Two settlement areas questioned in the District of Muskoka’s review of the adopted Gravenhurst Official Plan will be scaled back and re-designated through changes presented by planning staff to the development services committee of town council.

Further to a report in November, chief planner Ian Sugden proposed modifications to the plan pertaining to the proposed expansion of the Gravenhurst Urban Centre and the Severn Bridge Community Area to better conform to the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), which requires minimum targets for intensification and redevelopment within built-up areas.

The background work by the town’s consultant prepared in advance of the new official plan identified that the proposed urban centre already has greater than a 10-year supply of serviced land.

In November 2005, town councillors approved a request from Muskoka Bay Development Corporation that identified almost 120 hectares of land within the urban boundary. The request was said to provide certainty for the Muskoka Bay subdivision master plan of about 500 living units.

Despite the committee’s desire to include the Muskoka Bay development lands within the urban centre, there is no supporting evidence to show that such an expansion is warranted at this time, said Sugden’s report.

“Our own growth objectives and studies show no need to expand the urban centre that far,” Sugden said. “We can’t justify it and be in accordance with the PPS.”

To resolve the issue, staff suggested the official plan be modified to remove a portion of the Muskoka Bay lands and re-designate them the Near Urban Area.

He explained the intent is to identify the next logical growth area for the urban centre and direct expansion toward that area before any other location is considered.

This, Sugden said, addresses the concerns of the district and province and provides some assurances to the subdivision developer.

A similar issue cropped up in Severn Bridge where the consultant’s background work did not support the scale of expansion of the Severn Bridge community boundary suggested in the adopted official plan. The plan added 80 hectares of land to the Severn Bridge Community Area.

Sugden said the objective was contained in the plan, but growth projections did not justify it.

“It’s the most active area of growth outside of the urban area,” he told this newspaper. “It’s close to Highway 11 and Simcoe County and that’s why we focused growth there.”

A portion of the lands were removed and re-designated the Near Community Area and again will take priority for future growth, while providing a sense of assurance to landowners and developers in the area.

Committee member Terry Pilger took interest in the industrial area across from Muskoka Airport and noted the official plan associated mapping suggests industrial areas must be serviced, but some light industry does not require a lot of water.

Sugden said serviced land is needed for the widest variety of industrial uses and the airport land is designated an industrial area. He said having no municipal services restricts the number of uses permitted in terms of the Ontario Building Code and Fire Code.

“It’s a fair-sized area around the airport and is ideal for industrial,” said committee member Bob Colhoun, noting 60 to 70 acres are owned privately and are easier to develop on full services. “But the district is not willing to bring in the services.”

Colhoun agreed certain industrial uses are low effluent and use little water. He said if the town is the proponent it is required to extend services, but a private owner can satisfy the Ontario Building Code.

“The lands are available for us to develop as long as the town and the developer pony up and put the services in,” he said. He did not support staff’s modifications to the plan.

Another designation for Highway 11 in the official plan was adjusted to address the concerns of the Ministry of Transportation.

The previous designation, which encompassed all of the Highway 11 corridor south of the urban area as the Highway 11 Commercial Area, was substantially reduced in area to recognize only existing commercial uses as well as logical location clusters adjacent to existing intersections.

Sugden said a general amendment requested by the committee and members of the public to protect waterfront areas will be brought forward soon. The amendment will allow policies pertaining to shoreline protection and building setbacks to be implemented before the comprehensive zoning bylaw is updated.