Loading...
08 19 1992 Public Minutes I THB CORPORATION OJ' THB TOWNSHIP OF ORO SPBCIAL PUBLIC MBBTING WBDNBSDAY. AUGUST 19.1992 '7:30 P.M. - COUNCIL CHAKBBRS FORTY-THIRD 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: Mr. Gus Sarantopoulos, Mr. Conrad Boffo, Mr. Harvey Boehm, D.W. Jones, Mr. Glenn Bryenton, Mr. Ritchie Austin, Mr. Norman Roe, Mr. John Haverlock, Mr. Ross Bradley, Ms. Gladys Arff, Mr. Stephen Woodrow, Mr. Garth Daniels, Mr. Bud Arbour, Mr. Donald R. MacDonald, Ms. Vivian Bell, Mr. Bruce Bigelow, Garbis Mounouforian, Ms. Vera Spring (Mountouforian), Mr. Alex Ochrym, Mr. Alan Wayne, Mr. Rick Hunter and Mr. Rick Jones. 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 Zoning By-Law Amendment, pursuant to provisions of the Planning Act, 1983, section 34 (12). The applicants have applied to rezone certain lands described as: (Site A) Part Lot 20, Concession 6, (site B) Part Lot 20, Concession 9, (Site C) Part Lot 21, Concession 12, and (site D) Part Lot 21, Concession 9 To date, the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Oro have not made a decision on these applications, 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 these applications. Notice of the Public Meeting was mailed out on July 31, 1992 to all property owners within 120 metres of the subject lands. Notice of the Public Meeting was also placed in both the Barrie Examiner and 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 two letters had been received from the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (1) Lot 21, Concession 8; (2) Lot 20 Concession 6; stating that both applications were located outside the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority watershed. - 2 - 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 Zoning By-Law Amendments. Kris Menzies: The purpose of the Public Meeting tonight is to afford Council the opportunity to hear Public comment in regards to four rezoning applications. Those rezoning proposals are located on Part Lot 20, Concession 6, Part Lot 20, Concession 9, Part Lot 21, Concession 12, and Part Lot 2 Concession 9. The proposals before Counci this evening are two fold, most of which are an Industrial Holding Zone, some of which are Commercial Holding Zones. On th Public Notice and I will start to refer to these properties as they were on the Publi Notice as site A, B, C and D. with site A being on the Western end of the municipality as Part Lot 20, Concession 6. I think it might be appropriate Mr. Reeve to provide a little bit of a background in regards to what the Official Plan was and how these amendments are before Council. On March 20, 1989, Council of Oro Township adopted an Official Plan Amendment. That Official Plan Amendment is No. 37 and you will hear specific reference this evening to O.P.A. No. 37. That amendment redesignated several portions of land alon Highway 11 from primarily the Agricultural Land Use Designation to a Commercial Industrial Land Use Designation. The four rezoning applications before Council this evening are proposed to bring into force and effect these Council adopted Official Plan Land Use Designations. The Official Plan Amendment which is O.P.A. No. 37 as I have previously mentioned, is currently before the ontario Municipal Board and a hearing is scheduled for early October to hear the amendment. Council did receive four applications for four of the parcels which they redesignated under Official Pla Amendment No. 37 and as such Council felt it appropriate to bring all four zoning applications to the Public at the same time. (The Planner indicated on the map the locations of the four zoning applications.) As I have mentioned, each application that is before the Public Meeting this evening, each applicant has requested a Holding Zone. What the purpose of the Holding Zon is, is in effect, if Council deems it appropriate to pass the Zoning By-Law Amendment, the properties will be held in Holding category until such time that appropriate studies are done to the satisfaction of Council and various other agencies before that Hold is removed. until such time that the Holding Zone is removed nothing can happen on the property - 3 - Kris Menzies: except for the existing use that exists today. As an example, if the property is currently vacant and Council deems it appropriate to rezone the properties to an Industrial Hold, that vacant use must continue on the land until such time as th Holding Zone is removed by Council. If Council deems it appropriate, after appropriate public consideration and appropriate supports being presented to them and various other agencies to their satisfaction, if the rezoning is approved, the Holding Zone is removed, each owner of the land is subject to a process in Oro Township which is called site Plan Control That is governed under section 41 of the Planning Act. So even before any Building Permits could be issued on the property, a more detailed analysis of the site Specifi elements of the site must be conducted. A agreement is signed and then registered on title. Certain Letters of Credit, for a specified time period are required for the specific site work. That would provide the Public Mr. Reeve, a little bit of background in regards to how the applications came before the municipality. I believe each of the four applicants has someone here representing them and they may want to be given an opportunity to discuss each of the issues. (The Planner indicated that the following people may be present to provide the public and Council with information in regards to their particular zoning applications:) site A - Mr. Rick Jones of Jorden and Jone and Mr. Marvin Giest of Duco and Giest site B - Mr. Bruce Bigelow site C - Mr. Rick Hunter site D - Mr. Harvey Boehm and Mr. Darwin Jones Mr. Rick Hunter: site C - Part Lot 21, Concession 12 I represent the owners of the property North of Hawkestone. The area that is being proposed to the redesignated include a portion of my client's property, basically a quadrant at the intersection 0 the 11th Line and Highway No. 11. The are is basically that area that is suppose to be designated by Official Plan Amendment No. 37. On the property at the present time there is a relatively new dwelling. It is located just to the South of the intersection of the overpass. It is actually in the area that is suppose to be designated Industrial. One of the things that we will be requesting later on in thi discussion would be that the boundary - 4 - Rick Hunter: between the Industrial and Agricultural Area be adjusted slightly to the North of the existing dwelling. I believe that would be North about perhaps 60 to 70 metres. The reason for that would be not to include the dwelling in the Industrial area. The second characteristic on this property that I wanted to bring to the Council Committees attention. Right at the corner of Highway 11 and the 11th line is a three to four acre parcel of land that was rezoned the General Commercial (C1) Zone, believe prior to 1989. That property has neither been severed nor developed at the present time. Further consideration that my clients wish to explore would be to have the balance of the frontage between the dwelling and the area Zoned for the C1 General Commercial use, zoned for not under the Industrial Holding but under a Highway Commercial (C2 Holding Zone). This I believe would be permitted under the terms of Official Plan Amendment No. 37. It would include an are that is approximately seven and one half acres in size with several hundred feet of frontage on the 11th Line and several hundred feet of frontage on Highway No. 11 It would surround the C1 Zone that is righ at the corner. The parcel that would be zoned in that fashion would also be betwee the 11th Line and the Environmental Protection area that follows the pond and the wetland area that runs through this property. This would leave I believe approximately 23 acres of land that would be designated or zoned in the Industrial category. We have not yet gotten to the stage of developing a concept plan for the property, we have only recently been retained by the new owners of the property to be evaluating a variety of concepts for the site; so we will certainly be here in the next little while with more detailed proposals. with that Mr. Reeve, we would generally support the efforts of the municipality in identifying O.P.A. No. 37 and also in proceeding with this Zoning Application. Harvey Boehm: I am the owner of Lot 21, Concession 9. What we are proposing Mr. Reeve is to rezone to the M1 Holding Zone the sixty acres that encroaches on Oro Line 9. The approximately forty acres in the back whic is Environment Protected as Wetland would not be affected by this. We have done preliminary sketches showing how the roads would go through and the lots be divided. I have been in touch with the people who own the property adjacent to it and they have no plans as yet but they have no objection of looking at anything we have presented. Mr. Jones the Developer has drawn up the preliminary plans that I can - 5 - Harvey Boehm: show you right now if you wish. Reeve Drury: Yes please. Mr. Jones: (Briefly explained the preliminary sketch to Council.) Mr. Bigelow: I represent Mrs. spring who owns site B, Part Lot 20, Concession 9, approximately 2 acres. Now Kris has shown what Mrs. Sprin owns in the entirety. The application for the Industrial Hold is just what is zoned Agricultural, the rest is Open Space and 0 course that is left as is. So it is not twenty acres it is about eight or maybe nine at the maximum at the East end of the property. It is a small parcel and it is bounded by Open Space which cannot be developed. It is scrub bush, it cannot be used for basically anything right at the moment and this is why we have applied to conform to the Official Plan to rezone it Industrial Holding. There is no plans whatsoever at the present time for any development of it right now. Rick Jones: Mr. Geist and I represent Oro Township Limited Partnership and our site is a little larger than the others. We have formalized our Zoning pattern within a Pla of Subdivision. The property is consisted of 67 hectares, about one third is wooded and the rest is grassy. Agricultural operations took place at one point in time The intention is to Zone most of it to Industrial but with the frontage along Highway No. 11 to C1-H. The C1 of course is a General Category. It is our desire t have a general category as we are in geographic association with Guthrie and th C1 Zone allows a greater range of uses which we think are more compatible with that urban situation. This is basically the makeup of the Plan. It has just been completed and submitted to the Township. No doubt there will be changes, however, i is fairly consistent in its overall layout with a submission made by Consultants abou four years ago in terms of road and lotting. This features 43 lots, I believe the other Plan had a different number. In any event I believe it is consistent with your intentions in terms of O.P.A. No. 37. Glenn Bryenton: I occupy a home on Lot 21, Concession 12. In other words that Industrial area that you are proposing would be 30 acres approximately just across the field from me. (Site C) When I received this notice my mind went back to the time when we were considering here once before the Commercia property that was much smaller along Highway No. 11 and Concession 11. At that particular time it was not severed but it only consisted of three or four acres. This portion tonight is thirty acres which is fairly large. For the residents of the - 6 - Glenn Bryenton: Village of Hawkestone and the individuals living in Cedarbrook Estates and Simcoesid Estates and in that area, I think that if an Industrial area was going to be created of this size, that this should be clearly indicated to us on the notice or at least by the Developer at another meeting. I think that this is a tremendous size Industrial Park as far as we are concerned I think some of us would be concerned what is going in there, whether its light industry, heavy industry or is it just straight commercial. Reeve Drury: Perhaps I could alleviate some of your concerns. The municipality's Industrial Program is strictly light industry, the same type of thing you would see in Forest Home Park in Orillia. There is garages there, woodworking shop, welding shop, tha type of thing. It has to be a dry industr where nothing other than the employees would be using the septic system. The Cedar pointe Plaza is the typical thing we would love to have here and those are the types of dry industry we are looking for. Glenn Bryenton: I wish that you would really seriously consider, it is presently Agricultural and would be considering very carefully. stephen Woodrow: with the Central Oro Ratepayers. First of all I would like to ask why is Council entertaining a Holding Zone applications when this amendment is still to become before the O.M.B.? Is there a purpose in that? Kris Menzies: The referral before the ontario Municipal Board is for the Official Plan Amendment. Council felt it prudent if certain individuals who were land holders of the lands which were subject to the amendment, if they wanted to come forth with their rezoning that some of them as in the case of an example Mr. Boehm and Mrs. Spring, where they don't have specific plans today for development today, that it may be more appropriate for Council to consider a Holding Zone on the property which would give them the added assurance that any studies which may need to be done in order to justify the zoning, could be done to th satisfaction of M.O.E., M.N.R., the municipality and so forth. That it would be less appropriate to entertain applications without the Holding Zone and that is to negate those assurances for the municipality and public. stephen Woodrow: So Council isn't trying to create an artificial demand on these properties. Reeve Drury: No. stephen Woodrow: Secondly, we have an Industrial Subdivisio over on the 4th, which presently I think only has one occupant. stephen Woodrow: Reeve Drury: stephen Woodrow: Reeve Drury: Conrad Boffo: stephen Woodrow: Reeve Drury: Donald R. MacDonald: Reeve Drury: Donald R. MacDonald: Kris Menzies: Donald R. MacDonald: - 7 - I realize a lot of properties have been sold but there has been no development there, it has been around for fifteen years. I am wondering what criteria does Council have when considering demand for Industrial properties in Oro Township? Ho do you establish which properties get designated for Industrial and which properties don't? In answer to that question. Official Plan Amendment No. 37 was done by way of a stud almost four years ago and that study indicated each of the lands that should be looked at for Industrial uses. The Township would like to get a land bank, enough Industrial property for the next thirty to fifty years so that people do know what is going to take place in those areas. Wouldn't it have been prudent not to entertain any specific land owners until after the O.M.B. hearing itself. The Planner just explained that to you. Did I hear Simcoe Oro Ratepayers? No, C.O.R.A. Could you tell us where you live Mr. MacDonald? You didn't ask anyone else that. Well I'm asking you. I live in simcoe County in Rama Township. I have a question for Kris Menzies. Do yo not think that you are discriminating against those in Agriculture when you consider Agricultural lands and state here that they are "vacant". I am referring to mutuality in the Human Rights Code for ontario. Is that not a discrimination? In regards to the comment I made about vacant lands, that was an example in regards to how a Holding Zone is utilized. If I could, you may be taking out of context. The Agricultural designation of the land is a generic example I provided. Vacant from a planning standpoint in regards to buildings means without building. You can have vacant rural land, vacant industrial land, vacant commercial land and the generic example I provided wa simply to state that if a land is currentl vacant and in a Holding Zone it remains vacant. It wasn't to state that Agricultural land in any other context are necessarily vacant. I am sure the minutes will varify that. I have to express a concern about the infrastructure of the cities. You have costly services in the cities and here it Donald R. MacDonald: Kris Menzies: Donald R. MacDonald: Alan Wayne: Reeve Drury: Ritchie Austin: Kris Menzies: - 8 - is just basically speculators, that opposed to this. scheduled for the scheduled for? serving a land grab for is my feeling. I am You stated that it was O.M.B. What date is it There is a one day prehearing being scheduled in this room on September 30, 1992, and prehearings are utilized to determine specific parties and specific concerns. A three week hearing will commence in this room as well on October 5 1992. The notice to that will be coming out of this office by direction from the Board in a week or so. Anyways, I feel seeing as it is still Agricultural you should not refer to it as vacant land as yet. It is still Agricultural until it is determined at a Hearing. I have one basic concern that is classifie as maintenance, noxious weeds, etc. There is a lot of this property owned by people this present time that has become nothing but weeds. Specifically, the one at the 5th and 6th in between. At one time it us to be a farm, I assume the property is still farm land, Agricultural; I would like to see it ploughed under or cut. I don't know who you would speak to, but there are some other properties around tha are basically the same way. I would like to see Council possibly approach this with these people. Thank you for bringing that forward, I wil ask the consultants to take that back to the respective land owners and make a request for them to cut the weeds. Failin that, once our advertisement goes in the paper and if the weeds are not cut, we wil cut them and charge it back to the land owners. Our family owns property adjacent to Lot 20, Concession 9, we are Part of Lot 20, Concession 9. What I am concerned on is I never received any notice at all on the rezoning. I have talked to Kris about it. I am just curious to see if there is a possible problem why I didn't, or an address problem, because my mailing addres is a Barrie address not an Oro. The municipality in their Official Plan an through the Planning Act as well, is required to put notice in Newspapers which at the discretion of the Clerk has satisfactory enough circulation. This municipality chooses to put notices for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendments in the orillia Packet and Times and the Barrie Examiner. We also endeavou to provide first class mail notice, peopl within four hundred feet or under the new Act one hundred and twenty metres. If you were missed on the list, I would have to Kris Menzies: Ritchie Austin: Reeve Drury: Donald R. MacDonald: Kris Menzies: stephen Woodrow: Reeve Drury: stephen Woodrow: Reeve Drury: - 9 - apologize to my staff for missing you. However, if there is either one possibility, they overlooked your particular property, you are not within 12 metres or the assessment roll which we currently have doesn't list your address. My main concern is that we will be notifie from now on, anything that goes on after tonights meeting. Yes, please leave your name if you wish to be notified as there will be no more Publi Notices in the Paper as such, so please leave your name. Official Plan Amendment No. 37 has several other properties other than these, have they been rezoned as such, or are they going to be before this hearing? No, the application before Council this evening is in order to obtain Public comment and is on these four particular properties. Yes, Official Plan Amendment No. 37 did identify other properties, some of which Council has removed from the amendment by Ministerial modification, others of which the land owners have not come forth and requested rezoning. It is their choice as to whether or not they hav identified themselves as a party to the amendment. There is no zoning application before council, other than these four. council seems to have a lot of development on its plate. Again, with amalgamation coming I was wondering if a lot of this is being permitted in a rush manner in order to slip under before that occurs. I wonde what discussions are going on with Medonte Township since we are going to be one municipality. Medonte Township Reeve and Deputy Reeve came forward after the last Public Meeting and were ecstatic about this Industrial Development that is taking place in Oro Township. They congratulated us and said keep up the good work. What I am concerned about is it seems that this is instead of an Industrial block wit proper service, much like what we hope to have over in Guthrie on the 4th Line, whic hasn't progressed. We have gathered Industrial/Commercial Developments along the Highway and I am hoping that there is specific criteria for this and it is not the case of the Old Boys Club trying to help out their friends. In 1989 when we did the site, Official Pla Amendment No. 37, a study took place and was done by Township Consultants and they picked out ten or eleven properties at tha time, the municipality decided to take out three or four or five of those properties Reeve Drury: stephen Woodrow: Deputy Reeve Caldwell: stephen Woodrow: Reeve Drury: Donald R. MacDonald: Reeve Drury: Donald R. MacDonald: stephen Woodrow: - 10 - so I don't think there is any Old Boys Clu going around. Again, the Public hasn't had a chance to question that. Mr. Reeve I think we should point out that most people may not be aware of it but O.P No. 37 did have a Public Meeting and everybody did have the opportunity to comment at the time. There were comments pros and cons about some of the parcels that had been identified by our Consultant and that is why some of them were removed. Some of them were also removed after results from the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, so the Township has reduced what we were looking at and I quite frankly couldn't tell you the names of any of thos property owners unless they come forward and identify themselves. I realize there was a Public Meeting and concerns were exempted but that is not similar to cross examination under the O.M.B. process. Of course there was consultants, but again the criteria has no been put through the after test of the O.M.B. These holding zones should not be put in place until after that O.M.B. Thank you, Council has called this Public Meeting to hear what the Public has to say and consider everything. I think Steve has overlooked the one on where the Hydro is, the Industrial Park up there, very little of this has been utilized or being sold. Where are the industries, where are the people working there, they don't seem to exist. It could. The Planning Act, and the time it takes to get Plans in place, jeopardize us getting a lot of development going on i Oro Township. There was many people looking for a place to put small factories and light industries but we didn't have th land ready at the time. We learned from our mistakes back then. We must have the land ready when another boom comes along s we will get those factories and industries and jobs for people. That Sir is basically the same story I hea from Orillia. Yet there are many, many vacant parcels that are withheld by speculators. One other comment I would like to make tha concerns me and it is not anything to do with any of the properties but what is happening here tonight. Whenever Mr. MacDonald comes before this Council, he seems to be chastised for not living in th Township. He is a taxpayer in the County. We are all familiar with his quest to stephen Woodrow: Reeve Drury: Councillor Crawford: Garth Daniels: - 11 - protect farmland in Ontario. I think he has as much right as anyone else to ask a question and I don't think you Mr. Reeve amd have said numerous times and singled him out as to where he lives and I don't think that is right. That is your opinion, thank you. I think it is important that you realize why we are looking at Industrial land. We have got to find a place for people to work. I was to Toronto this morning and back and that Highway is something else again. A few people going to work in Toronto yesterday, met with their death. Do we always have to go to Toronto to find jobs for people to work or are we going to try to get some up here? This is the reason the Township is trying to find Industrial land and Commercial land up her so that you can live in Oro and work in Oro. Why do you have to live in Oro and work in Toronto? It is the stupidest thin you ever saw, going down that highway day after day, burning gas, wearing out cars, when that Industry could be up here. If w don't have land available for it then it i going to be down there because they always have land to build for Industry in Toronto Here we are sitting with no Industrial lan whatever to offer the people that do want to come so we cannot supply jobs in Oro. To me this is just shameful that we should have people living here and no place to work in Oro. We did it with Horseshoe Valley and Horseshoe Valley is the biggest employer now with over some 600 people and that is just one instance. As far as farming is concerned, I don't see farmers coming in here day after day looking for some places to farm. I am an old farmer and I appreciate the industry but nobody i knocking on your door to buy up agricultural land to work. There isn't on piece of land in Official Plan No. 37 that is good Agricultural land it is all very, very marginal. There isn't a better use for it than what we are proposing. I tend to agree with some of the things that you say Councillor Crawford but everybody doesn't drive to Toronto. You can drive to Barrie, the South end there i Industrial land there with buildings on it that nobody has been in for two or three years and I don't know when they are going to be occupied. You drive to Orillia and you find the same thing. We work in Barrie, we work in orillia, some of us wor in Toronto. Barrie and Orillia have the infrastructure, they have the sewage facilities, they have natural gas, they have the proper hydro, things which we don't have here. I am not saying that we shouldn't have some Industry but I look at something like this with this magnitude an I think it is maybe biting off more than you can chew. Councillor Crawford: Glenn Bryenton: Reeve Drury: stephen Woodrow: Councillor Crawford: stephen Woodrow: - 12 - Just a couple of comments. Somebody has t look at the future and I don't mean a year or two years to the next election. Somebody has to look down the road twenty- five, thirty and fifty years and that is what we are trying to do. It is all well and good to say I can't see it happening, well a lot of the Industrial units were no in Barrie twenty-five years ago either, bu you have to look a long way ahead. site number D has been farmed and there ha been some trees planted on it but I notice that every so often there is corn there an there is other field crops that grows, someone harvested it because I can hear th equipment going. I think it is pretty wel used as farmland with the exception of the house that is on it. I think all the sites have been farmed at one time or another, I don't think there i any dispute about that. We don't want to be misunderstood here. W realize Councillor Crawford that Oro Township has to plan for Industrial/Commercial in the future. But lot of what is happening in Oro Township seems to be helter/skelter and we would like the Council to consider other land uses when it does consider its Industrial growth. A lot of cities when they are doing plans, plan Industrial blocks where it doesn't interfere with residential or maybe an agricultural, recreational use. am just concerned that maybe this isn't development that may be conducive to futur Industrial planning in Oro Township. Wouldn't we be better to establish an area of an Industrial block where we can servic in the future instead of strip development along the highway. I am not saying we are against Industrial development, is this th right plan for it? I think if you look at any of the Highways throughout ontario you will find that the land closest to the highways is Commercial and you go back a little further. All you have to do is look at the North end of Toronto, and you will find there is an are left next to the highway for Commercial an then you will find the Industry back about a quarter of a mile and then the Residential is beyond that. with the Highway going through Oro Township from on end to the other I can't see it changing. Who wants to live next to the highway with all that noise so it is a good place for Commercial and Industrial. I can drive through Toronto and see exactl how it is. I don't live in Toronto becaus of that. What I am saying is if I am looking for an Industry, I don't drive along the 401 in Toronto looking for it, I look it up in the Phone Book and hopefully stephen Woodrow: Councillor Crawford: stephen Woodrow: Reeve Drury: stephen Woodrow: Reeve Drury: Deputy Reeve Caldwell: - 13 - it is in a well planned Industrial Subdivision where I can find it easily. Just because Toronto is developed that way doesn't mean we have to. I just hope that Oro Council is looking at alternatives also, other than Amendment No. 37. If we build an Industrial site five to ten miles off the Highway because it happens t be a site that we think is satisfactory, who is going to build the road to it? The closer you can keep to the Highway the les expense you have and that is why the Highway Corridor is the place. I am not going to sit here and argue all night. This Council has tried to look ahead a few years. If some of the people in the Township don't want to catch up with their thinking, fine, we will put up with all th objections. But we still have to plan because that is what we are elected for, t look at Oro and look at the future of Oro and plan. If we have an Industrial Developer who comes along after this amendment is passed and says ok I don't wish to locate anywher in this subdivision, I want to develop my own subdivision in a block, is Council the going to say to any Industrial Development after that, that I am sorry we have too much Industrial land on our table now we are turning you down even though your subdivision would be acceptable but it is just not viable because we have too much 0 our plate? You are giving an indication that we have already turned one proposed developer down We have some extra land in our O.P. Amendment No. 37 which we are hanging on t cautiously and a developer came forward to ask for a piece of land to be considered and we said no. Just to answer your question, it is no. That is what I am concerned about, our Industrial Development is going to be then channelled into O.P. No. 37 when there may >be a viable alternative somewhere down the road which Council ignores. We have done our studies and those studies dictate to us that these are the areas we shall look at and determine viable and tha is it. These will be the areas that this Council and the past Council and the forme Council have looked at and agreed that these are the areas that should be developed industrial. I guess if all thre Councils are wrong and you are right. I think the important thing is that we hav had our Planning Consultants look at the Horseshoe Valley Road, Highway 93, Highway 11, Old Barrie Road, Shanty Bay Road, any place that has highways or roads that coul handle truck traffic. Their , . , ,\ ~ - 14 - Deputy Reeve Caldwell: recommendations came back, not Horseshoe Valley Road, not Highway 93, but this corridor and only where there are existing overpasses because you can easily get the traffic on and off. That was the rational behind O.P. No. 37. When we had the Publi Meeting, I don't recall anybody saying tha that rational was wrong. As a matter of fact if there was any objection it was taking the land out of Agricultural use. That has to be justified when we go to the Board and if it can't be justified it will not come out of Agricultural use. Yes, it was looked at and very thoroughly. Only one Council has made a decision on it and that was the last Council when O.P. No. 37 was passed, but it was considered by the previous Council. This Council is only looking at four proposals for a holding zone of different types on these properties. The decision was to bring the to the Public for Public comment. Council has not made a decision. We may choose to approve none, one, many, all, or look at others, if these are not suitable. I thin you are jumping to the conclusion that Council has gone ahead. We try to encourage all these developers to come forward at once, so its all on the table with nothing being given and nothing being slid by, all out on the table. Conrad Boffo: I have two comments. Industry and transportation, they make sense to have Industry where there is transportation. I want to make a comment on having three Councils having looked at this one here an having some members of Council re-elected three times, they must have done a good jo and I congratulate you. Gladys Arff: I just wanted to make a comment to Deputy Reeve Caldwell that I did comment on the flyovers. I also have a question about th corridor and Councillor Crawford suggests that we have to look fifty years ahead, I think we are fifty years behind. 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. MOTION NO.1 Moved by Mortson, seconded by Crawford Be it resolved that this Special Public Meeting of Council (Propose Amendments to the Zoning By-Law) now be adjourned @ 9:00 p.m. Carried