GGRA.ca
Ditchburn Bay Boathouse proposal
June 18/10
There are 38 owners of 57 slips, each slip is 30 ft. in depth with frontage of 16 ft. on the bay.
Total area of each boathouse is 480 sq. feet. The site is currently zoned c-4 (commercial), a
designation which does not fit them and which was applied retroactively.
None of the owners will consider rebuilding or retrofitting their boathouses (although most of them
are considered eyesores) because then they would have to comply with all the provisions of
bylaw c-4. The Council is currently considering changing the bylaw or devising a new one.
Brian Ferguson proposes that:
a) the Town Planning Department create a new "special area" bylaw for the site, which would
legalize turning the boathouses into row-cottages, 2 storeys in height, with living quarters over
the boatslips. (no existing zoning bylaw would allow this.)
b) the Town install full municipal services (i.e. water and sewer lines), to be paid for by the
property owners in the usual way.
c) the Town waive the fees normally charged for studies to change zoning bylaws, since
replacing the existing boathouses as proposed might cost a total of $10,000,000.
Perceived advantages:
- The exiting boathouses, which are eyesores, could be replaced with sturdy, attractive
residential units, (with boatslips underneath), which would harmonize with the new buildings
of the Muskoka Wharf Project.
- The value of the properties would be enhanced, and more could be collected in taxes.
Brian has spoken to 23 of the 38 owners, and all those have responded favourably. He believes
no other arrangement could induce them to spend their money on improvements. He proposes
no additional slips, and hence only a marginal increase in traffic.
email a.d. for Brian Ferguson is bferguson3@cogeco.ca
note: Nick Popovich, Town Planning Department, is said to be quite in favour of the proposal and
considers water and sewer lines to be quite feasible. The Town would like to see the
existing boathouses replaced or retrofitted. Presumably, so would the Marriott Hotel.
Comments by J. Ross Raymond, retired professional planner, re Mr. Ferguson's proposal.
1. The proposed redevelopment's residential density would be far too great for the site. It would
not meet any of the existing housing standards. People using such units would soon want
extra space for friends and relatives, and would soon be demanding a third storey.
2. The proposal would require full municipal services (water & sewer). These would be hard to
install unless all or nearly all of the owners were in favour, since they would have to pay.
3. Parking space is insufficient. At best only one car could be parked at each unit, and a turn-
around space would be essential, probably at the far end of the peninsula. Building one, using
landfill would be extremely expensive.
4. All of the units would have to be built at the same time. To build them separately and
individually would be dangerous to all concerned.
5. A zoning amendment would be required. If granted, and contested, it would never be
approved by the O.M.B.
6. The scheme would require the unanimous agreement of all the owners. This is an unrealistic
hope.
7. It is standard practice that studies for zoning bylaws and the effects they will have, are always
paid for by those who want them.
8. The proposed approval for a two-storey cottage rowhouse development on boathouses with
tiny waterfront footages (just 16 feet) runs entirely contrary to all existing regulations, which
demand frontages of at least 200 feet, and certain minimum sizes for lots. If approved, it would
establish an ominous precedent, and soon other developers or owners would be demanding the
same exemptions.
Mr. Raymond believes it would be unbelievably unwise for the Town of Gravenhurst to give any
consideration at all to this proposal.
He also wondered about the following points:
a) do the slip owners have cottages already?
b) what do they currently pay in taxes on their slips?
c) what will the new buildings cost?
d) what would the taxes on the new buildings cost?