Huntsville’s Planning Committee was not overly enthusiastic about approving a zoning amendment that would permit a single family dwelling and septic system to be situated closer to the shoreline and type 1 fish habitat than the customary 30 metres – especially without a proper idea of the type of dwelling being proposed, its elevation or where the septic would be located on the property.
Committee, at its October 11 meeting, heard that the roughly 0.46 hectare property has a right-of-way traversing it, which makes it difficult to situate a dwelling and septic system at the required setbacks.
The vacant property, located at 300 Bay Meadows Road, has a frontage of about 68 metres on Fairy Lake. The applicant was seeking a setback reduction for the dwelling from 30 metres to 15.2 metres and for a septic, a reduction from 30 to 20 meters.
Because there is type 1 fish habitat abutting the shoreline, Huntsville planner Elizabeth Reimer told committee that the applicant had a fish habitat study conducted by Riverstone Environmental Solutions Inc. She said the assessment made several recommendations including sediment and erosion control measures during the construction of both the dwelling and septic. It also recommended that all vegetation fronting the proposed dwelling remains in its natural state and that the open space between the dwelling, septic and the shoreline be revegetated. The assessment also referenced using a tertiary septic treatment system for the site, rather than a conventional septic system.
“The Official Plan permits septics to be located at a lesser setback if a treatment unit is proposed. Treatment units operate differently than conventional septics in that effluent is treated inside the unit as opposed to in a leaching bed, therefore being unaffected by flooding causing effluent to wash away,” Reimer told committee. She also said some of the structures of the neighbouring properties are closely in line with the dwelling setback being proposed. Reimer said staff was recommending the approval of the setbacks.
But included in committee’s package were two letters of opposition, one from a neighbour south of the property and the other from the Fairy Lake Association.
“We feel reducing the setback by half (from 15 to 30) will significantly encroach on the privacy and views that we reasonably expected to be protected by the existing bylaws when we purchased our property,” stated the neighbour immediately to the south.
Fairy Lake Association expressed concern with a 20 rather than 30 metre setback from the shoreline for a septic system, which it noted would eliminate one-third of the buffer zone, should there be an accident. It asked that the municipality’s existing zoning bylaw with respect to sewage treatment be strictly adhered to.
“The consequences of sewage seepage, or a sewage ‘accident’ (no matter how unlikely), would be dire for the health of Fairy Lake,” it stated. Its letter also noted its opposition to granting a dwelling setback for an unidentified structure and said that any dwelling built that close to the shoreline would likely impact views from the lake and neighbouring properties.
“With respect to the building envelope, we do not support granting a reduced setback for a future structure that is currently unidentified. A setback reduction can only be properly evaluated by reviewing building plans that specify features such as height, massing, elevations, etc.,” added the lake association.
Huntsville Deputy Mayor Karin Terziano said based on the sketch provided, there seems to be quite a bit of space between the structure being proposed and the back corner of the property.
Planning Consultant Graeme Huizinga, who was representing the applicant, told committee that moving the house closer to the back of the property was contemplated “but it was determined that if we were to do that we might be encroaching onto the right-of-way with the proposed building.”
My instinct is to say take another crack at a different design, because that’s a drastic setback in my opinion and I don’t know that I’m ready to support that. Huntsville Councillor Jonathan Wiebe.
“We’re being asked to make a decision with very little information,” said committee chair, Councillor Nancy Alcock.
Terziano asked where the septic would be located. “It would be setback at least 20 metres from the shoreline,” said Huizinga. “I don’t think Mr. Butcher [property owner] has had someone out to identify a specific location that would be suitable for the treatment system, but I do understand that the treatment system is much smaller than a typical tile bed so it was not shown in this drawing as it was too preliminary to nail down kind of a specific location for it,” he added. Terziano responded that she then thought it also too early to make a decision on the application.
The Town’s chief building official Chris Nagy was called before committee to explain what the Ontario Building Code’s (OBC) requirements are. He said the OBC calls for a 15 metre setback for a septic system, which is intended to address issues such as contamination. “I would propose that the comments with regards to the septic system would be strictly based on a vegetative buffer and a visual impact rather than a contamination entity as that is already covered under the Building Code,” he said, adding that the building department will look at “how high above the watermark or the water table it [septic system] needs to be within. So through the actual inspections by the building department we’ll be looking at that.”
Still, committee was not convinced. In the end, Councillor Jason FitzGerald recommended that the application be deferred. Committee deferred a decision on the application and asked that the applicant return with more information as well as proposed building elevations.
This site diagram seemed to leave committee with more questions than answers. The rectangular shape on the top left is where the dwelling would be located, but it provides very little information about the dwelling itself. Committee also asked where the septic would be located; that too was not shown on the diagram.
Don’t miss out on Doppler! Sign up for our free newsletter here.
I read with concern earlier this year, the Town of Huntsville staff recommendation to approve a proposal by Jarlette Health Services to construct an 18 meter high, 80 meter long lakeshore building with apparent disregard for established setbacks, disregard for height restrictions, disregard for proximity to Type 1 fish habitat and disregard for established rules, regarding proposed construction of a 60 meter dock when 15 meters is the maximum allowed.
Town Council debated the issue, defied the staff recommendation, and told Jarlette that 12 meters would be the maximum allowable height. Jarlette is appealing to a higher authority and has taken the issue to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). My understanding is that Council, inexplicably, will not appear to defend their decision. What, I ask, is the point of enforcing the height regulation but neglecting to defend it?
The OMB is meeting in Huntsville November 19 and I understand a group of citizens will appear before the Board to defend, on their own time, Council’s decision. Council should be ashamed.
And where for God’s sake is the Fairy Lake Association (FLA), those self-appointed guardians of Fairy Lake whose only reaction to the height of the original Jarlette 18 meter high application was to state, “The FLA did not have a particular visual impact concern about the previous (18M) proposal.” The FLA should be ashamed as well.
Now I read that there’s an application on Bay Meadows Road to alter the setback for a dwelling from the lakefront by 50%, from 30 meters to 15 meters. The application also requests a setback change for a septic tank from 30 meters from the lakefront down to 20 meters. At least the FLA is opposing this application so perhaps they’re learning.
Huntsville Council’s reaction, however, is to defer. Grow a backbone Council, stick to your regulations as you should have done with the Jarlette application. Deny this new application and revisit the badly flawed Jarlette application.
The stakes are high for both waterfront and fresh water use. Deferring and deflecting is what the Trump White House excels at. I think you people are better than that.
The Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate (OMEC) change indicates that the three main causes of blue-green alga bloom in freshwater lakes are storm water runoff, leaching from septic tanks and agricultural seepage from fertilized areas. The Jarlette parking lots and building footprint will increase storm water runoff. Should they fertilize the grounds there’s the chance of runoff or seepage entering the lake from the fertilized lawns and shrubs. And allowing the Bay Meadows applicant to site any type of septic system within 20 meters of the lakeshore begs for a sewage incident.
Nearby Peninsula Lake enjoyed blue-green alga blooms this summer and early autumn. Is that what Huntsville Town Council wants for Fairy Lake, alga blooms and toxins, toxins the OMEC warns may be potentially dangerous to humans and animals?
The common-sense by-laws provide a good balance between environmental protection for the entire community and the desires of an individual citizen. Just apply them! Well done (so far …)
Come on. We have to keep our lakes clean. Look what happened in Penn Lake this year. What will you say to the next person that finds themselves in the same predicament? Yes, stay strong on this one committee!
The arrogance of expecting a variance without even providing specific details of the location of the septic treatment system suggests to me that our Town has a reputation for giving in to wealthy property owners. I hope our Planning Committee stands firm in strictly upholding its bylaws and puts that idea to rest.
You would be setting a precedent if you let this pass and should expect a waterfall of requests for the same consideration. Many property owners have been forced to put their septic beds on the other side of the road to comply. Don’t forget the global warming and extreme weather events we have been experiencing. Passing this request would just tempt fate
A ridiculous variance to even ask for. The existing Stakeholders on Fairy Lake are absolutely correct to oppose this. A 30m setback is a sound planning decision and needs to be adhered to. Hang in there Committee.