A subdivision application that has been on council’s radar for several years will require a legal opinion before a decision.
The issue is a subdivision at the northernmost part of the Moorefield urban boundary on land described as 83 McGivern St., Concession 9, on the east half of lot 9. The land is just under 12 acres or 4.8 hectares.
The Murray Group wants a subdivision there, which was the subject of an Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) ruling in 2008.
On Aug. 16 county planner Linda Redmond told council the township was doing a zoning amendment that year for all of Moorefield to allow smaller lots. The Murray Group had lands under draft plan of subdivision for residential and industrial uses at the time.
One item of contention was the industrial block, because the owner wanted to change it to residential use. She said the official plan amendment could not be completed because of a supply study being done then for employment lands.
She said the delay led to the appeal by the company to the OMB.
Redmond said there is a “significant woodlot” on the property the township wanted to preserve and asked for it be converted to a greenfields designation. That issue was considered at Mapleton council in March. The county hired a forester to assess the woodlot.
Redmond said two stands were identified in that study, and one was “significant enough to retain and preserve.” The other was not.
She cited the tree cover in Wellington County and noted it is 15 per cent, while Mapleton Township in general is the lowest in the county at 10%. She added the county Green Legacy program, which specifies 30% as ideal tree cover, is leading to new policies to recognize smaller wood lots.
Redmond explained that in 1999, the county incorporated a greenlands designation into its official plan, but planners later discovered it did not include smaller woodlots. She added the county is now trying to preserve areas with one or two hectares.
She added in Moorefield there are only two woodlots of that size that need protecting.
Murray Group vice-president Richard Seibel told council the current guidelines for protection is 10 hectares as a “significant woodlot.”
He said the Moorefield woodlot does not fit in the current policy and, further, “This is not what we applied for.”
He added there was never an attempt or request by the company to redesignate the woodlot to greenfields. He also noted the woodlot would have no protection at all under an industrial designation.
Redmond said the county and township could seek “tree saving measures in the site plan agreement.”
Seibel replied, “I really think you’re violating the spirit of the agreement.”
He said it is “unfair” the township might apply future county policies to a current application, and added the Grand River Conservation Authority had stated the entire parcel could be designated residential, and there was no objections when the move was made to redesignate the lands.
Redmond said it was only a draft amendment sent to the GRCA, not a final one.
But Seibel said her proposal is not what the company has asked for, and he urged council to obtain a legal opinion before it makes a decision.
To be clear, Mayor Bruce Whale asked if the Murray Group wants the entire woodlot to be residential lands.
Seibel said it does, and it would incorporate trees into backyards of new homes as a selling feature.
Whale noted the forester has stated, “That’s not the best way to handle a woodlot.”
But Seibel argued studies could have indicated Moorefield does not need more residential lands, but that did not occur.
Whale agreed council should defer its decision until it hears from a lawyer.
Councillor Andy Knetsch asked if the Murray Group is allowed to proceed, the woodlot would not be protected.
Redmond said it would not, but the township could try to protect it through a site plan agreement.
Councillor Neil Driscoll said “Moorefield is practically surrounded by trees.” Redmond said her study included only the urban boundary.
Driscoll noted the report to council said there would not be a lot of environmental impact if the woodlot is removed for houses.
Redmond said the second stand of trees is insignificant.
Seibel told council the county was doing a study on employment lands (now required for housing developments) and that was the reason the Murray Group waited for its application: the county had asked it to wait.
