Re - Johnston's Point

Apr 25, 2018

Dear Warden Higgins and Frontenac County Councillors.

Your response to the motion from South Frontenac Council concerning possible violations of the Conditions of Approval for the Johnson’s Point development ignored the motion’s request asking for an “investigation of a possible violation of the Conditions of Approval for the Johnson’s Point development”. As the mover the motion, that request was also the explicit intent of the motion.

The motion did not ask Frontenac Council to re-write, or appeal, the Conditions of Approval, only to fulfill its obligation to ensure that the Conditions, enacted be the Ontario Municipal Board and supported by the County, are met for the development to proceed. For some reason the legal opinion cited in the motion passed by County Council, argued that it was not possible to change the Conditions of Approval, an issue unrelated to the motion.

Rather than spend money on extraneous legal opinions it would be more useful to spend that money ensuring that serious concerns about the development are being investigated.

The possible violation that the County was asked to investigate relates to Condition 6(iv) and 6(v) of the OMB ruling PL150246:

iv…. all living trees greater than 4 inches diameter at breast height within 40 m of any water body shall not be removed, with the exception of trees knocked over naturally;

v..… all vegetation, with the exception of invasive species, shall be retained and maintained in their natural state within 30 m of all water bodies;

It is important to note that these conditions go above and beyond the normal environmental conditions put in place by the Township and the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority. The stricter requirements are due the highly sensitive nature of this development in a Provincially Significant Wetland and a candidate Area of Natural and Scientific Interest. These tighter restrictions were agreed to by the developer, in part, because an extra lot, an increase from 14 lots to 15 lots, was agreed to by the Township and the County.

The public can rightly be cynical of governing institutions when rules and regulations developed to protect a public good, like the environment, after much public consultation, are not adequately enforced. This may be the situation on Johnson’s Point. This is the concern that Frontenac County Council is being asked to address.

I would like to ask you to reconsider your actions on Johnson’s Point and respond to the concerns in the motion from South Frontenac Council. It would also be respectful to include concerned members of the public in the investigation of alleged violations.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your further deliberations.

Your sincerely,

Ross Sutherland, South Frontenac Councillor, Loughborough District.