Editor: Re: Brookswood-Fernridge (2017) Community Plan, Public Hearing #2.

Something doesn鈥檛 smell right here.

Have the Brookswood-Fernridge Community Association (BFCA) appointed themselves as the latest planning consultants?

How is it that an anti-development political activist special interest group attempts to hijack the planning/consultation process behind the scenes?

I doubt the Public Engagement policy was intended to this purpose.

The BFCA web site reveals that for several weeks prior to the public hearing, their 鈥渆xecutive has met for several hours with senior Township planners and individually with the mayor and members of council鈥� making every effort to garner support for a heavily regulated 2017 OCP.鈥�

At the (Sept. 12) public hearing, BFCA鈥檚 executive members presented their proposal for hundreds of changes to the 2017 OCP, as an omnibus package so it can be called one amendment.

It鈥檚 quite telling that Councillors Davis, Richter and Arnason are willing to do the bidding for this activist lobby group.

It鈥檚 no secret that the BFCA has been trying to stop and/or make it as difficult as possible for development. Their term 鈥渉eavily regulated鈥� is intended to make the 2017 plan so onerous as to be unfeasible for developers to operate.

Unfortunately, all the extra costs get transferred to purchasers of the lots.

Note that most of the executive of the BFCA live in the developed area of Brookswood where they are unaffected by the extreme restrictions they want to impose on others.

Why should they have such undue influence?

It鈥檚 evident they lobbied to exempt themselves (developed part of Brookswood) from the new proposed tree bylaw.

Everyone else must save and care for the trees at their own expense so the special protected group can look at them for free?

The 2017 Community Plan process (I was a member of the planning team) turned out to be a complete failure.

The so called 鈥渕inor update of the 1987 Plan鈥� morphed beyond the mandate into a full blown $400,000 botched 2017 Plan.

It鈥檚 not too late to admit the 2017 Plan is an overcomplicated, confusing bad plan and unnecessary.

On Sept. 12, the public spoke loud and clear.

An approximate tally of Township public submissions, (spoken, written and signed petitions), shows 85 were in favour of the 2017 plan and an overwhelming 520 were against it. Approximately 6:1 are against the 2017 Plan.

Now the question is, will council listen and re-defeat the 2017 plan on this second go-around?

Roland Seguin,

Fernridge