTING 1991-1994 COUNCIL The following members of Council were present: Reeve Robert E. Drury Deputy Reeve David Caldwell Councillor Alastair Crawford Councillor Joanne Crokam Councillor Leonard Mortson Also Present Were: Ms. Kris Menzies, Mr. Rick Jones, Mr. Rex Meadley, Mr. Gwido Papa, Mr. Patrick Capobianco, Mr. Alan Wayne, Mr. Conrad Boffo, Mr. Bud Arbour, Mr. Stephen Woodrow, Mr. Garth Daniels, Mr. Greg Howse, Ms. Sharon Howse, Ms. Jane Ball, Ms. Janet Keith, Laird Keith, Ms. Muriam Owen, Mr. Hartly Woodside, Ms. Kathleen Clarke, Mr. Gordon Ball, Mr. Ian Beard, Mr. Norm Daziel and Mr. Mike Elereld. Reeve Robert E. Drury chaired the meeting. Reeve Robert E. Drury opened the meeting by explaining to those present that this Public Meeting was to receive public ,comments wit respect to a proposed Official Plan and zoning By-Law Amendments, under sections 17 and 34 of the Planning Act, 1983. The applicant has applied to redesignate and rezone certain lands d~~cribed as Part Lots 1 and 2, Concession 7, (Sabiston). ' ' To date, the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro 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 July 31, 1992, to al property owners within 120 metres of the subject lands. Notice of the Public Meeting was also placed in both the Barrie Examiner and the Orillia Packet on July 31, 1992. Reeve Robert E. Drury then asked the Clerk if there had been any correspondence received on this matter. The Clerk responded by indicating that one letter had been received from Mr. Clifford Well stating that he had no objection to the proposed developmeDt but proposed a reduction in speed limit on County Road 22 from 80 km to 60 km between Concessions 6 and 8. The Reeve then stated that those persons present would be afforded the opportunity of asking questions with respect to the proposed Amendments. He then turned the meeting over to the Township Planner, Ms. Kris Menzies, to explain the purpose and effect of the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendment. "\ "'. - 2 - Kris Menzies: This Public Meeting is to consider an Official Plan Amendment and a Rezoning on Part of Lot 1 and 2 in Concession 7. The current Official Plan Land Use Designation is Rural and the proposed Land Use Designation is a site Specific Resort Area Designation. The site Specific component would permit year round occupancy of any dwelling units which are constructed on th property. There is a similar designation currently existing on Phase III of Sugarbush. The Zoning By-Law Amendment which is subject to this Public Meeting is two fold. One is a General Residential Zone which would permit the development of Single Family detached permanent Residential Units on a Plan of Subdivision The second Zone being requested is an Open Space and is commonly referred to an OSl Zone. There is a portion of the North end of the property which the proponents feel should be placed in that Open Space Zoning At the time of the development, the Public Notice which may have gone out to certain members of the public in the mail as well as in the Newspaper which stated that a seventy-six lot Plan of Subdivision is being contemplated, since then the proponents have received additional hydrogeological information which would support an eighty-three lot Plan of Subdivision. Both Rick Jones from Jorden and Jones and Rex Meadley from C.C. Tatham and Associates are here on behalf of the proponents of the development and they may have something to further add. Rick Jones: Before I begin I have a couple of hand out I will pass around. As Kris has explained the purpose of the Public Meeting is to redesignate lands from Rural to Resort Residential to rezone the Rural zoning designation to a category supporting Residential Uses. In this particular case the compatible zoning designation with the Township's Zoning By-Law is (RG) Residential General. The intentions behin the application for redesignation of rezoning are reflected certainly more precisely in this hand-out which reflects the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision. I would like to caution everyone that although this represents the most recent refinement of the Plan, certain other changes will probably be forthcoming as a result of more detailed scrutiny by the Township. The supporting documentation for the application and indeed the Public Meeting this evening is an amendment in relationship to Buffalo springs which deal with the County Road 22 Corridor. What it did was not designate but project on the South side of County Road, five clusters 0 residential uses. We happen to fall withi a cluster of three which is known as - 3 - Rick Jones: Sugarbush III. The objective behind that study was to indicate the desirability of expanded Residential Uses on the South sid of County Road 22 in deference to the recreational resources of the area and mos particularly in consideration of the area was not suitable for agricultural purposes So five clusters was established in that study and Buffalo Springs being one of those, which was more advanced by the study. The development proposal we have this evening is in line with Buffalo springs in that it recognizes or tries to represent the objectives of the County Roa 22 Study in terms of expanded residential opportunity. The proposed Plan of Subdivision as Kris has explained consists of eighty-three lot at this time. As the hand out further describes is comprised of an Open Space area situated on both sides of the propose internal road with the larger part on the West side consisting of forty-one acres, coinciding with the low lying wetlands. 0 the East side a higher area, consisting of about one and three quarter acres which will be used for more active recreational purposes. The subdivision pattern is determined by the proposed internal roadwa which is twenty metres in width or sixty six feet. This road begins at County Road 22 at a single intersection point and extends Southerly and it is proposed to project into a Plan of Subdivision owned b Mr. Capobinanco. This extension at this time is a proposal; it was the recommendation of the Township's Plan Committee that the extension take place in order to accommodate the movement in a mor efficient way within the Southern area between the 6th and 7th Concession. sugarbush lies to the South and lies West, the Rowanwood Subdivision lies East. We understand from discussion the Township's Planning Director and Planning Committee that traffic considerations between these various developments are a primary concern so we have tried to address this within this designed framework. to th to th with The density is very low and the lots run from half acre to two acres. The variability of the lots has been determine by topography and soil conditions. The larger lots are located on those lands wit the much more sever topography and the smaller lots of course are on the flatter or stable topography. The overall gross density including the forty-one acres of open space is .6 units per acre which is well in excess of the zoning (RG) density which is normally found in these areas. - 4 - Rex Mead1ey: I would just like to make a few comments with regards to the Engineering aspects of the development. This large open space wa reviewed with the Health unit and it has a relatively high water table; is low lying in the centre area and not overly well drained. It was determined that they didn't particulary see development in that area and when we could accommodate it in open space, so we are not proposing any lots there. It is not a classed wetland, it can be utilized and developed into some sort of recreation use. The entrance onto County Road 22 is about three hundred metres to the East of the existing Sugarbush entrance and there is ample site distance in both directions. The majority of the site is tree covered and quite a bi of it is reforestation, not of great quality. Most slopes approach fifteen percent, with a few areas where they are above fifteen percent. The lot sizes do range from half acre upwards. The plan is being designed to provide 20,000 square feet of usable building area and septic area. The water supply will be by a communal system that is piped and we will provide additional wells and storage as needed. We hope to interconnect that to the Sugarbush system as one integrated municipal system. Mike E1ere1d: The entrance into this proposed subdivision, where is it exactly from the old Sugarbush; where is the Sugarbush entrance right now? Rex Mead1ey: 300 metres to the left. There is an existing entrance on the property with a concrete barrier. (Indicated on map the location) Rick Jones: We did try to meet with the Indian Park Association, a number of times and numerou calls were made but they were unable to attend a meeting but they have been given copies of this Plan. Norm Dazie1: I am the Deputy Reeve of Medonte Township and I live in Cathedral pines adjacent to Highway 22. I travel Highway No. 22 quite often and I find more and more people are travelling this particular route. At the present time there are a limited number of trucks, simply because the economy is in a I would classify it as a depression. As w add more and more residential houses to this area we will have more and more vehicles and we will as the economy improves have more and more trucks. As these vehicles go through that deep valley of Horseshoe, there is an ongoing hazard which will get worse and worse. The two Townships of Medonte and Oro are going to get their heads together and see whether 0 not we can encourage the County to make improvements on County Road 22 to accept greater traffic. - 5 - Norm Dazie1: One of my concerns in a situation like thi is that you add seventy-six more lots to what are already available in Sugarbush an those lots in Sugarbush have been dropped in price about $20,000. currently being offered at $119,900. Horseshoe Valley is considering 250 lots over maybe the next ten years, primarily townhouses on the Medonte side. As a result of zoning was granted in 1984 and 1985 there are a multitude of lots in the various phases at Horseshoe on the Oro side and those lots probably will not all be sold for twenty years. I am surprised to come here tonigh and hear of another development to the Eas and maybe more development to the South. What I sense is we are going to have a city. Mr Chairman, you and I have had discussions of this nature in the past and I sense that on the Oro side of the road you are encouraging development that canno be sustained, in other words, far too many lots. On the other side we are much more conservative. Hartley Woodside: I am presently building in the Rowanwood Subdivision and I have a number of concerns. It would have been very helpful to have had access to this information prior to the meeting, it is very hard to come to a Public Meeting without having a map of the proposed subdivision. I feel i is very difficult to assemble all the impact of this subdivision in the half hou of this meeting. We have a maple syrup bush that backs onto starting at Lot 69 and running all along the crest of the hill. That is a rural pursuit and it is not necessarily a pursui that goes hand in hand with urban type density. I have questions about the density in my own mind and considering the other proposed subdivisions, you are creating a suburb in the countryside and that has implications. I have concerns about schooling. Apparently Guthrie cannot get septic approval for expansion and it is within 5% of being full. Where are these children going to go to school? Is this being take into account? Are there lot levies to build the schools with, are they being asked for in the subdivision? I question why the land has to be filled with houses? I have concerns of excess usage of that particular syrup bush in terms of snowmobiles, all terrain vehicles, etc. with a very fragile ecology but yet a very productive bush and it is very difficult t keep when you have a proposed 80 houses adjacent to it. This is the headwaters to the Coldwater River that runs at the base of that hill that is in behind that same group of - 6 - Hartley Woodside: houses. I don't know how but the wetlands will be impacted, I am sure. Greg Howse: I live in Rowanwood. Mr. Jones, you state something about the creek that runs along through that property line and you stated that you were going to accommodate the ditches along the roadside with storm sewers if necessary, the land is all going to be drained into those ditches which run into our property and which runs right through the middle of our Sugarbush and could cause some problems. Another issue which disturbs me somewhat but is negotiable as you said yourself, is the fact that your road runs right through our property and the first we find as we walk into the meeting today. Another issue to, the Capobianco subdivision, we Rowanwood i a Conserver society, for those who don't know we have ninety-two acres and ten lots We keep eight-two acres as a Conserver Society; there is a lot of wildlife there What is going to happen to all the wildlif that presently live in the area? Obviousl they are going to leave or they are all going to move to Rowanwood which may not b so bad but it could cause some problems in the future. with Capobianco and Sugarbush coming down, there is very little green space left other than what you have proposed. I appreciate what .you have got there, the fact that there is going to be that open space. As a member of Rowanwood and our Sugarbush which also runs down pas Lots 73 and 74; I would appreciate more green space between the lots. We are goin to get runoff from the septic beds into ou Sugarbush. What is going to happen to the quality of our maple syrup? We are in the process of making an investment in that bush. It would have been appreciated if w maybe could have been consulted as well, being as you are running the road through our property. Gordon Ball: I also live in the Rowanwood Subdivision. I have not got a lot more to say other tha that I support what has already been said. To share my concerns around the Planning that goes into this. It doesn't make sens to me to have this kind of massive urban development in such close proximity. I am not against the development per say and we are in a development, we have ten lots in our subdivision. It doesn't make sense to me to have a ten lot subdivision next to a eighty-three lot subdivision with such a drastic difference in style of development with a fence between them. I would welcom the opportunity to sit down with the developers outside this media and discuss what is going on, rather than have to come here tonight and see for the first time what is going on. If we had had or could still have an opportunity to talk and discuss some reasonable compromise, which - 7 - Gordon Ball: would please us both. So if there is some kind of a buffer zone which makes the transition between our life style and what is clearly a very urban life style a littl less drastic. Reeve Drury: The municipality, less than six weeks ago, actually entertained this proposal at a Planning Advisory Committee Meeting, which was basically the first the local Council and the Planning Advisory Committee had seen this proposal. We had made a decisio to get the Public as soon as we can so the Public does know what is going on very ver early in the Planning stages. Several years ago we tried to prolong before we took it to the Public. Now we put the onu on the developer to bring all the information forward that is required and take comments such as you have just brough forward and sit down and meet with them. Reeve Ian Beard: I feel sort of in an awkward position as you can well imagine. My questions, and there are several of them, the problem is the justification. Given the fact that a rural subdivision in a rural municipality is actually a money looser as far as taxes go and is going to cost the existing taxpayers money in the long run; what is the justification being presented by the developer for a development at this time? At the intersection at Sugarbush, it is ba enough now. The Sewell Commission has come out and sai that they hoped that there will be no more subdivisions in rural municipalities unles they are on sewage treatment plants. Reeve Drury: There are several minor concerns such as wildlife and the animals. Medonte does no believe that there is a development strip along Horseshoe/22. We have seen subdivisions close to Horseshoe Valley as premature because we feel that it is not a development corridor and especially until there is something done with the road. I can assure you, myself and I feel the rest of Council will not permit development along Horseshoe Valley Road until there is sewage treatment plant control and until the road is updated. I just finished completing a well in the pine Ridge Ski Resort in Medonte Township and just to perhaps lay aside some fears the people may have, we drilled through approximately 125 feet of solid clay befor we got into the water aquifer which was at 240 feet. So it is very well protected in that area and I believe that type of an aquifer flows through the basic area of County Road 22/Horseshoe valley/Sugarbush. Sharon Howse: You said 250 feet of clay? - 8 - Reeve Drury: About 100 feet of clay. Sharon Howse: Well I find that strange because our studies show that there is only about 2 feet clay layer in Rowanwood. It is not consistent clay layer in the area. You ca find that there but not necessarily in thi development. Have you had hydrogeological studies done? Rex Meadley: Yes, there is hydrogeological evaluations done on the site and is documented in a report which is being submitted to the Ministry of the Environment and can be mad available. Hartley Woodside: Just on the subject of water, I would just like it to be recognized that the seven wells at Rowanwood are all dug wells so ar subject to groundwater contamination. Mike E1ereld: I live just across that green area and hav ten acres there. On the ten acres I have absolutely no clay it is all gravel. My water level is about four feet. It is the same thing in that green area across the road, it is very very wet they are really low lands. Kathleen Clarke: I am also living in Rowanwood Subdivision. I have a question about the green line tha goes all around these lands here. Is that a walkway or is it intended to be a bicycl path? Rick Jones: It would not be formalized as a bicycle path, it would be a perimeter walkway. Kathleen Clarke: I have a question about you said the hydrogeological study has been done; I am assuming that they were done to support th water table of this and other existing developments? Rick Jones: Yes, that is right. The calculation for nitrates has been done and it must meet Ministry of the Environment specifications and preliminary information states no more than eighty-three lots. Reeve Drury: Just to respond to your question on walkways. The municipality's basic concep of these walkways are nature trails and will be left in their natural state and no motorized vehicles will be permitted. Lard Keith: I am also from Rowanwood. I have a question about the end of the road that yo would like to have it come across that piece of property that road that we have. My concern is the amount of traffic that i going right through, then anybody can come from County Road 22 and go right through. To me it would seem we would be better to put a button at the end of that road. Rex Mead1ey: with the layout of the subdivision we only have one entrance on the County Road. - 9 - Rex Mead1ey: The primary reason for this connection would be to provide a second alternative entrance into this property. There would not be a lot of traffic going this way. Most of the people we would anticipate would use this road to go out to County Road 22 would just be a few people from th area, if there was an emergency for some reason, somebody might go that way or if you wanted to go down the 7th to this office you may come out this way, that typ of thing but I don't think there will be a lot of traffic going through here. Reeve Drury: The municipalities position on a long cul- de-sac like that is that we don't allow these because of safety reasons. steve Woodrow: I don't live in the area but I have some concerns about the municipality in general and the Planning. with Medonte Council speaking, there seems to be two different ideologies on the Highway 22 corridor. I was wondering with the two municipalities amalgamating in the near future, I was wondering if Council maybe should consider either freezing the area or getting together with Medonte Council with a more constructive plan between both Councils so that the new Council will not have a lot 0 development on their plate that it doesn't necessarily want. In other words sort of prearrange a plan before amalgamation. I was wondering, since amalgamation is occurring, when do the two municipalities have to get together in their planning principles? Reeve Drury: Once we are amalgamated by legislation we will get together and start renewing the Official Plan. I believe we are allowed five years to update and renew the Officia Plan. stephen Woodrow: Do you think there is any possibility of the Councils getting together now and discussing some of these problems? Reeve Drury: The two Councils have been meeting on a regular basis for the last eight to ten months. stephen Woodrow: Are any of those meetings open to the public? Reeve Drury: Yes, some of them are, not all. Katherine Clark: I wonder what would prevent the snowmobilers from using the trail around the property? What is in effect to preven them from using that trail and what recourse would we have if someone should see this occurring? Reeve Drury: I guess you could explain the municipality and the By-Law Enforcement Department look after it and basically they are not going to be cleared as trails, they will be . " - 10 - Reeve Drury: classed as walking, hiking trails. Katherine Clark: Is there any plans to put fencing between our property (Rowanwood) and the subdivision and would it be at the cost of the developer? Reeve Drury: Yes it would be at the cost of the developer and quite often the municipality does consider this. If you would like to put that in writing to us we will consider that as well. Any concerns that anyone has, please follow-up with writing please. Jane Ball: I am from Rowanwood. You were talking about the road going across the main road, I understand that there will be a right-of way (cannot distinguish the rest of what i being said on the tape) Reeve Drury: No, we cannot expropriate. Hartley Woodside: I do not know what happens after this and am interested in the process after this, what are the stages following this Public Meeting? Reeve Drury: We would recommend that the Developer meet with the neighbours to discuss the concern and we would ask the Developer to report back to Council. Council has been taking notes and the meeting is being taped this evening and when that is transcribed Council will review it and all the questions, comments and concerns that has been brought forward, we will consider the all. The developer will be bringing forward a By-Law for Council's consideration. Hartley Woodside: That decision will be at a Council Meeting Reeve Drury: That is correct. Hartley woodside: will the same people be notified of that Agenda of the Council Meeting or could we ask for that notification? Reeve Drury: Yes, after tonights meeting, if you wish t be notified of any more procedures in this development we will take your name and we will notify you? Hartley Woodside: will you notify us because our name is on the list or should we let your Planners know that we want to be notified. Reeve Drury: Let our Planners know. There being no further questions or comments, the Reeve in closing the meeting, thanked those in attendance for their participation an 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. . ' .. , . , . - 11 - MOTION NO.1 Moved by Caldwell, seconded by Crokam Be it resolved that this Special Public Meeting of Council (Part Lots 1 and 2, Concession 7, Sabiston) now be adjourned @ 7:50 p.m. Carried ~ é E. DRURY ~ 4.. á" .<:: / ~ f1d ~~ /( L RK DARLENE SHOEBRIDGE