Impressions regarding the PSPAC meeting June 19, 2008
This proposal of Omaray Developments Ltd. was discussed under the Implementation Policy 10 of the current MPS and to be forwarded – if agreed by the PSPAC - for approval to the Town’s Council.
Open to the public for input and discussions was the development of Phase 1 only showing 33 dwellings of single unit and two unit ones illustrated on the map attached to the proposal. The future development of multiple unit dwellings was excluded and would have to be discussed at a later point in time in form of an amendment. With this decision of Mr. Wrye all and any implications on the development in total were not looked at. The Chair, Mr. Wrye confirmed at least that an amendment would have to go through the same process as a development agreement. For sure, any amendment will have to be based on the “new” MPS and the “new” Land Use Bylaw.
Mr. Morrison, Director Planning, showed in a power-point presentation 25 R-1 dwellings, 9 R-1A single unit dwellings and 9 R-1A semi-detached unit ones with 51 units in total. Obviously, he was mistaken in regards to the 25 R-1 dwellings and this figure became corrected to 15 by the developer later on.
Mr. Morrison presented as well that 72% of the runoff of the surface water would be directed to the East and to a natural watercourse “which carries water to Olsen pond and then across Main Street and eventually to the dykelands” and that a “smaller amount of drainage will be directed to the ditches on Maple Avenue and then to the natural drainage course on the west side of Maple Avenue.”
I stated for the record that any additional water in the watercourse on the west side of Maple Avenue would for certain be beyond the capacity of this natural watercourse and that - speaking for my neighbour, Mr. MacDonald, as well - we both oppose this development agreement unless there is a guarantee by the Town and the developer that any additional surface water will not increase our current flooding problems and having the Town telling us that it has no responsibility.
Mr. Morrison then pointed out that he had spoken to Mr. MacDonald in the afternoon and prior to the meeting and that Mr. MacDonald had been in agreement with the section “Drainage” of the proposal and had only expressed concerns with the then increasing traffic on Maple Avenue in its current desolate state and its missing infrastructure. Talking to my neighbour the next morning again, he verified that it was true that he and Mr. Morrison had spoken and that he had asked for a guarantee by the Town and the developer under the “Drainage” section that no additional surface water would be directed into the watercourse - as it is - on the west side of Maple. This part of his conversation with my neighbour Mr. Morrison had obviously forgotten entirely.
And there will be plenty of additional surface water coming downhill.
The proposal states correctly: “The site is gently sloped to the north with the exception of a steep slope area adjacent to Maple Avenue.” Before the top soil became heaped up and the entrance to the site was cut in by a dozer the grass surface could easily absorb any surface water. I even doubt very much that there was any runoff from that site and into the watercourse on the west side of Maple prior to the works done already. With all the planned hard surfaces on the 14 acres site (streets, driveways, buildings etc.) masses of surface water will have to go somewhere. And quite a portion will rush down the “steep” slope of the street to be built towards Maple and across Maple and into the watercourse there carrying a lot of sediment as well.
When I had questioned the presented 72% of drainage water to be directed to the watercourse at the North East, the developer even had corrected Mr. Morrison’s figure to 80% a little later. Whatever the truth might be it leaves more than a cup filled with drainage waters for the natural watercourse at the west side.
When Mr. Morrison then answered that calculations like the 72% were very easy ones for engineers and that it would be an easy job for an engineer as well to calculate and determine exactly the runoff prior to any development works (prior to touching the top soil and prior to dozing the entrance to the site with a steep slope towards Maple), I was wondering if Mr. Morrison would really understand what he was talking about.
Mr. Morrison has neither credentials as an engineer nor as a planner and - according to what I was told - does cost the Wolfville tax payers in addition to his salaries extra money for buying knowledge from outside consultants. I would like to hear these more than possible limitations in his public presentations when he tries to get a “professional opinion” across as the current Director of Planning.
For all the very critical and very technical details I had suggested an independent study to be done beforehand neither influenced by the Town nor by the developer.
Personally, I disagree with the decision taken by the Chair, Mr. Wrye, to have the PSPAC motion for Phase 1 of the development passed without a detailed clarification of all the open technical and other issues, forwarded to the table by the public and by PSPAC members as well.
This means that the Council will get the proposal presented for a final decision next month with crucial technical input defined, prepared and filled in by Town staff only and without any public participation and control. I am certain, at least Mr. Wrye understood on what he was doing.
Who do these people “in power” think they are? They do not own the Town!
Lutz E. Becker / June23, 2008
Cc/ Public
No comments:
Post a Comment