Opening comments: More at the end, maybe.
This letter was written about the first proposal to develop the land in question and it was an effort that did not even have a site plan. So say it was just setting things up for the what was to follow.
The next developer - Moldenhauer Developments - come along and as their lawyer says, steps into the shoes of that last developers applications for an Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application that is before the Ontario Municipal Board or OMB. The Dreaded pro-development OMB. The OMB is allowing Moldenhauer Developments to take over from the first developer, make changes, not have to go through the whole public process of meetings that would end up at City hall for Council meetings & decisions. The process has been greatly shortened. I will explain it better in the coming days. But how convenient that the politicians are cut out of some of the process, makes it easier for them to say, its not our fault for what happens. When in fact it is.
What matters the most is the changes now set forward call for an even bigger POPULATION EXPLOSION, than the last plan called for!!!! The 1 bedroom townhouses are now 3 bedroom townhouses. From 1 to 2 story's. 30 townhouses + 5 detached houses, with 3, each = 105 people in an area that should have about six lots. City say it could be as high as 109. Image what will happen as they do this down the length of Northmount. What is interesting, is in the plan that the City approved, it called for 1 bedroom townhouses for seniors or empty nesters, as I recall but looking over the documentation I can not find this reference. I was at the meetings and noted it, it was talked about at the meetings. More about these bedrooms as I review the files but remember the City has BLACKLISTED me so I can not talk to Planning staff or the Ward 1 Councillor, Carmen Corbasson. One reason they could be doing this, is to help create a misstatement, like the public was told one thing but the physical plans said another and I would not know this as I am denied access to the Planning Dept.
Their lawyer has the gall to say that their foot is just slipping into the shoes of the first application, I say the foot is 3 times bigger! They say the foot print of the development has remained the same, the general dimensions of units and their number is but not the environmental impact! And more developments of this nature or greater will wipe out the Cawthra Bush by over use as the surrounding community that had so long been one of the main reasons why the Cawthra Bush survived as a nature treasure, will eliminated.
Most of the points made below are still very valid
regarding the new plan, if not more so.
Northmount
Rezoning Maps
City of Mississauga
ATTN: Chair and Members of the Planning & Development Committee.
ATTN: Thomas S. Mokrzycki, Commissioner of Planning & Development Committee.
RE: File.# OZ/OPA02/23, on Northmount. ( or OZ/02/23 W1 )
Dear Sirs: June 17, 2003
The following are some of the reasons why the proposed changes to the Official City plan and a Rezoning Application for the Northmount area, (30 condominium townhouses and 5 freehold detached dwellings (on lots 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 R.P. 308), should not be allowed. That only single dwelling homes, not townhouses, should be allowed. Generally to approve these changes would set a dangerous precedence, that will allowed for more and more townhouses/subdivisions. Those in the Cawthra community who have invested their time and money into creating a livable community for their families, apart to retire to, will see their efforts for not. Sets precedence for exceeding the Official Plan and Mississauga Plan limits for maximum dwellings and minium open space, that were to protect existing communities and homeowers who investments in them, from the ravages of over development. This kind of undertaking has been called block-busting or over-development, and in the end - destroying their community. This rezoning is the recipe for a slum.
Northmount is a stable, health community but now will no longer be as the green light is given to overdevelopment. Developers will see how easy it is to exceed City planning limits, the drive will be on to remove the homes of the stable community for over development that will not only make the Northmount area an undesirable place to live but it will suffer the same fate as the Cawthra Bush. In the words of Peter Lyons, the City's Urban Ecologist, the Cawthra Bush will be pounded into the ground as a result of surrounding development. Everything of value in that community will be lost due to over development.
- 1 - ....2
The Character & Identity of the Northmount Community;
The City's Official plans repeatedly states that the purpose of the Official plan is to preserve and reflect "community identity", to "foster community identity and sense of place;", "promotion of design which ... reflects the unique character of communities;", that "Residential intensification ... compatibility with surrounding land use;", "any infill or redevelopment proposal will be encouraged to recognize and enhance the scale and character of the existing residential ...", and "The scale and character of a community will be principal considerations in determining appropriate residential densities and their sympathetic integration within each District."
In the District Plan for the Lakeview area (6.18.2), the following is noted, "The focus of these policies is to preserve and enhance the character of the existing development and transportation system. Infill and redevelopment will be facilitated/encouraged, where appropriate, and in a manner consistent with existing land use in the surrounding area." & "These policies provide for future development, with emphasis on its compatibility with existing land uses and densities." It could not be clearer that townhouses are totally out of context and character with the existing community and should not be allowed. The greatest of consideration should be given to the precedence approval of this rezoning will set.
In terms of the Character and Identity of the community, it should be measured by what is on the same street and that the Planning Act requires notices be sent out, some 120 meters or 400 feet, from the planned development. The City tries to argue that this proposed development is of the character as subdivisions that are not on Northmount. Like the Korgold lands some 4,000 feet away almost a mile & Delco Ave. some 3,000 feet and both of which (especially Delco Ave.) Northmount home-owners could go years without ever passing and seeing these subdivisions. So they rightfully should not in any way be considered part of the character of that street/community. The examples used by the City are unreasonable beyond the existing community and character on the street of Northmount.
The City's Supplementary report dated May 27/03 & June 17/03 tries to weasel out of these words by saying "These policies provide for future development, with emphasis on its compatibility with existing land uses and densities." In this context, the terms "consistent" and "compatible" are not construed to mean "the same as"." These words are the weakest that are in the City's Official Plans to protect the character & identity of community and the City hides behind them by saying they only mean development need not be "the same as" the existing community. The stronger words that would keep the community much the way it is and stable, are listed above from the same Official Plans. Words like "maintenance of the stable existing residential areas". The City has yet to say how dropping subdivisions (bombs and there will be more then one), will keep the community stable. The City has yet to explain how this subdivision (and those to follow) will improve the community and how. That is, improve the community more then building homes of the same nature and character that exist along the street now.
- 3 -
The City Plans notes the importance of "community identity", to "foster community identity and sense of place;", "promotion of design which ... reflects the unique character of communities;", it needs to be pointed out that those who move in will have so little land they will not be able to participate in one of the local communities main culture & activities, looking after large lots with mature trees and other plants which provide a great benefits (such as our childrens health), to the local community. They will not be able to relate to many of the existing communities concerns.
* There is no condominiums (a business), on Northmount, so condominiums are out of context and character.
* The claim that the clean-up cost justifies the townhouses should be not allowed. Show the public the facts as to what these claims are based on and how much the owner will make selling the scrap on site should be noted, as well.
* No more the 30 townhouses should be allowed especially as only 30 are asked for and allowed by current zoning. I can only wonder why the City is grant permission for 31 when only 30 are asked for.
Incomplete information;
* The City is wrongly moving ahead without full information, "In the absence of floor plan drawings", goes on to say the City would only be "assuming" how many bedrooms there could be.
* No site plan application, sounds like an effort to miss-lead.
* Where is the name of the condominium company? Where are the terms under which those who would buy these condominiums would live and services to them granted? They should be on the table with the other important items that are missing.
* There is a claim of building houses for seniors but there is no bus service in the area. Will the City be adding service? Or is it more likely the wrong place to house seniors. Again is this to miss-lead us?
Negative effects resulting from approval of this out of place and context subdivision;
* The new comers will not be able to participate in the community culture based on large lots and the gardens / landscaping features in them. They will forever be outsiders to the existing community culture.
* Property values will likely drop as developers try and force out people to build more mini-subdivisions with townhouses. The City is giving the go ahead for a building boom in the Northmount area.
- 4 -
* That peoples safety will be at risk as more and more people are added to the community not from just this site but from all the townhouse sites that will follow this one. This will include crime and higher traffic. The traffic from this one townhouse complex may not be too bad but if more follow then Northmount would likely need to be widened and children will be at risk from traffic. The City should review how much development is possible along Northmount and inform (warn) home-owners.
How more traffic will satisfy Sec. 6.18.2 of the City Plan call for "preserve and enhance the character of the existing development and transportation system", is not explained. Or how people loosing part of their front lawns as Northmount Ave. is widened to deal with the extra traffic.
It was noted that the road study was made at the wrong time of year and had to be redone in a more reasonable time of year. This resulted in much a higher traffic count and should be seen as an effort to miss-lead the City and home-owners as to the effect of this subdivision.
* I have seen the Toronto Real Estate Board listing for this property, which went up for sale 1/6/2003 for $3,100,000 and it is interesting that they list NO, for soil testing on site. We were told it had been done. Is this another case like the traffic study and it was not fully done?
Environmental aspects;
* There should be no cash-in-leu
of green space to ensure the largest area possible is available for lawns
and trees. This matter is not directly addressed, by name, in the
newest City report. It does note 35% of land
is to be provided for landscaped
open space, however under By-law 5500 it would be 40%. The higher
40% of open space should be required as it will be more land for trees,
etc., that will benefit the whole community's health and well being.
This issue was brought up at the public meetings but the City did not include
it in the record.
* The City should require that there be a warning sign posted and all persons who show an interest in buying any homes should be informed that it is a stones throw from the Cawthra Bush - a Provincially Significant Wetlands complex - which not only will not be their recreational park but this area can, in some years have a very high number of mosquitoes and from this treed community. That West Nile is known to be in this area. As the developer is telling us they want seniors buy the condominiums. I noted this concern at the Oct. 17\02 & Dec. 2\02 meetings (in writing) that City staff have not noted in their account of that meeting.
* The planner for this project publicly stated the water table would drop due to this development. City documents note such a thing would lead to decline of mature trees. This would be a long term problem and should be fully reviewed, as more townhouses could follow making the problem worse. The City says "there has been no indication of problems arising from existing developments in the immediate area", there is not data to support this statement or even reference to what development the City is referring to. There is no specific study that has been done regarding the watertable in the Cawthra Bush area that I know of, so the City can not rightfully say it knows what has or has not happened regarding the watertable. It is, however common knowledge that subdivisions do lower the watertable, so what the City is saying, is contrary to common sense.
- 5 -
Further to issues regarding the watertable. The City states that it feel there will be no long term impacts but goes on to say it can only "anticipate" this. The City claims there will be no new municipal storm sewers but in the Real Estate listing it says there are sewers - Storm and where in the recommendations does it specifically state no storm sewers? It does not, this issue should be formally addressed and not just brushed off. If storm sewers are to be installed they should be the kind that work to add as much local run off into the watertable as possible rather then just drain by pipe into Lake Ontario.
* The City has not fully taken into consideration the impacts on the Cawthra Bush, how will this development and future ones along the same lines, will affect it. No impact statement on one of Mississauga's most environmental significant wetlands/forests, maybe the City hopes the new residents will not see the Cawthra Bush which is literally right across the Rd., from them.
The City should specifically ask for the Credit Valley Conservation (CVC), to comment on how a subdivision of this nature and more in the future would affect the Cawthra Bush. The City should also ask the CVC if it believes that the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), should play a lead role in rotecting and commenting on this project. The CVC has informed me that they believe the MNR has taken over from the CVC the responsibility for protecting the Cawthra Bush. Lets us not forget the fact that the Cawthra Bush is a Provincially Significant Wetlands Complex with Jefferson Salamanders, currently listed by the Canadian Federal government as a THREATENED species.
Also included are letters and documents, to note the Cawthra Bush environmental significance as a Provincially Significant Wetlands Complex, with a breeding population of Jefferson Salamanders, currently listed by the Canadian Federal government as a THREATENED species. Page 20 from the City of Mississauga's Cawthra Woods Management plan, also notes other wetlands wildlife that depend on the vernal ponds in the Cawthra Bush feed by ground water - Chimney Building Crayfish, toads. Fairy shrimp have been found in Cawthra and details are noted in the Toronto Zoo article about this.
Public Participation;
* City planning staff have informed me that the New Official plan for Mississauga and which bears Mississauga's name will not be available in Mississauga's libraries. This alone makes it very hard for most people to review the Mississauga Plan and be involved in community decision making. It means they will not be able to study the Mississauga plan by signing it out and doing so in their homes but will have to go to the City during business hours. Something most people can't do. Also the cost of photocopies at City hall is much higher 50 cents to the library's 15 cent.
* For the record the City has refused to allow me access to this file to review it. This and other denials of service appears to have the Clerks dept., as the source and confirmed by both City planning staff and Carmen Corbasson, Ward 1 Councillor. In regards to my Feb 14/03 letters (specifically asking to discuss this rezoning to get a better understanding of it), and it being ignored, to Planning Dept., and Ward 1 Councillor this puts road blocks in the way of those who would try and fully participate in this public process. I had to call my Councillor to get conformation that I was black listed. This run complete opposite to both Official Plans for Mississauga and their commitment to the publics' right to participate in this public process.
- 6 -
* My concerns, like others were not properly recorded and mostly left out of the official record, this would not be the first time the City has tried to remove my or others comments from the official record so not to address them. Below is an example. "The City should require that there be a warning sign posted and all persons who show an interest in buying any homes should be informed that it is a stones throw from the Cawthra Bush - a Provincially Significant Wetlands complex - which not only will not be their recreational park but this area can, in some years have a very high number of mosquitoes and from this treed community. That West Nile is known to be in this area. As the developer is telling us they want seniors buy the condominiums. This was a concern I noted at the Oct. 17\02 & Dec. 2\02 meetings (in writing) that City staff have not noted in their account of that meeting."
I am willing to discuss my letter with you, in case the wording seems a little ambiguous or you want a request explained. My phone number is ...
cc - copies will be sent to Peel, CVC and the MNR. [1]
Please find enclosed:
1). A copy of
the letter from Steve Varga, Inventory Biologist, Ministry of
Natural Resources noting that the Cawthra Bush is a Provincially
Significant Wetlands Complex and includes one page from the wetland
report about the Jefferson Salamander breeding pond.
2). A copy of a letter from David M. Green, Chair of the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada.
3). A copy of
Page 20 from the City of Mississauga's Cawthra Woods
Management plan, Dec. 15/99.
4). 3
pages from the Summer 2002 Toronto
Zoo publication, Amphibian
Voice.
5). A newly
printed copy of some of the Feb. 23/98, letter to the City of
Mississauga, Urban Forest Management Advisory committee.
Sincerely yours, Donald
Barber, President, FCB & Chair, CRRA.
PLEEASSE SIGN OUR PETITION
It will make a difference!
Home page - Main Table of Contents - Back up a Page - Back to Top
[ COMMENTS BY DON B. -
[1] - Did not get around to sending to them copies then, energy shortage caused by the abuse I suffer from the City of Mississauga. ]