BRENDA O’FARRELL
The 1019 Report
In response to objections raised by Hudson residents to the town’s proposed planning bylaws that aim to limit how and where development can be carried out in the municipality, the town’s council will be going back to the drawing board to rewrite some provisions.
“You have been heard,” said Hudson Mayor Chloe Hutchison at Monday evening’s council meeting, referring to the hundreds of residents who participated in the information meetings and consultation sessions organized by the town.
The public consultation process launched last month – and which continues until Feb. 14 – has generated a mountain of feedback, including more than 400 survey forms as of Monday that were filled out online.
“We continue to hear you,” Hutchison said, adding: “We expect to return to the drawing board.”
“If we weren’t genuinely interested in getting your input, we wouldn’t have gone to such an extensive process,” the mayor explained. “We will get there.”
See HUDSON CONSULTATIONS, Page 4
HUDSON CONSULTATIONS:
Feedback from residents
has been loud and clear
From Page 1
Hutchison admitted that the feedback – in some instances couched in outrage and delivered with pointed criticism and accusations of purposely aiming to penalize residents – has been harsh.
“It’s not an easy time right now,” Hutchison said at the end of Monday’s council meeting.
But, she admitted in an interview after the meeting, that it is all part of the process that council designed to determine what residents are willing to accept and where there is pushback.
About 140 residents participated in a consultation session last Wednesday where the two proposed bylaws were discussed and residents had the opportunity to both ask questions and provide their comments. Much of the attention was focused on two provisions: One that would impose a fee on homeowners who would undertake major renovations of their homes. And another that would require property owners to request a permit to cut a tree with a trunk that is as small as five centimetres in diameter.
According to one of the proposed bylaws, the fee that is currently imposed on landowners who subdivide their property would be extended to property owners who want to build on a vacant lot, build a replacement building after a house has been demolished, add two or more residential units to an existing building, undertake a renovation that touches on 33 per cent or more of a building, expand a commercial building by more than 25 per cent of its existing footprint or change the use of a building, such as converting it from commercial to residential use. The money generated by this measure would go into a dedicated fund to finance parks, playgrounds and the acquisition of natural areas.
The example of renovating a home that would include a third of the building drew the most criticism during the consultation meeting.
“It’s not the right way to raise funds,” said resident Chantal Perreault, who called the measure “discriminatory,” and “unfair.”
Another resident suggested undesirable actions should be targeted and assessed a fee as a means to disincentivize the practice, instead of forcing homeowners looking to improve their homes or renovate to make space for adult children to live to pay a fee that could total into the tens of thousands of dollars.
One resident highlighted that the fee being triggered by a renovation that touches on 33 per cent of a home discriminates against the owners of smaller homes who often have modest means.
When it came to the plan to require a tree-cutting permit for a tree as small as having a trunk of five centimetres in diameter, the move was almost unanimously condemned. Described as “unreasonable” and “restrictive,” residents questioned whether they would be prohibited from cutting back a lilac bush. They scoffed when they were told that if the stems of the lilac were bigger than five centimetres, they would have to apply for a permit.
Other provision that sparked criticism included the increase in the buffer zone around wetlands that would restrict activity within a 15-metre band, increased from the existing 10-metre zone, and the town’s lack of a detailed plan that shows how much money the proposed renovation fees and reconstruction fees would generate and how it would use the park and natural spaces fund.
On Monday, Hutchison said council will take all the feedback into consideration before bringing forward a final version of the bylaws, adding she hopes that other aspects of the planning bylaws, which propose a framework for landscape development and site plans, that aim to ensure the town maintains and enhances a certain esthetic, not get lost in the public conversation.
The town will continue to accept feedback via an online survey until next week. A consultant hired by the municipality will then compile the responses in a report to council. Council will then begin the process of amending the proposed bylaw.