26 September 2006
To: All Members of Council
Re: Council Agenda 65, for September, 27, 2006,
Planning and Environment Report #54A, Item #1
Leitrim – Tartan lands rezoning – Phase 2
Dear Councillors:
The Greenspace Alliance of Canada has on numerous previous occasions expressed objections to proposals regarding development around and in the Leitrim Wetlands, most recently when a Plan of Subdivision was before Planning and Environment Committee on June 13, 2006. The rezoning recommendation now before you pertains largely to the same area as that Phase 2 Plan of Subdivision.
Our objections include the following:
1- In the March 2006 Addendum Report and Map for the Urban Natural Areas Environmental Evaluation Study, Area #106 is noted as remaining to be evaluated. From the staff report when this Addendum was presented to Council (PEC, June 27, 2006, Item #17; Council Agenda 62, July 11, 2006, PEC Report 51A, Item 15) one can infer that this site was among 10 that were not evaluated because access was denied by the owner.
When the Alliance made a similar comment to the proposed Plan of Subdivision, the staff response was that the portion of Area #106 that fell within the Plan had been removed from the UNAEE. This is puzzling as most of Area #106 falls within the proposed subdivision. A natural area does not lose its attributes because an owner wants to turn it into a subdivision.
When Council, on August 23, 2006 (PEC Agenda 52, June 27, 2006, Item 18; Council Agenda 63, ARAC Report 26A, Item 6) approved the Greenspace Master Plan and a related Official Plan Amendment, an expected UNF Acquisition Strategy did not yet come forward. Yet, the intent of Council clearly is that no zoning should be approved until a full evaluation is done on sites identified in the UNAEE Study. Rezoning of Parcel 1 of this proposal should therefore be deferred until this evaluation has been completed.
Having been denied access for the UNAE Evaluation means that the City does not owe the developer any favours.
2- At the June 27 PEC meeting, the Chair of the Ottawa Forests and Greenspace Advisory Committee made strong representation that the UNAEES Report on Area #108 was woefully inadequate. In the UNAEE Study, Area #108 was rated Low but a comparison with inventories provided by Albert Dugal in 1991 and 2000 showed such huge discrepancies that this re-zoning (which, barring OMB acceptance of Appeals of the Plan of Subdivision to the OMB, will give the green light to this Phase of the development) should be put on hold until Area #108 can be re-evaluated.
3- All the objections raised by the Sierra Club’s Albert Dugal when this rezoning was before Committee on September 12, 2006 and again in a submission to you dated September 23, 2006. Several of the Sierra Club’s grounds for objection re-inforce the imperative to defer rezoning of Parcel 1 as already argued above. Among other things, we refer to the hydro-geological issues raised; the appearance of a huge Swale, never before shown in documents circulated and never reviewed by federal agencies; the contested findings of Transport Canada’s Area-Wide Risk Assessment on toxic fall-out from the former Gloucester Landfill; and the potential loss of a recreational trout fishery in Findlay Creek.
Submitted with respect,
Erwin Dreessen
for the Greenspace Alliance of Canada’s Capital
Carol Gudz, Interim Chair