Corporate Report # 2012.043

Corporate Report

DEPARTMENT/ Development Services

DIVISION Planning REPORT NO. 2012.043

DATE PREPARED January 6, 2012 FILE NO. 58T-09502

MEETING DATE March 19, 2012

SUBJECT Draft Plan of Subdivision - 1490220 Ontario Ltd. (Ryan Jones) - 1230 Mountain Road

RECOMMENDATION

Draft Plan of Subdivision

(For consideration by Council on April 23, 2012)

THAT a Public Meeting having been held with respect to the application by 1490220 Ontario Ltd. to create 25 lots for single detached dwellings on

part of the East half of Lot 12, Concession 12, S.K.R., 1214/1230 Mountain Road (58T-09502), draft plan approval be issued, subject to the conditions outlined in APPENDIX "A" to Report No. 2012.043 (Planning);

AND THAT the plan of subdivision proceed to final approval in stages to the satisfaction of the Engineering and Planning Divisions;

AND THAT the necessary By-laws be presented to City Council for ratification;

ALL as contained in Report No. 2012.043 (Planning), as submitted by the Development Services Department.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The applicant, 1490220 Ontario Ltd. (Ryan Jones), has applied for draft plan approval for a 25 lot plan of subdivision on an 18.125 hectare property located on the south side of Mountain Road immediately east of, and adjacent to, the Fort William Country Club. The plan is comprised of 25 lots for single detached dwellings, two green space lots, two blocks for future road widening of Mountain Road, two blocks for a 0.3 metre reserve along Mountain Road, and one new street. The subdivision would be serviced by municipal piped water and individual private septic systems.

This application has been on-going for several years. Numerous background and supporting studies have been commissioned by the applicant in support of the application. The applicant is of the opinion that all issues regarding this development can be addressed and as such is now ready for Council to consider the request for draft plan approval of a subdivision.

Pursuant to Section 51(20) of the Planning Act, no decision can be made on the application for draft plan approval of this subdivision until at least 14 days have elapsed from the holding of the public meeting. The recommendation for approval of the draft plan will be presented to Council for consideration on April 23, 2012.

Administration is recommending that this application be approved.

DISCUSSION

Application History

In 2002, a site specific policy was introduced in the Official Plan to permit the development of a 25 unit vacant land condominium on the subject lands. In 2005, a Zoning By-law amendment application was submitted to give effect to the Official Plan policy. There was a significant amount of neighbourhood opposition to the application. Area residents expressed concerns about traffic, environmental impact and the need for additional residential development in the area. The application was not approved by City Council. Following Council’s denial of the application, the developer commissioned a number of additional studies to address the varying concerns that had been raised during the application process. A Traffic Study, an Environmental Impact Study to examine Peregrine Falcon habitat, an Archaeological Assessment and a Record of Site Condition were all prepared. Based on the information obtained through the various studies, the developer has revised his proposal and has redesigned the development into a plan of subdivision rather than a condominium. The application currently being presented for consideration was originally submitted in 2009. Since that time, the developer has been consulting with neighbours, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Fort William Country Club. The application does not require any amendment to the Zoning By-law.

Description of Proposal

The applicant proposes to develop a plan of subdivision that is serviced with municipal piped water, storm sewers, and private septic systems. The plan of subdivision is comprised of 25 lots for single detached dwellings, two green space lots, two blocks for future road widening of Mountain Road, two blocks for a 0.3 metre reserve along Mountain Road, and one new street.

The property is currently zoned "R1" - Residential Zone 1 and "EP" – Environmental Protection (with associated Environmental Overlay) where a tributary of Mosquito Creek crosses the site (Blocks 30 and 31) and where a portion of the site is adjacent to Mount McRae (southern portions of Lots 13 and 14).

The applicant proposes to deed the portion of land comprised of the tributary of Mosquito Creek and adjacent shoreline to the City as Parkland dedication (Blocks 30 and 31).

The applicant has not requested any amendments to the Zoning By-law to facilitate the proposed plan of subdivision.

The layout of the draft plan of subdivision is shown on Attachment "C" to this Report.

Description of Subject Property

The subject property is 18.125 hectares and is located on the south side of Mountain Road immediately adjacent to the east side of the Fort William Country Club. In addition to the golf course, the surrounding lands are largely developed with single detached dwellings on lots that were developed either by plan of subdivision or by consent. These lots vary in size. On the south side of Mountain Road to the east, the lot depths are generally the same as the subject property while elsewhere; the lot depths are more in keeping with the minimum suburban standard. A small inn and associated restaurant is nearby.

The lands are currently vacant and covered with significant natural vegetation. A tributary of Mosquito Creek runs through the middle portion of the subject lands. The southern limit includes a portion of the talus slope of Mount McRae.

Planning Division Comments

The subject property is designated "Suburban Residential Stage 1" on Schedule "C" of the Official Plan. The lands adjacent to Mosquito Creek, which bisects the property, are designated "Natural Corridor" on Schedule "B." There is a Site Specific Policy in the Plan (Section 17.30) that explicitly permits the development of a 25 unit plan of condominium with private servicing on these lands. This policy was introduced during the last Official Plan Review process in 2002 to specifically acknowledge the intent of this developer to develop these lands and to recognize the work that had already been done to prepare the site for development.

Lands designated as "Suburban Residential" are intended to provide a low-density form of residential development as an alternative living environment to urban settings. Lands designated "Suburban Residential Stage 1" are lands where development has already occurred and/or where development will be directed, in the short to intermediate terms. It is worth noting that these lands were also designated as suburban residential in the previous 1982 Official Plan.

The property is zoned "R1" – Residential Zone 1. Where municipal water is the only service available, the "R1" Zone permits single detached dwellings on lots with a minimum lot area of 2,100 square metres and minimum lot frontage of 30.0 metres. The majority of the lots in the proposed development are generally twice the minimum size. The proposed application is consistent with the policies of the Official Plan.

Provincial Policy Statement (PPS)

The applicant has provided justification that the application is supported by the PPS.

The PPS, 2005 applies to all applications, matters or proceedings commenced on or after March 1, 2005. The applicant notes that the matter of developing this land at the suburban scale commenced prior to March 1, 2005 and was in fact in process in the late 1990's by a previous owner. As such, this application is governed by the PPS that was in effect at the time that this matter commenced.

The applicant notes that when the previous application for a 25 unit vacant land condominium was considered in 2005, the Planning Report concluded that the application was "consistent with the PPS as it specifically relates to the suburban residential development in the context of local land use issues."

The applicant continues to believe that the proposed application is consistent with the PPS, 1997. The Planning Division does not dispute this opinion.

Environmental Impact Study (EIS)

Mosquito Creek has been identified as an area of fish habitat. An Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was prepared in 2005 by a qualified consultant in accordance with the policies of Section 2.3 and 14.7 of the Official Plan. The EIS notes that the adjacent golf course is immediately downstream and is a net consumer of runoff from the subject property. Given that the golf course employs a series of retention ponds, it is highly unlikely that lot drainage from the proposed development will impact Mosquito Creek. The EIS recommends that the flood plain should remain in its natural state. The EIS notes that nitrification can be mitigated with appropriately designed and installed Class 4 septic systems, a pre and post development storm water plan to attenuate flows and minimize sedimentation and erosion , and downstream consumptive use by the adjacent golf course.
The EIS recommends that road signage be installed to alert drivers along Mountain Road about wildlife that may be displaced by the proposed development. The EIS indicates that fish habitat downstream is a warm water fishery and suggests that retaining the flood lands adjacent to Mosquito creek in a natural state will help maintain fishery values existing presently.

Environmental Impact Study (EIS) – Peregrine Falcon Habitat

A second EIS was prepared with a specific focus on the identified peregrine falcon habitat in the area. This EIS concluded that the proposed development will likely have little or no effect on the breeding pair of Peregrine Falcon, or the surrounding habitat that they utilize within one kilometre of the project site.

The Peregrines and/or their habitat area is most sensitive during the critical breeding period, which takes place between mid to late March through August annually. To minimize any potential effects the report recommends the following mitigation measures:

� Any road construction within the project area must be conducted between August 30 and March 1;

� Any occupancy or utilisation of lands within 250 metres of the cliff face of Mount McRae must be non-structural and must protect the natural vegetation in this area; and

� Any construction or site alteration between 250 and 260 metres of the face of Mount McRae must be between August 30 and March 1;

The Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) have reviewed this EIS and based on the information provided and mitigation proposed, the project is not expected to contravene the species protection and habitat protection sections of the Endangered Species Act with respect to Peregrine Falcons. The MNR accepts the mitigation measures contained in the EIS, but notes that the breeding dates provided are guidelines and that annual consultation with the MNR is required to put a finer point on when activities can commence on the site. Further, they require that lot owners should be informed by the developer that the subdivision is located within Peregrine Falcon Habitat, which is protected by the Endangered Species Act.

It is therefore recommended that the following conditions be imposed as a condition of Draft Plan Approval:

That the Subdivision Agreement between the City and the owner contain a provision wherein the owner agrees to include in all offers of purchase and sale the following notices:

� For all lots, notice that the area of the subdivision is located within a peregrine Falcon Habitat, which is protected under the Endangered Species Act.

� For Lots 12, 13, and 14, notice that the portions of the lots within 250 metres of the cliff face of Mount McRae, that no buildings, structures, or removal of vegetation is permitted.

� For Lots 12, 13, and 14, notice that the portion of the lots within 250 and 260 metres of the cliff face of Mount McRae, that no construction is permitted between March 1 and August 30.

� For all lots, that prior to the issuance of any building permit confirmation be received from the Ministry of Natural Resources that construction may proceed in compliance with the species protection and habitat protection sections of the Endangered Species Act.

Thunder Bay District Health Unit

Each lot in the proposed development will be serviced by individual private septic systems which is typical of development in this area. As part of the previous re-rezoning in 2005, the Thunder Bay District Health Unit (TBDHU) stated they had no objection in principle; however, as with similar applications, the agency objects to any development on partial servicing. The TBDHU has indicated that test pits and a soils report are required before comments can be submitted. The TBDHU, as a result of the Public Meeting Notice, submitted comments that they require a detailed soils study and PPS justification. The TBDHU has been

provided with a copy of the Hydrogeological Report prepared by True Grit Consulting Ltd, the Servicing Options Report prepared by Menic Planning Services Inc., and the applicant's PPS justification.

It is recommended that as a condition of Draft Plan Approval the applicant be required to prepare a soils analysis to the satisfaction of the Health Unit.

Record of Site Condition

Over the years, a significant amount of fill has been brought onto the site. In accordance with the policies of Section 12 of the Official Plan, an Environmental Site Assessment and Record of Site Condition were completed. The RSC was reviewed and accepted by the Ministry of the Environment.

Lot Inventory Report

The recent 2011 Lot Inventory recognizes that there is a sufficient supply of vacant lots in the suburban area. However, as noted in the Inventory Report, the majority of lots available exist primarily in the Mount Forest area. Given that development at Foxborough Greens is nearly complete it is reasonable to deduce that market demand exists for lots in this area.

Adjacent Landlocked Parcel

There is a landlocked parcel of land at the south limit of the applicant's property that currently has a right of way for access across the subject lands. The applicant has recognized this right of way in the proposed plan by including it as a proposed 5.0 metre right of way on Lot 12. While giving unimpeded access, this right of way could not constitute sufficient frontage in the Zoning By-law for development.

Agency Comments

The Notice of Application for this Draft Plan of Subdivision was given on August 24, 2009, as prescribed by Section 51(20)(a) of the Planning Act. The proposed plan was circulated to the required agencies and the comments received and the agency requirements are summarized in Appendix "A" to this Report.

The following civic departments and outside agencies reviewed the proposed plan and offered no objections:

Thunder Bay Fire & Rescue Services Division
Thunder Bay Hydro
Ontario Power Generation
Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, and Forestry
Lakehead District School Board
Union Gas Ltd.
Realty Services Division

Engineering Division

The applicant must enter into a subdivision agreement to ensure services are installed to Engineering Division standards. In addition, the applicant will have to comply with the Engineering Division development Requirements for a Suburban Subdivision and Division's Development Requirements for On-Site Sub-Surface Sewage Disposal Systems.

The Engineering Division also makes the following comments:

1. The watermain will need to be a single feed supply instead of a looped system. The design of the water system will need to reflect the additional maintenance requirements for flushing and maintaining residual chlorine in the water supply.

2. Notwithstanding the Road standards discussed in the Suburban Subdivision Requirements, the pavement design for this subdivision must be based on a site-specific geotechnical investigation due to the potential increase in freeze-thaw impacts as a result of addition single serviced lots and must meet the following design criteria as detailed in the City of Thunder Bay's Engineering and Development Standards:

Section 2.4.6 Pavement Construction

3. The storm water system required for this development will discharge to an existing stream and drainage will exist through neighbouring properties not owned by the developer. Easements for drainage will be required within the development to allow for maintenance. In addition, the Storm Water Management report will need to assess whether downstream facilities will be able to handle the major storm drainage overland flow from the development

Design briefs will be required for the water supply, road design and sewage disposal as well as a lot grading and drainage plan and erosion and sedimentation control plan. These issues will be dealt with during the final approval process.

The Engineering Division has reviewed a traffic impact study, dated March 2007, submitted by the applicant and finds it acceptable. Due to neighbourhood concerns, the applicant commissioned a supplemental study for pedestrian/cyclist activity in August 2011. The supplemental study concluded that the proposed development will have a negligible impact on the operation of Mountain Road.

Parks Division

The Parks Division has no objections. The parkland dedication, Blocks 30 and 31, is acceptable to the Parks Division. The planting of boulevard trees, will be a requirement of final approval of the plan of subdivision. A local trail within Blocks 30 and 31 is a possibility, and notice should be provided to prospective purchasers of Lots 6, 7, 20, and 21. It is therefore recommended that the Subdivision Agreement between the City and the owner contain a provision wherein the owner agrees to include in all offers of purchase and sale, notice to prospective purchasers of Lots 6, 7, 20, and 21 that a local trail within Blocks 30 and 31 is a possibility.

Ministry of Transportation

The Ministry has no comments on the proposed subdivision development as the subject property is not located adjacent to a Provincial Highway. The Ministry was provided with copies of the traffic studies conducted.

Ministry of Culture

The applicant's property is in an area of high archaeological potential. This potential is based on the presence of a significant archaeological discovery on an adjacent property, and the presence of a series of landforms that signal potential. The applicant conducted a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment, dated August 13, 2007, in support of the previous application for a vacant land condominium. The Assessment concluded that no additional archaeological work is required.

The Ministry reviewed the Assessment, concurs with its recommendations, and has no concerns with the application. The Ministry requires two conditions of draft plan approval to fulfil the applicant's obligations under the Ontario Heritage Act and/or the Cemeteries Act. These conditions would require the developer to stop operations and contact the Police, the Ministry of Culture, and the Registrar of Cemeteries should cultural heritage values and/or human remains be discovered during construction. It is therefore recommended that draft plan approval include the requested conditions.

Lakehead Region Conservation Authority (LRCA)

The LRCA has reviewed the proposed plan as it relates to flooding erosion and fisheries habitat.

The LRCA advises that proposed Lots 6, 7, 20, and 21 are affected by the LRCA's Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulations. The LRCA requires that a permit be obtained from the Authority for development of the proposed road construction and water crossing. In addition, potential purchasers of Lots 6, 7, 20, and 21 should be informed of the regulated area on the Lots and that a permit from the Authority may be required prior to construction. Also, potential purchasers of Lots 13 and 14 should be informed that the Lots contain a portion of the talus slope of Mount McRae. It is recommended that as a condition of final approval the applicant receive a permit from the LRCA for the road construction and water crossing.

In addition, the Planning Division recommends that the Subdivision Agreement between the City and the owner contain a provision wherein the owner agrees to include in all offers of purchase and sale:

notice to prospective purchasers of Lots 6, 7, 20, and 21 that a permit from the Authority may be require prior to construction and
notice to prospective purchasers for Lots 13 and 14 that the lots contain a portion of the talus slope of Mount McRae and that a permit from the Authority may be require prior to construction.

The LRCA notes that all other lots appear to be developable without encroaching into the Regulated Area.

Canada Post

Canada Post requires that notice be given to inform all prospective purchasers, through a clause in all agreements of purchase and sale that Lot 24 is identified for the location of a Community Mailbox. In addition, the developer is required to provide curb depressions at the Community Mailbox location. It is recommended that the request from Canada Post be a condition for final plan approval of the Subdivision.

Public Consultation and Applicant Response

A Notice of Application letter was sent to all property owners within 250 metres of the subject property on July 29, 2009 when the application was originally submitted. Notice of Public Meeting was mailed and a sign was posted on the property on February 17, 2012

A total of 18 letters were received in response to the initial Notice of Application letter; 2 in support and 16 in either opposition or expressing some concern over the development proposal. There have been no additional comments received in response to the Public Meeting Notice.

The Planning Division recommended that the applicant host an open house in an effort to mitigate the concerns and issues expressed in response to the Notice of Application; however, the applicant believes that many of the issues presented are identical to the ones that were raised during a Zoning By-law amendment process that applied to these lands in 2005, and have already been addressed. As a result, the applicant chose not to host an open house and has provided the following responses to the concerns raised.

CONCERNS/COMMENTS ABOUT APPLICATION RESPONSE

Adjacent Golf Course
The Fort William Country Club (FWCC) submitted a letter of support, but also expressed concern with the potential for litigation resulting from errant golf balls. The FWCC has suggested that the developer erect a large net to catch errant golf balls or that a significant forested buffer be left between the proposed lots and the golf course. In addition, the FWCC suggests that all homeowners sign a waiver and agree to not pursue legal action from errant golf balls. The FWCC encourages and supports the development as long as there are appropriate safeguards in place to allow for the peaceful coexistence of all parties.
The developer is not amenable to constructing a net along the western portion of the property due to cost and aesthetics, but has agreed that it would be appropriate to include a notice in the Subdivision Agreement advising of the proximity of the golf course, and to have a 6.0 metre naturally vegetated buffer included as a design feature for the plan of subdivision. The developer has discussed these provisions with the FWCC and both parties agree that they are appropriate.

Safety and traffic issues In March 2007, the developer had a Traffic/Transportation Report prepared by Engineering Northwest Ltd. The Report concludes that "the increase in traffic from the proposed development will have a negligible impact on the operation of Mountain Road." A subsequent Report on pedestrian and cyclist movements during the summer months did not yield any particular concerns.

Degradation of the natural environment In 2005, an Environmental Impact Statement was prepared by Bio Consulting . The Report assesses drainage (water quantity), nitrification, wildlife habitat, fisheries values, social impacts, and best use practises. The Report states that there will be little environmental effect as a result of the plan of subdivision provided that the existing stream channel and associated shoreline remain untouched.
It is noted that a portion of the property toward the centre of the proposed subdivision is zoned "EP" – Environmental Protection and therefore cannot be developed. During the processing of the previous application for rezoning, the LRCA was consulted about the limits of the flood plain area, and it was determined that an adjustment to the zone boundary was appropriate. The "EP" – Environmental Protection Zone that currently exists in the new Zoning By-law incorporates this new flood plain boundary.

Existing oversupply of residential lots Although it has been suggested that there is currently an oversupply of residential lots in the City, the applicant does not believe this to be true and has indicated that he has received overwhelming interest in the proposed lots. One objector stated that lots in the nearby Foxborough development were largely unsold. The applicant believes that virtually all of these lots have been sold.
The City’s Official Plan suggests that at least a three year supply of draft approved and/or registered lots in plans of subdivision should be maintained.' The applicant feels that it is desirable to have a supply in excess of three years and notes that much of the existing supply is in urban and rural areas, not in suburban areas.

Provincial Policy Statement, Official Plan, Community Environmental Action Plan (CEAP). It is the applicant's opinion that the development conforms to the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS).
The proposed development does not propose to change the extent of the "EP" Zone that bisects the property thereby precluding any development within this existing natural corridor.
It is the applicant's opinion that the development conforms to the Official Plan. The applicant's property is designated as "Suburban Residential" and not "Rural" as stated in some of the objector's letters. The proposed development conforms to all of the policies of Section 17 including the objectives, lot areas and frontage, stages of development, and the policies related to plans of subdivision.
Specific references by one of the objectors to a number of transportation policies contained in Section 10 of the OP were either out of context or have been supported by the Traffic Report.
In terms of the CEAP, no changes are being proposed to the location and extent of the "EP" – Environmental Protection Zone as was previously contemplated by the former vacant land condominium application.

Septic systems and their impact on Mosquito Creek The developer will prepare a detailed soil analysis to ensure that the lots are capable of supporting septic systems as part of draft plan approval. District Health Unit approval of the soils report and all septic systems will be required. There has already been some analysis done on nitrification in the Environmental Impact Statement and more work will be done in this regard during the design and installation of the septic systems.

Loss of wildlife habitat This issue has been analysed in the Environmental Impact Statement which concludes that the development should not have a significant impact on species density/distribution.

Introduction of noise and light pollution Single detached dwellings are not typically considered as sources of noise pollution. It is suspected that this will be a typical quiet residential subdivision on a cul-de-sac.

Protection of peregrine falcon habitat An EIS focussing on peregrine falcons and their habitat was prepared and reviewed by the Ministry of Natural Resources.

Planning Act Requirements:

Pursuant to Section 51(20) of the

Planning Act

, no decision can be made on the application for draft plan approval of this subdivision until at least 14 days have elapsed from the holding of the public meeting. Council must close the public meeting and consider the recommendation on the subdivision application at the next appropriate Council meeting after the 14 days have elapsed which would be April 23, 2012.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

All of the costs associated with the proposed development be borne by the applicant. Increased municipal costs, such as road maintenance and garbage pickup for the new residential subdivision are expected. Information from Finance state that if these are average size lots with a 1300 sq. ft. bungalow and an attached garage, an average assessment would be approximately $250,000 (2008 CVA) which would result in a total of $123

000 in property taxes for the 25 new homes.

BACKGROUND

In the previous 1982 City of Thunder Bay Official Plan (1982 OP), the subject lands were designated as "Suburban Residential" and "Hazard Land" on Schedule "A" – General Land Use. Lands designated as "Suburban Residential" in the 1982 OP were intended for residential development on partially serviced lands with City water only and private septic systems and plans of subdivision were permitted within this land use designation.

During the 2002 Official Plan Review (2002 OP), significant steps were taken towards reducing the extent of the "Suburban Residential" designation, and the staging of development within this designation was introduced.

In an effort to reduce development potential in this area, the rear portion of the subject lands were designated as "Rural" in the first draft of the 2002 OP and a "Suburban Residential Stage I" designation was maintained on the portion fronting on Mountain Road.

The property owner at the time expressed concern about the "Rural" designation that would have applied to the 'backlot' portions of his property, and requested that a suburban designation be applied to the entire landholding.

Council considered this request and approved a modification to the Plan that included retaining the Suburban Residential designation and introducing a specific policy to allow a 25 unit vacant land condominium development on the property. The Province did not oppose the inclusion of the modification in the final Official Plan which became effective on March 8, 2002.

As part of the review of the new Comprehensive Zoning By-law, the lands were placed in the "R1" – Residential One Zone. The "R1" Zone replaces the former Zoning By-law's "RS" Residential Suburban Zone. This zoning is consistent with the Official Plan's Suburban Residential land use designation.

Area residents expressed concern over the zoning of the lands to "R1" during the new Comprehensive Zoning By-law process. After Council's approval of the New Comprehensive Zoning By-law in October of 2010, an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board was filed objecting to the "R1" Zone that was applied to the lands. This appeal was ultimately settled between the applicant and appellant in June of 2011.

CONCLUSION

It is concluded that the application for draft plan approval should be approved, subject to the conditions set out in APPENDIX "B" to this Report. The draft plan of subdivision conforms to the Official Plan.

REFERENCE MATERIAL ATTACHED

Attachment A - Application Fact Sheet

Attachment B - Appendix "A" – Draft Approval Conditions for File 58T-09502

Attachment C - Plan showing Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision

Attachment D - Studies completed in support of Draft Plan Approval

PREPARED BY:

Decio Lopes, Senior Planner

This report signed and verified by Mark J. Smith MA.MCIP.RPP., General Manager - Development Services on March 12, 2012

	*Corporate Report*
*DEPARTMENT/*	Development Services
*DIVISION*	Planning	*REPORT NO.*	2012.043

*DATE PREPARED*	January 6, 2012	*FILE NO.*	58T-09502

*MEETING DATE*	March 19, 2012

*SUBJECT*	Draft Plan of Subdivision - 1490220 Ontario Ltd. (Ryan Jones) - 1230 Mountain Road

CONCERNS/COMMENTS ABOUT APPLICATION	RESPONSE
Adjacent Golf Course The Fort William Country Club (FWCC) submitted a letter of support, but also expressed concern with the potential for litigation resulting from errant golf balls. The FWCC has suggested that the developer erect a large net to catch errant golf balls or that a significant forested buffer be left between the proposed lots and the golf course. In addition, the FWCC suggests that all homeowners sign a waiver and agree to not pursue legal action from errant golf balls. The FWCC encourages and supports the development as long as there are appropriate safeguards in place to allow for the peaceful coexistence of all parties.	The developer is not amenable to constructing a net along the western portion of the property due to cost and aesthetics, but has agreed that it would be appropriate to include a notice in the Subdivision Agreement advising of the proximity of the golf course, and to have a 6.0 metre naturally vegetated buffer included as a design feature for the plan of subdivision. The developer has discussed these provisions with the FWCC and both parties agree that they are appropriate.
Safety and traffic issues	In March 2007, the developer had a Traffic/Transportation Report prepared by Engineering Northwest Ltd. The Report concludes that "the increase in traffic from the proposed development will have a negligible impact on the operation of Mountain Road." A subsequent Report on pedestrian and cyclist movements during the summer months did not yield any particular concerns.
Degradation of the natural environment	In 2005, an Environmental Impact Statement was prepared by Bio Consulting . The Report assesses drainage (water quantity), nitrification, wildlife habitat, fisheries values, social impacts, and best use practises. The Report states that there will be little environmental effect as a result of the plan of subdivision provided that the existing stream channel and associated shoreline remain untouched. It is noted that a portion of the property toward the centre of the proposed subdivision is zoned "EP" – Environmental Protection and therefore cannot be developed. During the processing of the previous application for rezoning, the LRCA was consulted about the limits of the flood plain area, and it was determined that an adjustment to the zone boundary was appropriate. The "EP" – Environmental Protection Zone that currently exists in the new Zoning By-law incorporates this new flood plain boundary.
Existing oversupply of residential lots	Although it has been suggested that there is currently an oversupply of residential lots in the City, the applicant does not believe this to be true and has indicated that he has received overwhelming interest in the proposed lots. One objector stated that lots in the nearby Foxborough development were largely unsold. The applicant believes that virtually all of these lots have been sold. The City’s Official Plan suggests that at least a three year supply of draft approved and/or registered lots in plans of subdivision should be maintained.' The applicant feels that it is desirable to have a supply in excess of three years and notes that much of the existing supply is in urban and rural areas, not in suburban areas.
Provincial Policy Statement, Official Plan, Community Environmental Action Plan (CEAP).	It is the applicant's opinion that the development conforms to the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). The proposed development does not propose to change the extent of the "EP" Zone that bisects the property thereby precluding any development within this existing natural corridor. It is the applicant's opinion that the development conforms to the Official Plan. The applicant's property is designated as "Suburban Residential" and not "Rural" as stated in some of the objector's letters. The proposed development conforms to all of the policies of Section 17 including the objectives, lot areas and frontage, stages of development, and the policies related to plans of subdivision. Specific references by one of the objectors to a number of transportation policies contained in Section 10 of the OP were either out of context or have been supported by the Traffic Report. In terms of the CEAP, no changes are being proposed to the location and extent of the "EP" – Environmental Protection Zone as was previously contemplated by the former vacant land condominium application.
Septic systems and their impact on Mosquito Creek	The developer will prepare a detailed soil analysis to ensure that the lots are capable of supporting septic systems as part of draft plan approval. District Health Unit approval of the soils report and all septic systems will be required. There has already been some analysis done on nitrification in the Environmental Impact Statement and more work will be done in this regard during the design and installation of the septic systems.
Loss of wildlife habitat	This issue has been analysed in the Environmental Impact Statement which concludes that the development should not have a significant impact on species density/distribution.
Introduction of noise and light pollution	Single detached dwellings are not typically considered as sources of noise pollution. It is suspected that this will be a typical quiet residential subdivision on a cul-de-sac.
Protection of peregrine falcon habitat	An EIS focussing on peregrine falcons and their habitat was prepared and reviewed by the Ministry of Natural Resources.