I'm posting a comment here that's not related to development, but is important for Seguin's natural environment. Seguin NEEDS a by-law on fireworks.

According to figures from the Office of the Ontario Fire Marshal, fireworks were blamed for 129 fires and almost $2.5 million in damage in Ontario between 2009 and 2013.

In addition, fireworks expose humans and animals to toxic combustion chemicals. When fireworks explode, chemicals and small minerals are released into the air. Leftover particles fall to the ground, polluting waterways and posing a risk to both wildlife and humans.

Research shows that the loud sounds of fireworks causes significant distress in wild animals. Birds and other small mammals often abandon their nests leaving their babies behind. The panic can cause disorientation, making it difficult for wildlife to locate their homes.

We need to protect Seguin's natural environment by controlling fireworks.

Overall Seguin wants to be an environmental leader. While I agree that our diverse heritage and natural systems are pretty good, I really think we need to update and double check all of the EP zone mapping and inventory. We have seen many instances of EP zones being moved or redescribed.

Ii am not sure it belongs here but I do want us to look at our blasting policies. With larger lots and residences being built I do not think the 20 meter setback from the waterfront is sufficient to protect our waterfronts. Can we add something that talks about “visibility from the shoreline”.

As a cottager, I'm very concerned about the impact of larger watercraft and increased speeds above what seems reasonable on the smaller lakes in Seguin, particularly where there are sensitive habitats and where such lakes are home to very unique wildlife. We come to Seguin in trying to be one with the natural environment versus disrupting the very delicate balance of nature.

Although the environmental policies in the OP in Seguin are strong, we are seeing the environmental policies be circumvented by Council to permit development and site alteration in sensitive areas, through OP amendments, or by-law amendments. The policies should be upheld or they don't mean anything.

I would also argue that the policies that are currently in place to protect natural Lake Trout lakes are not strong enough at all. This can be seen, for example, by the number, and size, of boathouses on Lake Joseph, Lake Muskoka and Lake Rosseau. Many of these boathouses are located within spawning habitat for Lake Trout. If the township continues to permit these large boathouses in our pristine natural Lake Trout lakes, we may no longer have any spawning habitat left for these important fish (which bring in $ through anglers). I understand the tax revue brought in for these boathouse is significant for the township, but at what cost to our environment? These boathouses don't really benefit anyone except the incredibly wealthy owners, who often spend limited time in Seguin township. The majority of the boathouses on the "3 big lakes" are much larger than most full-time residence houses.

Additionally, if Seguin continues to permit these boathouses through building permits, we will likely continue to have issues around spring flooding damage during high water levels. Water levels fluctuate and with climate change we are expected to see more flooding events. Permitting 4000sq ft "boathouses" is poor, short-sighted Planning, in my opinion. The township should update their floodplain mapping and restrict development within the floodplain to ensure their planning reflects the potential future state of the environment (i.e more flood events with climate change, higher water levels, etc.). This should include restricting the building of excessively large, and expensive, boathouses within the floodplain.

Policies around development and site alteration around wetlands needs to be strengthened. There are recent examples of Council permitting the infilling of wetlands to appease landowners. We need to take an example from the mismanagement of wetlands in Southern Ontario, where close to 80% of their wetlands have been lost to development and poor planning. Once we lose these features we cannot get them back; they are nearly impossible to replace. Wetland loss is a huge issue in regards to flooding mitigation as well and we can expect more flooding events if we do not protect these important features.

I am strongly against the idea of using biodiversity offsetting as a strategy to compensate for the loss of a natural features, through the creation of a new natural feature at another location. This does not work in most cases. Natural features are located where they are for a reason - because that is where they naturally occur and function optimally. There are few success stories around creating wetlands where they do not naturally occur. I feel the better approach is to protect these features from development, as required by the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). Perhaps there should be more onus on the developer or landowner to do their due diligence to understand the constraints on their property before applying to develop. More focus should be on choosing the appropriate locations (where there are not natural heritage features) for development, not destroying natural features to permit development on properties that are not suitable for development.

The township should also ensure that their natural heritage mapping is up to date and take a cautionary approach to the mapping to ensure these features are properly protected. The natural heritage features identified within the PPS (wetlands, fish habitat, Species at Risk habitat, etc.) should be protected from site alteration and development, at a minimum. Significant Wildlife Habitat (SWH) is often ignored when making planning decisions and I feel that the policies around SWH should be strengthen.

If Seguin truly wants to be the "Natural Place to Be" then they should work to improve their natural heritage policies and deny activities within natural heritage features that are inconsistent within the PPS and their NH policies.

Thank you!

The township should integrate natural shoreline development methods into the Official Plan. For example, requiring native plantings instead of non-native plantings, requiring a minimum buffer around lakes and watercourses to protect the riparian area from development, etc.