• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • RSS
  • Twitter
South Muskoka Doppler

South Muskoka Doppler

Read Local

  • Home
    • All Stories
    • Community Guidelines
  • COVID-19
  • News
  • Community
  • Commentary
    • Letters
  • Business
    • Professionally Speaking
  • Sports
  • Obituaries
  • Lifestyle
    • Entertainment
  • Events
    • Event Listings
    • Add Your Event
  • Speak Up, South Muskoka!
  • Subscribe
  • Donate
  • North Muskoka
  • Art Fx
You are here: Home / News / Council rejects 55-foot build in Windermere
An artist's rendering from the Counil agenda package.

Council rejects 55-foot build in Windermere

By Thomas Goyer On June 20, 2022 News

Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Email this to someone
email
Print this page
Print

Muskoka Lakes council has rejected an application for increased height to a dwelling after discussions about setting precedents. 

At the Wednesday meeting council rejected the proposal of Muskoka Trust which was applying to build a property in Windermere with a height of 55 feet exceeding the municipal height limit of 35 feet.

Several people associated with the development spoke to council. Catherine Nasmith who is the agent for the developer discussed the unique tree shaped design of the building which aims to limit destruction of the surrounding forest. 

“This project’s point of departure is addressing climate change, building on a minimal footprint in order to preserve the forest,” Nasmith said. 

Harold Elston a lawyer for the project stated that allowing this decision to set a precedent would be beneficial because it would be an example that would be good for the community. 

“It will show your commitment to a sustainable, environmentally friendly project,” Elston said.

In order for the developed to be allowed to exceed the 35-foot height limit council would need to pass a bylaw. The developers had committed to a significantly reduced footprint and a commitment to not severe the property. The smaller footprint would allow use of only 3000 square feet as opposed to the 20,000 square feet that would have been allowed prior. Elston highlighted this massive reduction as evidence that few others would attempt to do the same. 

“You’re not going to find many people that are willing to give up 80% of their coverage and their development rights just for some height,” Elston said. 

The proposal was put before the Planning Committee in May which recommended that council reject the proposal. Several councillors voiced concern over setting a negative precedent. 

Councillor Peter Kelley stated in his time on council he has witnessed council continually grant bylaw exemptions. He said that council always denies these are precedents, but he believes that they are.

“Frankly in the three and a half years I’ve been here, I’m constantly hearing, ‘don’t worry, it won’t set any precedents,” Kelley said. 

Kelley said that this development in his view sets the precedent that a property can exceed municipal restrictions if the developers can simply put enough pressure on council. 

“I think that insults a good number of people who might have similar plans but can’t back it up with the kind of expertise and passion and resources to get planners and designers and architects and lawyers,” Kelley said.

Councillor Ruth-Ellen Nishikawa spoke in support of the development. Highlighting its creative design and the willingness to work with the township to reduce its footprint as things that council should encourage for new developments.

“I wish that we could be more proactive, our counsel to recognize when something good is in front of us and to encourage,” Nishikawa said. 

Mayor Phil Harding agreed with Nishikawa’s point that council should look to encourage more creative solutions to problems. However, Harding said he was uncertain about the fact that the development would be 64% over the current bylaw requirements. 

“A 64% increase in my mind is not a minor variance,” Harding said.

Stephen Fahner representing Muskoka Lakes Association spoke against the development citing its significant exception to the stated height limit. 

“We feel that this has just gone beyond the bounds of what would normally be considered any variance or zoning bylaw exemption application,”

Fahner went on to say that 40 to 45 feet would be more acceptable and argued against the notion that the property could not be built at that height instead. 

Council voted six to two to deny the application. 

Don’t miss out on Doppler!

Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!

Click here to support local news

Reader Interactions

Join the discussion:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. Please ensure you include both your first and last name and abide by our community guidelines. Submissions that do not include the commenter's full name or that do not abide by our community guidelines will not be published.

Primary Sidebar

Latest News Stories

Trio convicted in gunpoint robbery and beating

August 5, 2022 Leave a Comment

Second person succumbs to injuries in Bracebridge shooting, deceased identified 

August 5, 2022 Leave a Comment

Renovations underway to expand imaging capabilities

August 4, 2022 Leave a Comment

Bruce Clark puts iconic Muskoka Store on the market

August 4, 2022 Leave a Comment

Collision in Gravenhurst Sends Three to Hospital

August 3, 2022 Leave a Comment

Trip to local drive-thru ends in impaired conviction

August 3, 2022 Leave a Comment

OPP release name of drowning victim

August 2, 2022 Leave a Comment

Gravenhurst Fire Department tackles overnight fire on Muskoka Road South

August 1, 2022 Leave a Comment

Man admits to ramming police cruisers in Muskoka-wide police chase

July 29, 2022 1 Comment

MAHC self-screening requirements for COVID-19 start July 28

July 29, 2022 1 Comment

  • Recent Stories
  • Popular
  • July 8, 2022 4

    Rick Maloney set to be named new Mayor of Bracebridge

  • July 18, 2022 3

    Councillor proposes Bracebridge-wide item swap weekends

  • July 14, 2022 2

    Cyclist struck in Gravenhurst

  • August 6, 2022 2

    Is Muskoka going to the dogs?

  • July 30, 2022 1

    We’re at a crossroads in this country: Sally Barnes | Commentary   

  • August 6, 2022 2

    Is Muskoka going to the dogs?

  • August 6, 2022 0

    Baysville Arts and Crafts Festival this weekend

  • August 5, 2022 0

    Trio convicted in gunpoint robbery and beating

  • August 5, 2022 0

    District Accessibility Advisory Committee needs community input to break down accessibility barriers

  • August 5, 2022 0

    Second person succumbs to injuries in Bracebridge shooting, deceased identified 

  • 2021 Federal Election (1)
  • A Sponsored Profile (6)
  • Advertise (1)
  • Art Fx (13)
  • Breaking (2)

Footer

About Doppler

Established by a bunch of local news hounds, Doppler strives to be the go-to source for people wanting to know more about what is going on their community.

We strive to provide local news that is relevant and timely. We also look to tell local stories that inspire, inform and engage.

Notice the persistent use of the word local? Our mantra is local. South Muskoka Doppler serves the communities of Bracebridge, Gravenhurst and Muskoka Lakes with features on local people doing extraordinary things, local business spotlights, news and sports coverage, all supplemented by provocative opinion pieces on topics near and far. We are working hard for you.

Feel free to drop us a line at matt.driscoll@doppleronline.ca and tell us how we are doing, what you would like to see more of, or to just say ‘Hi’.

Thank you for reading Doppler.

South Muskoka Doppler – READ LOCAL
A division of C3 Digital Media Group Inc.

Bracebridge Ontario Canada
August 7, 2022, 12:19 pm
Partly sunny
Partly sunny
28°C
real feel: 35°C
current pressure: 1020 mb
humidity: 73%
wind speed: 1 m/s SW
wind gusts: 4 m/s
UV-Index: 7
sunrise: 6:09 am
sunset: 8:37 pm
© 2022 AccuWeather, Inc.
 

Recent Comments

  • Bob Braan on Is Muskoka going to the dogs?
  • Bob Braan on Is Muskoka going to the dogs?
  • Kay Godden on Speak Up, South Muskoka!
  • Ramona Thorpe on Wayback Wednesday: KFC customers, Bracebridge
  • Dinny McCraney on We’re at a crossroads in this country: Sally Barnes | Commentary   
  • Patricia Kosche on Starter Company Plus Helps Small Businesses Start, Sustain and Grow
  • Sharon Burgess on Man admits to ramming police cruisers in Muskoka-wide police chase
  • Bob DeVreeze on MAHC self-screening requirements for COVID-19 start July 28

Copyright © 2022 ·Doppler Online, a division of C3 Digital Media Group Inc. · Log in
  • About
  • Support Local News
  • Advertise with us!
  • Community Guidelines
  • Contact