In a well-attended and lengthy online meeting on July 7, Madawaska Valley Council dealt with some contentious re-zoning applications focused on properties along the Madawaska River. The public meeting for planning matters started at 10 a.m., ran into the lunch hour and was followed by a full Special Council meeting that ended in the early evening. A detailed report will follow in The Current but for those anxious to learn the outcomes, here they are:
Bent Anchor re-zoning application rejected
In a recorded vote requested by Councillor Carl Bromwich, MV Council unanimously rejected the application by Bent Anchor owners Mateusz Psuty and Jameel Bharmal for a site specific zoning by-law amendment to add a retail store on their premises, which would sell cannabis products. Council heard from the applicants and their lawyer, their planning consultant, adjacent property owners, community members, and a total of 61 items of correspondence. While the cannabis element did not go down well with some residents, Council rejected the application primarily because of issues relating to the access road which crosses residential land, and neighbours’ concerns about increased traffic and parking. Click HERE for our earlier story.
Chippawa Shores condominium development re-zoning amendment approved
Also in a recorded vote requested by Councillor Bromwich, MV Council unanimously approved the application by Combermere Lodge Ltd. for a Site-Specific Zoning By-Law amendment for the Chippawa Shores Subdivision to permit a 44-lot residential plan of subdivision. Doug De La Matter spoke on behalf of the Friends of Madawaska River Watershed who objected on environmental grounds and asked for further studies before a decision was made. Neil Enright, his lawyer, his planner and one of his consultants spoke for the proponent. County Planner Charles Cheesman also participated.
The video meeting is available (in several parts) on the Madawaska Valley Township channel on YouTube.
Thank you for this article! It really hit the mark. The decision was not anti-cannabis but had to do with planning, zoning and current bylaws. I am not anti-cannabis or anti-tourism but I am in agreement with thoughtful land use planning strategies and zoning that encourages development but safeguards our residents too.