Loading...
01 06 1993 Public Minutes 4 HB CORPORATION 01' HB IfOWNSHIP OJ' ORO SPBCIAL PUBLIC KBftING WBDNBSDAY. JANUARY IH. 1993 . 1105 P.M. - COUNCIL CBaHBBRS SBCOND KBBTING 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: R. Sheridan, M.A. Sheridan, V. Bell, Mr. Nelson Robertson, Mr. Jack Scott, Mr. Earl Robertson, Ms. Ruth Langman, Ms. Gladys Coleman, Mr. Henry Coleman Mr. John Cameron, Mr. Bernard Pope, Mr. Jim Langman, Mr. Eric Langman, Rev. Wm. Moreland, Mr. Daryl Simpson, Ms. Mary Lou Kirby and Mr. Thomas Wheaton. 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 described as Part Lots 5 and 6, Concession 14, (Davidson). 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 December 17, 1992, t all 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 December 17, 1992. Reeve Robert E. Drury then asked the Clerk if there had been correspondence received on this matter. The Clerk responded indicating that five letters had been received, two of which sent earlier in 1991 as a result of preliminary circulation completed by the applicant's consultants and as follows: any by were 1) Ministry of Agriculture and Food (October 24, 1991) stating they had no objection to the proposal and that minimum set bac distance of 350 feet from a small barn adjacent to the propose development would be required. Ministry of Natural Resources (October 1, 1991) stating they had no objection to the redesignation and advising that any stream relocation, driveway crossings of a stream or boat dock erection would require Ministry approvals. 2) ~ - 2 - 3) simcoe County District Health unit (July 2, 1992) requesting adjustment to property line between lots 3 & 4 in order that adequate building and sewage site can be created. Details regarding system and design to be provided at consent stage. 4) Ministry of Natural Resources (January 5, 1993) updated comments from first review. Regards is to be given to the Wetlands Policy statement of May 14, 1992, and request the applicant prepare a full Site Environmental Impact Study. Suggest that a decision be deferred until it is shown that there will be no adverse impact to the wetland as a result of the development of adjacent lands. 5) William Moreland, neighbouring property owner; supporting the application provided assurances that no environmental hazard results to Bass Lake. 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. Kris Menzies: The proposal is a redesignation in the Official Plan as well as an accompanying rezoning for Part of Lot 5 an 6, Concessio 14. The property fronts onto the Bass Lak Side Road, as well fronts onto Bass Lake itself. (Kris Menzies explained the notic that was received in the paper, indicated on map and explained the differences between the Official Plan and the zoning.) Kris indicated that an error was made by the municipality and that an area on the map was not subject to a rezoning or an Official Plan Amendment and is not subject to the Public Meeting. The property in yellow (portion of property error was made on) is owned by a Mr. Langman and Mr. Langman at this time has made no application to the municipality to have any changes made. The remaining area, the dot tone area is currently designated in the Official Plan as Agricultural. Mr. Davidson, the owner of the property wishes to redesignate that portion of his land from Agricultural to Estate Residential. This black area, Mr. Davidson wishes to redesignate the land from Environmental Protection to Estate Residential. The effect of this would be to permit, as the proposal sits today, four Estate Residential Lots to be severed from this property. Through an environmental evaluation that was done by one of Mr. Davidson's consultants, it was determined that in their opinion that this area here which is currently designated Agricultural in the Township's Official Plan, should in fact be redesignated to an Environmental Protection Zone. That would be more in keeping with what currently exists on the property. ., - 3 - Kris Menzies: As you heard, the Ministry of Natural Resources which has jurisdiction over that area from a Provincial level, has reviewed a report by Mr. Wheaton and you heard thei comments. The property fronts onto Bass Lake and along with the Official Plan Amendment being requested by Mr. Davidson are applicable rezonings which will follow the Official Plan Amendment which is a requirement of the Province. I believe Mary Lou Kirby of Kirby and Associates is here and she might want to elaborate on some more details of what Mr. Davidson proposes. Mary Lou Kirby: I would like to just start with a bit of background on this. I have been involved in this project for some five years now and it is hard to believe that we are finally at a Public Meeting. The Davidsons purchased the property in about 1986 and it was always their intent to build their own home on the property. They felt because of the special features of the property and the size of it, they would like to do something else with it in terms of some form of development. It was my recommendation at that time that we have an environmental evaluation done on the property just to see what could happen because it was obvious there was very sensitive areas on the property. A firm of Environmental Advisory Services was retained to work on the project and Mr. Wheaton who did most of the work, along with some of his associates, is here this evening and we will have the opportunity to ask some specific questions about that aspect of it. The final conclusion of this report boils down to this part of the property which I have outlined in pink (indicated location on map) should be designated Environmental Protection because of a wetland area, also areas of organic soils and seepage zones from slopes. He also concluded that the Agricultural fields at the front of the property had a lower classification rating than the Provincial mapping indicated. What we ended up with was here, as well as this hardwood covered ridge here (indicated location on map) that appeared to be suitable for some form of very low density development. The plan that we have developed was based on that environmental evaluation and reflects the conclusions and recommendations of that report. To back up a little bit, we came to Planning Advisory Committee over a year ago and at that time a decision as to whether or not a Public Meeting should be held was deferred until the Township's Amendment No. 48 was approved by the Minister. That Amendment developed new policies for Estate Residential Development in the Township. II - 4 - Mary Lou Kirby: What it does essentially is it sets a quot system as to how many estate lots can be allowed in any particular year and we had to wait until that was approved by the Minister before we could proceed to the next stage. We attended again a Planning Committee just before the end of the year and at that time the Amendment was approve and we are now proceeding to this Public Meeting. As you heard from the correspondence, we have been dealing with the various approval agencies for well ove a year. The Davidsons decided they really did want to build their home and because i was a vacant property and they could build on it under the current zoning and they proceeded to do that this past summer and I am sure all of you were watching the activity out there. Their house is locate here (indicated location on map) on what will be Lot 1, if this development is approved. The intent is that a second lot be severed and created just to the West of that and a partner of Mr. Davidsons is intending to build on that site (indicated on map) and there would be two additional lots created by consent on the West half of the property and they are considerable larger than these. The middle lot, there are two possible building sites, one up near the road and one at the end of the hardwood ridge. If this site was built on and with this building site there would be only one new house that would be visible from Bass Lake Side Road during the season while the leaves are on the trees. I think the plan really respects the rural nature of the area. ill Shaw: I am from the Orillia Fish and Game Conservation Club. The Orillia Fish and Game Conservation Club have operated a wildlife sanctuary across from this property since 1963 approximately and have been in the area since 1947 when George Langman donated his property to use the wildlife sanctuary. We have a lot of concerns. This sanctuary was developed because it is a rural area, it is a wildlife area and we are concerned today about conservation and wildlife natural habitant being maintained. We are concerned that land that is designated Environmentally Protected and if it is rezoned and not Environmentally Protected land, it was made that way for a reason. To rezone it for some other type of zoning for building and so on, that concerns us a great deal. We do not understand how you can do that. How do you do that? ary Lou Kirby: The Environmental mapping that was done when the Official Plan and the Zoning By- Law were done, it is a very broad brush sort of mapping, it did not look at sites in specific detail. On this particular site the line just sort of went through the middle and did not really bear any - 5 - Mary Lou Kirby: relationship to the actual features that were on the site. So the study that Mr. Wheaton undertook was to better define tha line. Instead of having a fairly straight line, it actually includes more land now under the Environmental Protection than it did previously. It just changed the location of the line. Bill Shaw: As you know, Bass Lake is now densely populated. If you drive along the Lake yo will see that there is two areas left. Th West end and this particular area, is the only area left that is natural. At one time it was farmed I guess and was not goo for farming so it went back to the natural state. This property is a natural habitan for wildlife and is also a natural habitan for the fish species that are in the lake. There is no docks or boats and is an area where fish are not interrupted if they are spawning, etc. and is not interrupted by human activity. That type of development will change that and that is the only plac left on Bass Lake like that. In the past we just did it and we looked back and woul say, gee we shouldn't have done that. We destroy nature and you cannot get it back. This really concerns us, the whole Club. If you are a naturalist, it is the only area where certain species of wildfowl nest. They won't nest in the swampy areas on the West end, but there in the rocks, wood ducks and other things nest in that area and there is just a few but there are only a few left anyway. The wildlife sanctuary is there because that area is no developed and I know the homes are not going to be right on the sanctuary but it still will interrupt, the traffic, the people. I would love to have a home on th lake but maybe it is time to make decisions the other way, protect the environment. That is our concerns, what is going to happen if these things go on? A precedent will be set and if the next person comes along and wants to build, they will say they did it so why can't we and so it keeps going. Once you allow one to go, a precedent is set and then the whole area is developed. r. Wheaton: Thank you very much for your comments and your concerns. Let me give you a little bit of background about myself. I have seven years of training as an ecologist and I have eighteen years experience in the consulting field dealing with natural systems, so I understand your concern about what happens to natural systems when you do anything to them, if you alter them, if you disrupt them or that kind of thing. I believe also that I have enough background to be able to do a reasonable prediction of what will happen in certain areas and that is one of the reasons why Mary Lou first came to my firm and asked me to do the Environmental Study on this portion of it. II - 6 - Mr. Wheaton: As she has already mentioned there is that initially broad brush stroke that was take and looked at and we knew it needed refining and I went in and did that refining. Based upon my report and the conclusion of my report, I in fact extended, shifted it a bit, but actually made larger the Environmental or natural features area that was in there. In my report I also came up with mitigate measures which would help to protect that environment. Given those kinds of things, my feeling is we are not disrupting a natural habitant. What we are doing is we are refining it, putting protection on the areas that need the protection but also allowing for the areas which are not so sensitive and allowing for other uses rather than just letting them sit idle. I terms of the natural area on Bass Lake, I did not do a comprehensive study of all th natural areas around Bass Lake so I cannot comment about whether or not this is the last natural area. What I can say is that this area that I looked at very closely is in fact connected with the area that the Orillia Naturalist Club has and is part of the Langman Class 3 complex. There is also a Class 1 wetland up near the Bass Lake Class 4 wetland complex, very large, so that there are linkages if you would have it with other natural large areas. So this is in fact a very small portion of it. There are migratory routes for animals all the way through, so by eating into this portion of it (indicated on map) which I have already shown is not that sensitive, we are not disrupting that sort of natural flow of things. We were very careful to make sure we did not do that kind of thing. You mentioned something about woodduck nesting. Where do they nest on this property? ill Shaw: They nest in the forest along the shores. r. Wheaton: I saw no evidence of that while I was out there, and I did a comprehensive full seasonal survey. In any event when it comes to any of the species that you mentioned that this might disrupt and have them move away. Based on my conclusions I would have to disagree with you on that and simply say no. By putting the proposal as Mary Lou has put it in and keeping the natural areas the way we have suggested, the wildlife that is in there now are not going to be pressured to move anymore than they are at this present time. ary Lou Kirby: If I could just add something, it relates to the second letter that was received from the Ministry of Natural Resources and if you recall, it indicated that an Environmental Impact Study, they are going to require that. The Implementation Guidelines for the Provincial Wetland II - 7 - Mary Lou Kirby: Policy has just been issued before Christmas and we have all only had a chanc to have a brief look at it. What this means is that the information that Mr. Wheaton has gathered on the site, plus the information that is known about the Langma Marsh, is going to be looked at again in another report done in the formate require by these Implementation Guidelines. The main focus of that is to make sure that none of the functions that the wetland areas are serving are going to be lost. S I think there are certainly going to be ample safeguards to make sure that those concerns are addressed under the most current policy of the Ministry. Mr. Wheaton: Just let me add that this part of the Davidson property that was zoned Environmentally Protected area (indicated on map) was not put in as part of the Clas 3, Langman complex. After my report came out I suggested and recommended and the Ministry agreed that it was part. So you can see what we are trying to do is bring out all the environmental aspects. Bill Shaw: Our concern is not necessarily just with the wetland, our concern was with the development within the area itself. You are not going to build houses on the wetland, we understand that. We understand that there is another microcosm of wooded area that is part of this and is natural because they havn't been farming that area for a long time, it has been left wild. It is a wild area in all aspects, not just the wetland and if you build houses there you are going to drive out the species that live there. There is an interaction between the wetland and the species that live there. The birds interact with the animals of the wetland and so on, all the animals interact. If you interrupt one part of the ecosystem you are going to interrupt the other because there is a balance that has been there for a number of years. You build a home, cut down trees, put in roads, septic beds, that is going to drive out whatever is there and it is going to upset the balance in some way. There is no way you can get around it. The decision is if you are concerned enough about that, not to let it happen. I disagree, you can not put roads in, build houses, have docks, laneways, and not drive species out. If you do a study on any type of a system, it takes a number of years to see the interaction, you just cannot go in and look at it and walk through it over the summer and maybe once or twice in the winter, you have to look at it and make a decision over a number of years. If you look at other wetland areas that is how scientific information is developed. - 8 - Jim Langman: From Bass Lake and I am a former owner of this property and I would like to make one comment and refer to the map if I could. Mr. Langman indicated on map and defined the line showing the wetland area. Mr. Langman felt the line was not correct and proceeded to show where the line should be. Mr. Wheaton: Mr. Langman, were you the one that diverte the stream and rechannelized it through here. Mr . Langman: We cleaned it out. Mr. Wheaton: But were you the original one that interrputed this from its natural flow through here. Mr. Langman: That is the natural route. Mr. Wheaton: No, this has been channelized. Mr. Langman: The other was done by hand by my Great Grandfather. Mr. Wheaton: You are quite right in one way that there is a high water table through these areas. Now there is certain things that have to be in place before you can call something a wetland, it is not just based on one or two variables, there is a number of things. In my report I have referred to all of this, I just have not necessarily called it all wetland because it does not necessarily have all the attributes that it needs to be determined a "Wetland" according to the Ministry of Natural Resources. Some of them are wet old fields and some are not. The other complicating factor is there has been a beaver dam this year which has increased the water table and has begun to affect and change the vegetative communities through here. No question, I will not disagree with you in terms of the fact that there is a high water table through here, but that has been addressed in my report and adequately covered I think and thank you for pointing those things out to me. eeve Drury: Mary Lou, could you point out where the houses are proposed to be situated? eeve Drury: (Indicated locations on map) On those sites, are there any trees that actually have to be cleared to any great extent? ary Lou Kirby: ary Lou Kirby: These two sites, there wouldn't be any clearing required. On this site there would be clearing required, actually there is some very large old maple trees there, the tree growth is not very dense, just several very hugh trees and if you took out a couple of them you could put a house in. II - 9 - Mary Lou Kirby: I think if you took a look at the clearing that occurred around the Davidson's new house that is probably what you would see, you wouldn't see anything larger than that on both of these locations. Daryl Simpson: I am with the Orillia Fish and Game Conservation Club. There is one comment I would like to make. The Wetlands Policy statement was eluded to and I believe it i a requirement of the Zoning Change By-Laws that any property owner within 120 metres be advised and so on. The same setback requirements, 120 metres of a wetland and lands collecting the individual wetlands within the wetland complex, come under the Wetland Policy statement. Is this propert not the same area amounts? Mary Lou Kirby: Yes. What we understand from speaking wit the Ministry recently is because of the connection between this wetland and this wetland which has been identified; all th lands in between are going to be considere adjacent lands, in terms of the Policy statement. So the study that is being don is going to be looking at whether development can occur on those adjacent lands under the definition of the policy and what mitigation measurers if it can occur, will have to be imposed. Daryl Simpson: Then you are saying the adjacent lands are part of the wetland complex? Mary Lou Kirby: There is the wetland complex and there are adjacent lands. Daryl Simpson: You don't think it will take any loss or any use in the wetland functions, as state under the policy objectives? Mary Lou Kirby: That is what we are going to be looking at in greater detail. Bernard pope: I live at Lot 6, Concession 14, South side of the Bass Lake Side Road and right across from Mr. Davidson's property. My purpose for being here tonight is to object to Mr. Davidson's proposal. My concerns which I will try to show are those that go in hand with a strong farm background and I am currently farming. I have a great love and respect for the land and all of nature. The Wheaton report said that the stream flows from Langman Marsh to the Langman Beach at Bass Lake is a coldwater stream with no coldwater species. The report also mentioned the Beaver Dam in this creek. Before the Dam was built, I saw the creek thick with suckers in the springtime and later I also saw many six to twelve inch rainbow trout. The Dam of course prevented these fish from coming up the creek which has been considered the best possible creek on the Lake to foster these species. The Kirby Report does not follow the Wheaton Report that recommends that the Langman Creek be zoned as an Environmentally II - 10 - Bernard Pope: protected parcel in its entirety. If the low land is Environmentally protected and the Langman Swamp is considered a Class 3 Wetland then surely the creek would need t be zoned as an Environmentally protected parcel. On the North side of the Davidson property there are three drains that were built between 1987 and 1991. These are perpendicular to Bass Lake and from what I can see from the Lake they are quite effective. I object to straight open ditches because of erosion and I would suggest that the ditch part of the propert is responsible for major source of old recharged water. As such, the Open Space Zoning on there should be retained. The Wheaton Report recommended that any building be fifteen metres from any major slope, but from reports Mr. Davidson's house is over the slope overlooking these ditches. I don't believe that Open Space Zoned lands should be sacrificed for Estat Residential and thereby allowing a possibl road access to the private lanes serving the cottages to the North-East of Mr. Davidson's property. I oppose and will always oppose the practice of taking Agricultural Zoning away from Agricultural Lands. I have no problem defending the smallest field in its value and integrity. Mr. John Sewell, Commissioner for the Commission on Planning and Development, voices his concern from Agricultural lands quite clearly throughout his Draft Report which just came out December 18, 1992. I wish to read a few excerpts from Mr. Sewell's Report. Under the municipal role it states the Upper Tier Municipality should be required by the Act to prepare and adopt a Municipal Plan, among other things, that Plan should protect the natural environment and Agricultural and other resources. Of course this Township would be under a Lower Tier, which is responsible to the Upper Tier. The purposes for Planning in section 2 of the Planning Act should be amended to provide that an exercising power under the Act, the Provincial Government, its Ministries, Agencies, Commissions, Boards, the O.M.B. and its Municipal Government, Agencies, Commissions and Boards and all other Planning Authorities shall have regard to matters of Provincial interest such as the protection of eco systems including natural features and functions, the protection of the Agricultural resource base of the Province and the conservation of natural resources. Under the topic of Agricultural Land Policy they say the goal is to protect quality Agricultural areas for long term agricultural use. Quality Agricultural areas will be identified and protected for Agricultural use except for expansion to Communities that meet the tests outlined in Policy 7 and 8 of the II - 11 - Bernard pope: proposed community development and infrastructure policies. Areas of local Agricultural significance may be identifie and protected. As you can see, the Commission is at last testifying to the value of farmlands and the need to preserv what is left. The Kirby Report discusses the farm to the East, that being Mr. Moreland's property. For two years roughly, Mr. Moreland electe not to crop his fields but last year he came to an agreement with Charlie Horne an as a result we took hay off all possible areas and this would show that this farm i also active in production. The Kirby Report makes great discussion about the limited value Agriculturally of Mr. Davidson's two fields. In past discussion with Mr. Langman, I discovered these field were a vital part of his operation and shared equally in the plans of crop rotation. I believe in 1986 the crop was corn, 1987 the lower field was planted in oats and seeded down to hay. This land I believe is to be Class 2 or 3 and as such is quality land. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food has the following concerns according to the Kirby Report. (Mr. Pope read from the Kirby Report) The definition of high quality Agricultura land is land that includes specialty land crops and/or Canada Land Inventory Classes one, two, three Agricultural capability soils. Quality Agricultural land may be identified through an alternative land evaluation system approved by the Ministry of Agricultural and Food. I object to the possibility of a house or houses on the small open field to the Sout side of the property. According to the policies of the Official Plan, lands which may be considered for Estate Residential Development must avoid prime Agricultural land and be removed from any Agricultural operation, according to the requirements 0 the Agricultural Code and Practice. This development must also be located in scenic rolling topography with suitable building sites that has sufficient tree cover to restrict visibility of buildings from abutting lands and roads. I also doubt that some of the clearances may be met in this small field. I would further object to any house that close to our own house. The representative from the Fish and Games discussed the disruption of wildlife and before we put our house there, apparently there was a fox running there. Well we don't see the fox anymore, so that is proo as far as I can present it, to his statement. The last concern and one of great importance to me is the right to farm. I have been involved in farming in one way 0 Bernard Pope: Darlene Shoebridge: Bernard Pope: Mary Lou Kirby: - 12 - the other, all my life and this land where I live has been farmed since 1832 by Mr. Langman's family. I would hope that there would never be any objection of any kind t an act of farm operation on this land. I have one question. When the Clerk was reading the correspondence, what was the last date on the last M.N.R. letter? January 5, 1992. Their letter is dated January 5, 1992, but it is stamped as bein received by our office January 5, 1993, so I would presume it is a typo on their letter. In conclusion, I would like to ask the Township to consider these points and suggestions and if approval is given, I would ask that Environmentally Protected Lands be increased to include all areas North West of the Hydro Easement, everything between there and the Lake and an area twenty feet on either side of the creek all the way to Mr. Moreland's property and also include the area to the North West of Mr. Davidson's property wher those ditches are following the 258 metre contour line to the Northerly limit of Mr. Davidson's property. I would also ask tha all remaining lands South and East of the creek be left in Agricultural Zoning with prohibition of any buildings on any of these areas. And if for any reason there is any lot allowed, that the Township of Oro insist on a Development Agreement to b put on title that would ensure forever our right to farm on Lot 6, Concession 14, South Side Bass Lake Sideroad. I would appreciate that the Council and all concerned parties keep me informed of any developments in this issue, if possible. Just to clarify the Agricultural issue. We had Mr. Wheaton's Associates look at the Agricultural Code of Practice as it relates to Mr. Pope's barn. He presently has I believe twelve animals. There was some indication in the past or possibly the intent in the future is to have up to one hundred head of cattle on the property so we used that number in our calculations, not what he has existing in his barn. We came up with a separation distance of 500 feet. The closest building site is 250 metres which is I believe around 700 feet, so we are well in excess of what we would suggest is the minimum. The letter that the Ministry of Agriculture and Food wrote indicated that they required a separation distance of 365 feet. We have considered that aspect and we are well within the Agricultural Code of Practice in that regard. What you were quoting from my Report was actually from Mr. Wheaton's report. That was a general indication of what the Ministry's concerns are in the Province. - 13 - Mary Lou Kirby: We are not saying that this field can't grow crops, it obviously has grown crops and can still grow crops. From what I understand from Mr. Van Weesenbeck who inspected the site for the Ministry, it wa his feeling because it was not associated with an active farm, it was a very small area and it doesn't have that high of a capability rating. Bernard Pope: I think perhaps you missed my first statement. The first statement was to protect the integrity of any piece of Agricultural land. Mary Lou Kirby: Yes, I recognize your position, I am just clarifying what the Ministry's position is on this and also what we looked at in orde to locate these building sites. The other thing I think I should mention, you indicated that you wanted Environmental Protection along the stream and various setbacks and I think once we go through this next report with the Ministry of Natural Resources to identify what can happen. If there is going to be development allowed, I am sure the Ministr will want controls as to what could be done, if anything, in the wetland, in term of Boardwalks, or small docks or whatever. All of these matters can be addressed in the zoning By-Law, in terms of permitted uses. There can be special setbacks applied on the various lots to make sure that there is no buildings out here. All of these things can be dealt with at the time the zoning By-Law is actually prepared. Bernard Pope: This objection that I read was written before Jim told me that there was going to be a new study done and so it was my suggestion to her and she said we have already done it about the strip along the creek. ary Lou Kirby: There are many controls that prevent you from doing anything in creeks and it took several months to get the proper approvals to put the access across the creek to Mr. Davidson's house. So there certainly are protections built into our various regulations. ernard Pope: You are still defending the house on the small field. I would like to read again where it states compliance of policies for Estate Residential Development and it states that such development must be located in scenic rolling topography with suitable building site that has sufficient tree coverage to restrict visibility in building of buildings from abutting lands and roads. That house on the slope on the road would be more visible than my house across the road. II - 14 - Bernard Pope: I would disagree with you on that. Your house is up on the top of the hill. This would be down below the brow of the hill. You certainly woul see it but you would have difficulty seeing it driving along this way. It is completely open, there is no tree cover at all. Mary Lou Kirby: Mary Lou Kirby: There is no tree cover along here, there is tree cover coming this way and there certainly could be trees planted. Bernard Pope: But that doesn't match with this. It says you are suppose to have the trees, not maybe some time we will plant some, like I did. Where I buil was an open field and we planted 400 trees just around the house and 3000 in behind. But that is not natural cover. I have to maintain my point 0 disagreeing with you there. Mary Lou Kirby: I don't think you can disagree with the fact that this is rolling topography, it is a very interesting piece of property. You don't want a house built out in the field and thes gentleman don't want them built in th woods because of the wildlife issues. Reeve Drury: Before you leave Mr. Pope, would you please read again that request you made to the municipality. Bernard pope: My final request was that if for any reason there is any lot allowed on this property that the Township of Or insists on a Development Agreement be attached to title that would ensure the right to farm on Lot 6, Concessio 14, South Side Bass Lake Sideroad. Bernard pope: In past dealings with that type of legislation, we are advised that if this municipality did register something on title it would not hold any water whatsoever. But the Province has passed the Right to Farm Legislature which would allow you the right to farm. I understand that too, but Right to Farm means that I would have to defend my right to farm. Reeve Drury: ill Shaw: As a representative of the Orillia Fish and Game conservation Club, we are not against development. When people moved in around us, we hoped they would appreciate the natural area that is there and try to maintain it. What we see is someone who can see a development and to make money on it. We cannot condone people from making money but we really are concerned - 15 - Bill Shaw: that this area is a natural area. Th meeting was very short notice for the club or we would have had thirty or forty people here. That area is very important to the Club and we hope it is very important to the community. It is the only natural wetland privately operated. We are not against development and if you develo you develop but I know it will be ver sad if that goes. That is what we are trying to do is maintain habitant around and we will maintain these things that are there that will never come back. We appreciate the proposal and why their intents, we are not against people doing that. Unfortunately it is very close to our back yard and we have been fighting these things around the whole Orillia, Barrie area for a long time, hoping that some parts will be left as they are and left natural. We have been loosing one after the other and have not had a lot to look forward to and have seen a lot of things disappear around the area and we hope sooner or later people will take a stand and say yes, natural habitant is important too. We hope you can take what we said and think about it and let us know what is going on, we would like to have information sent to our Club. ill Moreland: You will hold your nose after the statement you read in my letter. I found it very difficult to operate in the length of time between the time I got the notice and the time of this meeting tonight. My lawyer thinks that maybe you were just within the line of twenty days. Now that is not your fault it is probably the governments fault in their delivery system around Christmas. I am glad I was able to come tonight. It does seem to me that it would be better if you could have given a little bit more time. You have to take out of that stretch, Saturdays, Sundays, you have to take out New Years Day and Christmas. It is just a suggestion that if it is this important, I think a longer period of time should have been given. ris Menzies: In response to the Notice Time, the Planning Act in ontario regulates the time a notice for a Public Meeting has to go out. They state in this particular case twenty days. The ontario Municipal Board which is at a higher level than at a Council level which holds a lot of legal jurisdiction over what happens in . . - 16 - Kris Menzies: regards to the Planning Act, gets very, very upset with municipalities if they provide nineteen days notice or twenty-one or more. They are real sticklers for the twenty and I think you will find that every municipality who is dealing with the twenty day time frame makes sure that it is twenty days. Bill Moreland: Is that twenty calendar days? Kris Menzies: Yes that is correct. Allan Johnson: You have the wonderful privilege tonight of having people of varied opinions. I too am a neighbour and I have come here tonight and I am among my neighbours and my friends. come from Lot 7, Concession 14 so fro on top of the hill I overlook Mr. Pope, I overlook my friends from the Sanctuary, I overlook the proposal an I overlook Mr. Moreland and I guess from where I am I guess I am just one of the neighbours in the community. am not here to speak on specifics, I am not here to tell you I am a conservationist, I am not a naturalist. Really Mr. Reeve I am just a nobody and I had no where else to go tonight. I would maybe like to challenge you to a few thoughts and that is, tonight there has been some good comments made on behalf of my friends from the Conservation Club an Mr. Pope has brought out some good concerns. I too come from the Agricultural community and I too am concerned about Agricultural concerns but I am more concerned about preserving the farmer rather than the land. You can preserve all the land you wish but if you don't preserve th farmer, it will grow up in weeds like a lot of other vacant farm land. I guess Mr. Reeve you and your Council have the wonderful decision that will satisfy everybody and I trust you will listen to all the people and in so doing, the way I see it from where I sit, you have two choices. You can say no to this proposal, not pretty easy. You can get Kris to write the people a nice little motherhood letter with all the phraseologies that are appropriate for the terms that are required and basically a no is easy. Or maybe I could challenge you to think about some other concerns. First of all I would encourage you to go up and walk the property, even if you have to wait until spring. I would encourage you to take a look at what is there now. And maybe I should state that I am here tonight as an individual, I have II " - 17 - Allan Johnson: not been approached by anyone to stat for or against, I am just speaking as a nobody. I would hope that you will take a look at the concerns that have been listed tonight by the people tha have addressed their concerns. But I guess that my concern is that as you look at this proposal, what do you se as the future of this property? Yes maybe somebody can cut a bit of hay off those fields, someday that hay will run out and then what. My concern is does it become another statistic where it grows weeds like a lot of other abandoned properties! I guess Mr. Reeve, I would like to challenge you and the other members 0 Council to take a look at the residence that was built there this past summer, take a look at what was done before they ever got across the stream. Take a look at what was done and what it did to our local economy in a depressed state and I guess I am saying to you that there are maybe some better purposes that could be used in this property. My concerns will not be the same as Mr. Popes because he has to look across the roa and I have a little further to look. I am on top of the hill and in the library looking out the window, and looking down across this, I am a lot further away than most of the people that have spoke here tonight, so therefore I won't be sharing as strenuously the same concerns as Mr. Pope or as my friends from the Sanctuary. Now I said that because I don't want to find my tires flat on my old Ford when I get out. Mr. Reeve, If I could challenge you and your council to take an on site visit and take a look at what you are really dealing with and I would leave it up to you, I know you will make the right choice and I know that in the future I can some day when I am going that way to town, I can say that this Council of the Township of Oro made the right decision for the right use of that property in the future. eonard Mortson: How many entrances will there be on the Bass Lake Road? Kirby: We are proposing that there just be two. (Indicated locations on map) My understanding is that the last letter received from the Ministry of Natural Resources requested that we defer any decisions on this until the Impact Study was done, if there were development on this property? eputy Reeve caldwell: 1\ ~ - 18 - Bill Shaw: The Environmental Impact study, would that be done by the Ministry of the Environment or by the Ministry of Natural Resources? Kris Menzies: The studies of the Implementation Guidelines will be done by the proponent or in this case likely Mr. Wheaton, the consultant for the proponent and is submitted to the Ministry of Natural Resources for their review. Bill Shaw: Having dealt with several of these issues over the last number of years, we have found that Environmental Impact studies done by a consultant hired by the particular people involved was a Conflict of Interest. It would be better that if when an Environmental Impact study is done it is not done with association with the people who are involved with the development of the property. We have found that the reports tend to lean. The ontario Municipal Board, if you g that way and ask the ontario Municipa Board to have a Environmental Impact study. That is another route to go i that right? Kris Menzies: The requirements for the study, you would have to speak to the Ministry 0 Natural Resources to change their policy in their guidelines. They won't send people out as I understand into the field to do it themselves. You may hold your own opinion in regards to whether or not a report is skewed, however, in my opinion, professionals at the Ministry of Natural Resources Office are reviewin them. So regardless whether a particular report you feel comes out skewed, you do have an independent Provincial Ministry reviewing that report. In regards to the Board, I have no direct knowledge as when the Board has asked that an independent party do a particular report. You have expert witnesses which are challenged by the other side. ary Lou Kirby: We have had to challenge groups and we have had to go to the Ontario Municipal Board to get an Environmental Impact study done. If you challenge a development because of the Environmental aspects of it, can you not go through the ontario Municipal Board to do that? On that point, to get to the point I understand this Council would adopt this amendment, we have to do the study to satisfy the Ministry of Natural Resources. Is that correct? Then the amendment would be adopted and then you would have a chance to Bill Shaw: II J - 19 - Mary Lou Kirby: Bill Shaw: appeal that or take it to the Board. Mary Lou Kirby: When this report is done and it is no satisfactory to the parties involved, they can appeal that, it is still not a final decision at that point? Can I just make one comment. I think we should keep in mind that it would have been a lot easier for Mr. Davidson and this would have gone a lot quicker and smoother if Mr. Wheaton hadn't concluded that this wetland should be considered as part of the Langman wetlands. Bill Shaw: No, I am not questioning that. I said I have seen reports that are different, I can't question Mr. Wheaton's report because I have not read it. In this proposal, you are going to sit down and make a decision after receiving the Ministry's report. Is that correct? Reeve Drury: Sometime down the road, yes we will. Bill Shaw: This could drag on for years, is that what you are saying? Reeve Drury: Hopefully it dosn't. If the municipality gets these reports in place and is reasonably satisfied with them and decides to rule in favour of the amendment and you still have concerns, I think I am free to say that we are willing to sit down with you and negotiate some of these concerns through the consultants. ill Shaw: At this particular point all the Conservation Club has is the letter that was sent. I don't know how we can receive these reports but if we can have them sent I would appreciate it. ris Menzies: I was just going to state that anytime after this Public Meeting that you want to come and take a look at any of the reports that Ms. Kirby has done, or Mr. Wheaton has done and will do in the future, call the office and you are welcome to come in and take a look. If council makes a decision favourable to the proponents, you will receive notice of the passing. If Council decides not to make a decision favourable to the proponents you will not receive anything in writing, you can just call and find out what's happened. eputy Reeve Caldwell: This gentleman seemed to be unclear as to what his options were as far as the ontario Municipal Board is concerned. What triggers whether the ontario 1 - 20 - Deputy Reeve Caldwell: Municipal Board gets involved in, is decision by Council either way. If w turn it down, the proponent can take it to the ontario Municipal Board, if we approve it then any member of the Public can take it to the ontario Municipal Board. And the other question you raised was the professional reports. While the proponent is required to provide it, before the Ministry of Natural Resources will make a decision, there is nothing to prevent any member of the Public or any group from having a independent report prepared by a professional in that field as well. If they are going to go to the ontari Municipal Board and my observation of ontario Municipal Board Hearings, if you go there without a professional report to counter the one that is presented you are basically wasting your time from my observation. Bill Shaw: We realize that. Unfortunately because we are a charitable organization we don't have the funds to go ahead and do that. This is why we have to rely on the council. People who have the money to develop can afford the lawyers, can afford to process and unfortunately the average citizen, the farmers, etc. are loosing. Bernard Pope: The access to the proposed house site, Lot 3 at the back, how would that be, across the bridge? Mary Lou Kirby: I had indicated that it would come here and follow the existing farm trail down. You would have to go through approvals with the Ministry of Natural Resources. Reeve Drury: I would like to take this opportunity to thank the speakers this evening, they spoke very professionally and the input has been very positive and Council really appreciates this kind of input into a Public Meeting. I would also like to say that this Council is very environmentally conscious. There are many stops and checks and rechecks before anything can happen. Some of the concerns from the Wildlife, Fish and Game Club have, probably will not fall in that category, but we hear what you are saying and I can assure you before anything takes place your concerns will be taken into consideration. ,¡- " ' . - 21 - There being no further questions or comments, when being called for the third time, the Reeve 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. MOTION NO.1 Moved by Crawford, seconded by Mortson Be it resolved that. this Special Public Meeting of Council (Davidson, Part Lots 5 and 6, Concession 14) now be adjourned @ 8:40 p.m. Carried m¿!2 REE~ ROBERT E. DR~ ~~~:;'f.;;i! s~~~ d~