Council OKs Paxton's Bush report; looking into preservation options
Paxton's Bush - Photo from the Paxton's Bush Facebook Group
By Aaron Hall – Daily Post Editor
Preserving a “gem in the community” was the main theme at Monday’s (May 17) Planning meeting held at the Civic Centre in Chatham.
The Chatham-Kent Council Chambers was packed with members of the community, as Council considered options for preserving Paxton’s Bush – a woodlot located in the North Side of Chatham.
After nearly three-hours of community presentations, Council voted unanimously in support of the following staff recommendations:
- 1. Council adopt the alternative concept plan prepared by administration, which preserves all of the Paxton’s Bush woodland, permits low density residential development in the southwest portion of the northwest quadrant of the area and retains the existing urban reserve land use designation for all the remaining lands, as the position administration will take at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).
- 2. A second public meeting be held at an appropriate time prior to the commencement of the OMB Hearing scheduled to begin October 25, 2010 to confirm Chatham-Kent’s position regarding all issues, in addition to the development of the Paxton’s Bush woodland.
- 3. Administration continue attempts to settle the Brombow appeal.
A fourth recommendation, which instructs Chatham-Kent’s solicitor to prepare an agreement of purchase and sale for the purchase of the north part of the woodlot, was brought forward by the organizing committee for the Preservation of Paxton’s Bush. North Kent Counc. Bill Weaver entered a successful motion to include this option with staff’s recommendations.
West Kent Counc. Bryon Fluker entered a successful motion as well to include a recommendation from the Preservation group, which stated if the previous option does not succeed, Council will move to pass a by-law to expropriate the same land.
A staff report indicates that Brombow Developments, which made an appeal to the OMB, is proposing a mix of land uses for development in the area, including a subdivision. A section of Paxton’s Bush is proposed to be included among this development.
Tom Storey, of Storey Samways Planning Ltd., said at Monday’s meeting that it is unknown what role the Ministry of Natural Resources will play at the OMB hearing – as the Endangered Species Act indicates that Paxton’s Bush has an endangered species within the woodlot – the Butternut tree.
Chatham Counc. Steve Pickard said he believes everyone on Council wants to see the popular woodlot preserved.
“This is completely about seeking a fair resolution,” Pickard said.
East Kent Counc. Steve Pinsonneault said Council needs to make a responsible decision on its attempt to preserve the bush.
“We can’t just out out a blank cheque to buy the problem,” he said. “That would not be responsible to all of the tax payers. I don’t think anyone around this horseshoe wants to see any trees cut down.”
Chatham Counc. Douglas Sulman said fundraising efforts would be a great initiative for the community to under take.
“If you got a toonie a week from everyone in the Facebook group… that could go a long way,” he said.
Wallaceburg Counc. Tom McGregor said he is confident a resolution could be reached.
“A responsible government has a duty to preserve the environment,” McGregor said. “I’m very confident that administration, with some direction from Council, can get to that point.”
Wallaceburg Counc. Sheldon Parsons said the situation with Paxton’s Bush, is very similar to that of Sycamore Woods in Wallaceburg. Parsons said the community rallied together to purchase the 10 acre lot in Wallaceburg for $64,000 a couple years ago.
“A good outcome can come of all of this if we work together,” he said.
West Kent Counc. Brian King said various government grants should be available if the purchase of the woodlot becomes a reality.
“We need to get on this,” he said. “We need to strike a deal.”
Chatham Counc. Marjorie Crew said she visited Paxton’s Bush recently, and was very impressed.
“It’s quite a gem,” she said. “You forget that you are in the city.”
Crew added that she intends to look into entering a motion to create a tree cutting by-law in Chatham-Kent.
Noting the endangered species located with Paxton’s Bush, Chatham Counc. Anne Gilbert said she believes Chatham-Kent has a good case to bring forward to the OMB hearing in October.
“Any negotiations need some clout no matter what… unless we can strike a deal,” she said.
Mayor Randy Hope said he wanted to thank the O’Neill family, owners of Brombow Developments, for allowing the public to utilize portions of the woodlot for years.
Hope also commended the various youth and members of the community for providing their presentations to Council on Monday night as well.
Check out these other two stories from Monday’s meeting:
Chatham-Kent youth open up about Paxton’s Bush
Community discusses Paxton’s Bush, calls for access and preservation
Terence Johnson
May 18, 2010 at 10:57 am
A big THANK YOU to all the young people who stood up and spoke to Council last night. That’s not an easy thing even for grown-ups to do, and you all did really well!
As for councilors worried about the cost, weigh it against the amount of Economic Development and Tourism dollars that will be utterly wasted if this bush is destroyed.
It also seems that certain deals signed by administration some ten years ago were very, very poorly drafted – hence the disputes over exactly how much of the bush the public own, and over renaming Orangewood/Lacroix – and it will always be expensive to unravel that kind of a mess. To my (non-lawyer) mind, the contract for the conveyance of the bush portion seems to bypass planning law, and whoever signed it should have sought better legal advice. Councilors should make sure that such problems are avoided in future, and that administration understands its duty to consult properly before accepting any “gifts” with planning-related strings attached.
Why not even go so far as to make an offer for the portion to the south of Brown Drain between the existing bush and the Salvation Army, and expand the bush? Building a new road bridge into that small an area isn’t really worth the capital expense and future upkeep, and according to the reports presented last night, Chatham has huge deficits in public parkland and tree cover. I’ll help plant the trees.
RealityCheck
May 18, 2010 at 12:41 pm
I watched this meeting was impressed with all the presenters. Very well done!
Council does need to insure that cost of this land is not beyond reasonable for similar bush land. To simply pay whatever is being asked may be politically expedient, however it would not be appropriate.
Cookie
May 18, 2010 at 11:33 am
I can’t figure out how Paxton’s Bush got into the hands of a private developer in the first place – what were our municipal officials thinking at the time?
If I’m correct, the city sold it to the developer and now we’re going to buy it back – sounds like a lousy economic decision to me and will only make the developer richer.
Don’t get me wrong – I think Paxton’s Bush belongs to the people – we are just going to have a very hefty price tag to put it back in the hands of the citizens.
Terence Johnson
May 18, 2010 at 11:59 am
My understanding is that it was all in private ownership before the original transfer of the center portion to the municipality.
Steve Pickard
May 19, 2010 at 9:43 am
from tom storey at the open meeting monday night:
in 2003?, the property was originally in private hands but in a deal with mr. oneil lands of paxton’s bush were to be transferred to the municipality for other lands and considerations. after the transaction, mr. oneil had a different interpretation of the wording of the contract – council thought that they had negotiated for all 20 acres of the bush and oneil would get the surrounding lands. oneil said that council got only the centre of the bush and he got the surrounding bush lands. council capitulated in 2005 which started the ball rolling on mr oneil wanting to bulldoze the bush.
Joel
May 19, 2010 at 10:34 am
Mr. Pickard,
Could you maybe comment on your steadfast support for Paxton’s Bush supporters relative to your indifference to wind turbine opponents? To the casual observer, your politics may seem highly inconsistent.
Jim in Wallaceburg
May 19, 2010 at 9:37 pm
Mr. Pickard – thank you for your insight and contributions to this article. I suspect there are many things that you are unable to comment on with regards to this issue due to municipal guidelines. It seems to me that Mr. O’Neil is quite the wheeler and dealer and I would suggest having any contract reviewed by an out-of-region attorney. And don’t mind Joel, he is usually well intentioned and sometimes off topic.
Joel
May 20, 2010 at 12:53 pm
geez Jim…you can at least by him dinner first
WhyMeLord
May 18, 2010 at 12:18 pm
I agree that this woodlot should be preserved in its entirety, but I hope that it is not tax dollars that are used to purchase the land. Much like the residents in my community have independently raised funds to purchase a brownfield site to transform into a community park, I hope that the residents of Chatham, especially those in the organized group, can spearhead such a fundraiser.
And expropriation is not an option. Although the current owner and the municipality have conflicting interest, it is best for everybody if a solution accepted by all parties is brokered. Including this party writing this comment (my interest shown above).
James Snyder
May 19, 2010 at 11:13 am
The meeting was an excellent start
There are options that may make land donations as an ecological gift more attractive to private sector owners
I have noted below examples from other communities/ groups etc
The federal program
Ecological Gifts Program
http://www.ec.gc.ca/pde-egp/default.asp?lang=En&n=FCD2A728-1
http://www.on.ec.gc.ca/wildlife/ecogifts/ecogifts-e.html
A typical doner profile under this program
http://sustainabilityfund.gc.ca/wildlife/ecogifts/profile-glassco-e.html
the London model
http://www.london.ca/d.aspx?s=/Parks_and_Natural_Areas/donation.htm
The Lakeshore model developed as part of the Recreation Master plan by IBI
http://www.lakeshore.ca/businessresources/EcologicalLandDonations.asp
The Kawartha model
http://www.kawarthaheritage.org/ecologicalgifts.asp
The Essex County Conservation Authority model
http://www.ourgreenlegacy.org/
As noted in the Lakeshore model in addtion to the Federal Program Lakeshore, via their Recreation Master Plan consultants ( who happen to be the same for CK) identified two Provincial programs that may be of interest
“In addition to the Ecological Land Donation program there are two Provincial Tax Incentive programs described below. The first program offers property tax exemption for lands having provincial significance. The second program offers property tax reduction for forest lands managed in accordance with an adopted forest management plan. These incentives encourage stewardship of these natural areas without changing the land ownership.
Conservation Land Tax Incentive Program (CLTIP)
The Conservation Land Tax Incentive Program (CLTIP) is designed to recognize, encourage and support the long-term private stewardship of Ontario’s provincially significant conservation lands by providing property tax relief to those landowners who agree to protect the natural heritage values of their property. The current tax relief offered is 100 % tax exemption on that eligible portion of the property. Further information can be obtained by accessing the following website: Conservation Land Tax Incentive Program http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/CLTIP/index.html(MFTIP)
Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program
The Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program is a voluntary program available to landowners who own four hectares or more of forest land, and who agree to prepare and follow a Managed Forest Plan for their property. Further information on this program can be obtained by accessing the following website: Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/Forests/Publication/MNR_E000245P.html
Two other programs identified that may be of use
Ontario LandCARE
Led by Ducks Unlimited Canada
This program provides financial incentives and technical assistance to farmers to encourage soil and water conservation while improving the environment for wildlife and people.
Contact information: http://www.ducks.ca/contact/index.html
Wetland Habitat Fund
Led by Wildlife Habitat Canada and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
This program provides Ontario landowners with financial assistance (up to 50% of project costs, to a maximum of $5,000) for projects that improve the ecological integrity of wetland habitats.
Lastly here are some incredible land purchase /donation projects/ groups examples in London that are worth visiting as a model for CK areas or even arranging a guest speaker to comment on the history and process of obtaining and maintaining such sites .
http://www.thamesriver.on.ca/Wetlands_and_Natural_Areas/meadowlily.htm
http://www.thecoves.ca/
There are also home grown examples such as the one noted in the article just outside of Wallaceburg etc
WhyMeLord
May 20, 2010 at 12:23 pm
Here is another option. You may recall that some land in south-eastern Chatham-Kent has already been “saved”. The Nature Conservancy of Canada has bought over 1000 acres of land known as the Clear Creek Forest. You can find the information here: http://www.natureconservancy.ca/site/PageServer?pagename=on_ncc_work_projects_clearcreek1
Maybe they would be interested in working with the Chatham group.
James Snyder
May 20, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Well said re community involvement The examples noted from London and the two examples from CK show that a private group of motivated citizens can accomplish wonders both from a purchase and operations standpoint . Tax dollars are not always the only solution.
Jim in Wallaceburg
May 19, 2010 at 8:06 pm
I attended the public meeting last month and asked Brombow Development what their average price per acre was in 2010 dollars. They refused to answer the question. A simple search of the registers office would reveal many details – but I estimate it at between $4,000 and $8,000 per acre. And Brombow Developments wants to sell for $40,000 per acre because they can make more money by calling 1-800-THE-BULL. Shameful.
A few years ago the Sydenham Field Naturalist coordinated the purchase of the 10 acre Sycamore Woods in Wallaceburg for $6,400 per acre and Larry Cornelis spoke knowledgeable and passionately at council about the benefits of woodlands in our community.
We need more selfless and passionate citizens like Mr. Cornelis, who volunteer their time and expertise for the betterment of our community, and fewer like the proponents of Brombow Development who appear to be motivate by self-indulgence.
Good to hear the council did not take the annex option off the table as a last resort.