TINY’S RECREATION MASTER PLAN

TINY’S RECREATION MASTER PLAN

Cottagers asked to buy the bullets to shoot themselves in the foot!!

IN an era of widespread mistrust for our political masters, coupled with a deep recession that has hurt many families financially, Tiny Township is presenting a Recreation Master Plan for the beaches of Tiny that shows no respect for the peace and quiet of the cottage communities nor any financial mercy for cottagers who will be asked to foot most of the bill for the big plans.

The Master Plan calls for extensive parking lot developments: 1,784 new parking spaces (for high intensity beach use) and the construction of wall-to-wall washrooms: some 228 would be “required” by the building code where there are now 32. Eleven specific beach communities have been targetted to welcome the influx of day-trippers expected from the promotion of our beaches to millions of people. No revenues are forecast to be generated by this vast throng: it is Tiny tax dollars – 70% of which come from cottagers – that will create this new Wasaga spreading out from 11 locations along our beaches. Are you near one? See the table on page 12 and map on facing page.

Background: The Parks and Recreation Master Plan was originally commissioned by the former Lancia Council in 1989. It had a steering committee with two cottagers on it. It was designed to look at all forms of recreation in Tiny, and to pay particular attention to the longstanding problems of shoreline use. Its mandate was to study Township-owned land. It was supposed to sort out appropriate levels of demand: from cottagers, front and back-lot; from inland residents; and from others. It was supposed to assess beach sites on an environmental basis. Communication with shoreline associations was supposed to be extensive. It actually boiled down to one Spring 1991 meeting with the consultant which most of the 40 or so cottagers who attended, felt was quite unsatisfactory.

The study was stopped by the Lancia Council in July 1991 as the further implications of two major issues, restructuring and the shoreline lawsuit, became clear: Tiny might not have any township-owned shoreline land base left if the MNR wins its lawsuit, and it may not have any money to pay for more parks and washrooms if most of Tiny’s commercial tax base is eventually lost through restructuring.

After the November 1991 election, the Hastings Council wasted little time in resurrecting the study, even though provincial grants to support its $100,000 cost had been cut off. Council decided to act as its own steering committee, and the original terms of reference were given scant attention, as was the environment and sorting out appropriate levels of demand.

The consultant took a few weeks to turn out a 94-page draft report which council received last fall. A few “tiny” changes were made to get it into its final draft form received by Council on April 14 this year. The Township recently sent one copy to each of about 30 listed ratepayer associations to study. (Compare: this Tiny Cottager reaches about 15,000 seasonal residents.)

The “Master Plan” Report: The report makes sweeping recommendations that could devastate many stable family cottage areas, yet it is deficient in elementary research and analysis. The report relies on a “textbook” approach to figuring out carrying capacity of beach areas. No land survey was undertaken to determine the amount of land available. No environmental study was undertaken to set user limits that the beach areas can actually withstand without serious damage. The consultant merely shows the results of calculations using four different handbooks! The Tiny Council is left to pick a number, any number!

The report never says where is the township-owned land in all of these locations to contain these hundreds of extra parking spaces and dozens of nice new flush toilets. There is never an indication of how big a septic bed is necessary, or whether some colossal holding tank is to be used! Never a hint as to the environmental impact of all that sewage and runoff from the parking lots!

The report expects all those “users” to be the millions from the Greater Toronto Area. The report quotes the prediction that there will be some 6.5 million people in the GTA by the year 2021; MNR has stated frequently that one-half of the population of Ontario lives within 90 miles of the beaches of Nottawasaga Bay. Thousands of people will bring tons of garbage. Guess who will pay to remove the garbage and pick up the broken beer bottles and used needles?

The Master Plan contains no analysis of the impacts of these huge beach developments on adjoining property owners. Everyone knows that parking lots, particularly those hidden in remote wooded areas, will attract rowdyism, noisy night parties, alcohol consumption and drug dealers. Bonfires can spark larger fires, especially when set by those under the influence. The report ignores how cottage owners are to be protected from such obvious impacts, and the inevitable trespass onto their cottage properties. The report ignores the question of whether proper police patrols and protection is even feasible, given OPP budgetary constraints.

Who Benefits? Who Pays? There is no cost/benefit analysis anywhere in the report. It calls for some 1/2 million dollars to be spent to develop parking lots and washrooms, but there is no revenue to be gained from these facilities. It assumes free parking and toilets for Metro residents – mostly paid for by the cottagers. The development of facilities for Ontarians as a whole is a Provincial function. To this end, the Province years ago set up the 4,500 acre Awenda Provincial Park. It has 2 miles of top-class beach, purchased to provide beaches for all residents and visitors of Ontario. Why has it only some 120 parking spaces for day trippers? Why doesn’t the report come on strong with a strategy to lobby the Province for more? Why should Tiny be considering building with OUR tax dollars over 1,700 parking spaces on non-existent land in the midst of tranquil and stable cottage communities? What is the hidden agenda?

Do you want the Township to spend a 1/2 million dollars plus thousands more every year to clean up after out of township residents so that they can trespass on your property, expose you to nighttime parties with ghetto blasters and fires and put your person and property at risk. That is what the Recreation Master Plan asks you to support. Supporting this plan is like being asked to shoot yourself in the foot and pay for the bullets to do it!

Why the Rush? There is a saying: “if you don’t own it, don’t plan for it”. And yet, some members of this Council seem to be in a great hurry to start implementing this plan right now, even while ownership of the western shore is being decided in a court of law (see article). Nine of the eleven sites “studied” will be affected by the outcome of the lawsuit. Township Council has stipulated that all comments from the public must reach them by June 18th! Why the rush, councillors? What is the hidden agenda?

What Can You Do?

* Do you agree with the findings of the Recreation Master Plan?

* Do you want to find out more about them?

* How do you feel about a plan to service Torontonian day trippers at a cost of millions to Tiny taxpayers when we don’t even have fire fighting equipment adequate to protect us and our seasonal or permanent homes (see article)?

* Are you happy that your cottage is not in a location “chosen” in the report?? If so, dream on, because with an anti-shoreline Council what is proposed for 11 locations now could hit you some day in the future!!

* Are you concerned? If so, make your views known to Tiny Council. They have scheduled a meeting on the Master Plan report for Saturday, June 5th, 1993 at 2:00 pm in the Municipal Offices on Balm Beach Road. Don’t miss it!!

SUMMARY OF REQUIREMENTS (from Tables 2 and 3 of Recreation Master Plan)