Springer Ponds Development

Standard

On January 25, 2017 a public meeting was held to speak about an application from Springer Ponds Development Inc. where they sought to receive approval for a draft subdivision plan, along with a zoning by-law amendment. Here are the:

That evening, though some will tell you otherwise, nothing was approved.

During the public meeting we heard from the property owner/applicant, many concerned residents in the area, municipal staff, and Councillors on topics such as:

  • The applicant’s financial capacity to complete any site works and related road works
  • The length of time required to complete the works
  • The potential for the pond to be partially filled in (based on past proposals that have since been withdrawn, but were included in the January 25 package anyway)
  • How the applicant planned to have the new lots developed
  • The potential for infringing on another neighbour’s property rights, whom also owns part of the pond
  • Noise, pollution, and related matters
  • Where water that drains from the pond goes (it seems to drain to the larger pond south of Glendon Dr, and then over to the ponds west of Komoka Rd)
  • And other concerns!

There was a lot of back and forth. Ultimately the staff recommendation put forth was to defer approving anything until staff had an opportunity to come up with a list of conditions. That is what was approved; to have staff develop a list of recommendations before reviewing the application and zoning by-law amendment again.

Again, for clarity: the draft subdivision plan and zoning by-law amendments have not been approved.

For me, personally, I’m not someone who allows themselves to be subject to “slippery slope” type issues. The owner of the property is currently seeking to sever the property he owns along Springer St in order to accommodate new homes, and based on what he said during the meeting, sell those lots to individuals/couples and have those folks find their own builders.

Regardless of what the property owner eventually applies for to do along Glendon Drive or Queen St, I will review and assess those applications individually when the time comes. They are not up for review right now as they were withdrawn.

As for the trees that were cut down on the property last week, neither Middlesex Centre, Middlesex County, or the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority had any legal manner to stop that. The property is not designated a significant woodland, nor is it designated a wetland. We were legally powerless to stop it. The property owner later informed us that he was only having dead trees cut down, but I have received information stating otherwise. Regardless, we couldn’t do anything about that.

Moving forward I will be keeping a keen eye on the conditions recommended, any changes to the plans, further variances/amendments requested, and ensuring I listen to the affected residents, and anyone else who can provide pertinent information or opinions, to ensure the best outcome is achieved.