Cold feet

Council defers subdivision approval, pending review of impact to Waring’s Creek

Council found itself halfway across a muddy field at Sandy Hook this week. They’ve already stumbled a few times on the uneven ground while the wet earth grasps at their boots with every sodden step. There is no easy way out from here.

In 2008, the municipality agreed to map and study the Waring’s Creek watershed. The agreement, signed by Mayor Leo Finnegan and Cliff Rice on behalf of the Waring’s Creek Improvement Association (WCIA), bound the municipality to examine the land surrounding the creek to understand the nature and condition of the water runoff to Waring’s Creek.

But alas, the work was never done. The municipality didn’t undertake an independent assessment of the risks of development on these lands as prescribed in the agreement. Now, a couple of developers want to build about 1,400 homes on the subject land. The WCIA insists the municipality honour its agreement before this happens.

“The quality of water leaving this site will literally determine the life or death of Waring’s Creek,” explained Cliff Rice, one of the agreement’s signatories, to the Planning Committee of council last week. “The County has failed to meet their obligations under that agreement. We consider the County in breach of contract. We will vigorously defend this watershed,” assured Rice on behalf of the WCIA.

According to Rice, County staff, until recently, denied even knowing about the 2008 agreement. He perceives little interest in the municipality to fulfill its obligations in the negotiated settlement.

There appeared to be a bit more interest from Council last week.

“Are you aware of the agreement?” Councillor Phil Prinzen asked municipal planning staff.

Planning co-ordinator Matt Coffey confirmed that the agreement had only come to his attention recently—after the WCIA’s Rice had forwarded it to him.

Prinzen suggested that approving the subdivision plan was premature—that the matters prescribed in the agreement should be settled first.

Coffey said it wouldn’t change his recommendation to approve the development. He said the time to deal with the agreement was in 2015, when Picton’s Secondary Plan was updated. He said that plan would have dealt with the issues.

In any event, the developers were required to study the impact of their projects on Waring’s Creek and the surrounding environment, according to Coffey. He said these issues were being addressed. He added that each of the developer’s studies were reviewed by independent firms contracted by the municipality.

It’s been dealt with, according to Coffey.

But Council wasn’t so sure.

“The absolute key concern is the quality and quantity of water reaching Waring’s Creek,” said South Marysburgh councillor John Hirsch. “I remain unconvinced that it has been demonstrated that it is going to work out.”

David Harrison, councillor for North Marysburgh, said, “The onus is on the County to do a more in-depth look at the whole property—inclusive of both proposed subdivisions.”

Another council member, Roy Pennell, wants the County’s lawyers to evaluate the 2008 agreement.

Athol council member Sam Branderhorst recommended deferring consideration of the development application until the County conducted its own hydrogeological (hydroG) study of the land subject to the two subdivision proposals.

Sensing the direction Council’s questions were heading, planning manager Mike Michaud suggested limiting a review to assessing the developer’s existing hydroG studies. Such a review would determine if there were gaps in the data, and his department would proceed to fill those gaps—rather than starting all over again.

Not all council members were clear or comfortable about the narrow interpretation of their obligations under the agreement, but they agreed to defer the application to see what planning staff produced.

Councillor Roy Pennell promised, too, to ask for a legal review of the agreement at the next council meeting.

A meeting that began to consider one subdivision plan—Loyalist Heights—will result in a review of its studies as well as those of an adjacent development, the Cold Creek subdivision. Council recently approved that developer’s draft plan on its third attempt.

Michaud assured Council that both applicants would have to work together for a “wholesome review.” He said the results would be shared and reviewed by the municipality, the WCIA and the two developers.

With that, Council deferred the application, taking one hard-fought step toward the edge of the soggy field, boots still on their feet.