Springwater responds to MRA questions
From Springwater Township May 9 3012
The Council of the Township of Springwater would like to thank the Midhurst
Ratepayers’ Association for their presentation to Council on the Midhurst Secondary
Plan. During the presentation there were several questions that were posed. The
following points contain the Township’s responses to the questions presented that
evening:
Question 1: Would Council explain to us why an annual urban growth rate of 30%
is necessary in our rural village?
Answer: The Township has not designated an annual urban growth rate. There are
no set annual growth rates for any settlements in the Township of
Springwater.
Question 2: How does Council plan to protect the existing Village of Midhurst
from serious traffic congestion?
Answer: Addressing traffic is important to the Township. The Township has
completed work that includes a traffic study, which evaluates the
anticipated traffic flows and identifies required upgrades in the settlement
area to address this concern. The upgrades required include additional
road connections to existing arteries, urbanizing of selected roads to
include sidewalks, widening of some roads from two lanes to four lanes,
addition of turning lanes, and signalization of key intersections.
Question 3: What measures will Council take to deal with the inevitable land use
conflicts and damage to our natural environment that will arise from
intensive urbanization under the Secondary Plan?
Answer: The Midhurst Secondary Plan identifies and delineates environmental
corridors through environmental protection designations to provide for
natural spaces and connections. The Midhurst Secondary Plan was also
reviewed by the Ministry of the Environment. The planning process,
through plan of subdivision, zoning and site plan, provides tools for
Council to control how development will occur. Engineering requirements
will also be mandated that have strict requirements on design and
measures that focus on the protection of the environment.
For example, treatment of storm water is enhanced (storm water ponds
which are to also provide an aesthetically pleasing open space area) through
requirements within subdivision agreements to ensure that storm
water management plans are provided to the satisfaction of the Township
and Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA). One of the
requirements within a storm water management plan is to reduce or
remove pollutants from storm water (quality and quantity control) before it
is conveyed back into the watershed.
Question 4: How much more of the taxpayers’ money does Council propose to
spend promoting and defending a plan that the voters of Midhurst
don’t want?
Answer: The Midhurst Secondary Plan has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal
Board by a number of parties including the Province of Ontario. Township
Council has not provided any direction to staff for the expenditure of
taxpayers’ funds towards the defence of the Midhurst Secondary Plan at
the Ontario Municipal Board.
Question 5: Will Council do the right thing, repeal the Secondary Plan and
develop a strategy to work collaboratively with the community to
create a Secondary Plan that reflects the voice and wishes of the
voters of Midhurst?
Answer: Consultative sessions were held between 2004 and 2008 prior to the
approval of the Midhurst Secondary Plan. There have also been several
Public Information Meetings in 2008 that solicited public input prior to
approval by Springwater Council in November of 2008. Additional
meetings were held afterwards to give ratepayers an opportunity to gain
additional information on the Secondary Plan. A schedule showing these
meeting dates is included in the Midhurst Secondary Plan section of the
Township website. (Municipal Services > Planning & Development >
Midhurst Secondary Plan)
The Midhurst Secondary Plan was developed as an integral part of the
Township’s future planning and growth requirements. Planning policy
requires a balance of competing interests and the provision of equity and
accountability for all citizens and affected stakeholders. There are many
different types of citizens (residential, corporate) within the Township, and
as a result, the answer to what is the “right thing” depends on the
perspective of who is asking the question. As such, the “right thing” as
mentioned, may be perceived to be in the best interests of the residents of
Midhurst, but may not be in the overall public interest of the Township as a
whole. Therefore, Council’s position moving forward will need to consider
the impacts to the citizens (resident, corporate) and the Township as a
whole.
The Midhurst Secondary Plan is currently before the Ontario Municipal
Board. In these circumstances, the Ontario Municipal Board now has
jurisdiction over the Secondary Plan and it is questionable whether it is
legally open to the Township to repeal it unilaterally in any event. The
Township’s status before the Ontario Municipal Board is essentially the
same as that of the Province and other parties to the Ontario Municipal
Board appeals. The Township can advocate for changes to the Secondary
Plan at the Ontario Municipal Board, but any changes would have to
conform to the Growth Plan including Amendment #1 as the solution
imposed by the Province for the Midhurst Secondary Plan.
Leave a Reply