Dear Ms. Zhuo, On behalf of…

ERO number

019-5530

Comment ID

61631

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses

Comment

Dear Ms. Zhuo,

On behalf of our client, DIV Development (Barrie) Ltd., owners of approximately 80 hectares of land located north of Lockhart Road and west of Sideroad 20, I have attached a letter which provides a detailed summary of the outstanding concerns and comments on the new City of Barrie Official Plan.

We are concerned with the disposal of the Hewitt’s Secondary Plan, which was included as Section
9 in the previous Official Plan to guide development on lands annexed from the Town of
Innisfil in 2010, and represented an extensive planning study and process that was ultimately
approved in 2016, just six years before the adoption of the Barrie OP. We request that the Province exclude the Hewitt’s Secondary Plan area from the requirement for a new Secondary Plan prior to, as a requirement of, or condition of development approvals (e.g. draft plan of subdivision and zoning bylaw amendment) for lands in this area. Accordingly, we request that the Subject Lands be identified with a site-specific policy on Map 2 and a new subsection be added to Policy 2.8 that reads as follows:
Proposed Policy 2.8.8 “2.8.8 Notwithstanding the policies of this plan, the lands noted on Map 2, municipally known as 1080 Lockhart Road (Part Lot 20, Concession 11), are permitted to develop
for single and semi-detached uses, all forms of townhome dwellings, and one park. The lands shall be planned to achieve an overall minimum density of 55 residents and jobs per hectare. Development approvals on these lands shall not require the preparation of a secondary plan.”

Additionally, in order the expedite the delivery of housing in the Barrie, we request the Province modify the policies of the Official Plan to make phasing for new development to commence contingent only on the availability of required infrastructure. Phasing policies should not be delayed for apparently arbitrary milestones on other lands (e.g. 60% of development in the previous phase registered), as currently contemplated in policy 9.5.2. Should the Phasing outlined in Appendix 2 of the Official Plan persist, we request that the schedule be modified to include our client’s lands within Phase 1. This can be achieved by extending the Phase 1 boundary east to include all lands south of Mapleview Drive East and west of 20th sideroad on this schedule.

Further comments regarding Affordable Housing, Minimum Density on Collector and Arterial Streets and Intensification Corridors, and Lower Density and Height Requirements Adjacent to Municipal Boundaries are outlined in the letter.

Supporting documents