Application for development contains false information says reader

The following is a letter that has been included in the Agenda of the March 18th Saugeen Shores Planning Committee meeting.
Dave Brandt
Donna Douglass Brandt
Subject:
File Number: SSOPA32-18.48
Dear Ms. Steeper:
The address of our family cabin is 231 Miramichi Bay Road, Port Elgin, Ontario N0H2C6 which is not far to the south of the proposed 15 Properties ( TP LTS 40, 41, 42,43, 44; GROSVENOR WS, Town of Saugeen Shores {geographic Town of
Southampton}).
My wife has spent summers there her entire life and I have been there since we married 47 years ago. I am a retired Natural Resource professional, working for 31 years for the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. My expertise is in all areas of soil, water (surface, ground, wetland and floodplains) air, plants and animals.
Over the years, I have assisted hundreds of landowners who unknowingly bought houses built in wetlands. The municipalities allowed that development . I saw first
-hand the heartache, frustration and the wasted money these people had to endure.
Many times, the wetland soil where the houses were built was organic with no structural strength. The homeowners had to deal with constant wetness, flooding, black mold and uneven settling of the foundations, etc.
Similarly, I have assisted landowners who live directly downstream of an urban
development where upstream wetlands were filled and floodways or floodplains were
pinched.  Severe erosion occurred because of an increase in volume and rate of
stormwater runoff.
The municipality governing those developments did their residents no favors but gave the developers quite a bit.
That is my frustration. If municipalities allow developers to fill wetlands, pinch
stormwater runoff, reduce floodplain storage, it goes against their responsibility to
protect the health, safety and welfare of the community .
Regarding¬†File Number: SSOPA32- 18.48, I tried to use your GIS to view your wetland layer, stream layer, floodplain layer, soil layer as they relate to their existence on the¬†subject property, but I failed.¬†I have read the ‚ÄúPETITION TO REJECT SAUGEEN SHORES OFFICIAL PLAN¬†AMENDMENT APPLICATION SSOPA32.18¬†-48‚ÄĚ.
These people have done their research!  I agree with this petition in opposition of the proposed local amendment to allow development in significant woodland, wetland, environmental hazardous areas and floodplains.
I find frightening in the petition¬†‚ÄúSection 16 of the application Form One (which asks ‚ÄúIs¬†there a stream, pond or other wetland within 100 meters of the subject lands?‚ÄĚ) that the answer is ‚ÄúNo‚ÄĚ,¬† which is false in that there are upwards of five such permanent streams and significant¬†wetland within the subject area‚ÄĚ. I know for a fact that there are at least three streams¬†because we always use the bike path directly adjacent to the east property line of the¬†south triangle. There are three wooden bridges over said streams.
I also find frightening¬†in the Petition that the ‚ÄúSupplement Significant Woodland Study¬†‚ÄstBay Street Area (as prepared by AWS Environmental Consulting Inc.) was developed¬†based on ‚Äúa road-side assessment‚ÄĚ.
Please do not accept any report done looking out the window of an automobile.
Further frightening in the Petition is the report prepared by¬†Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority relating to SSOPA32-18.48, dated January 29,¬†2019, indicates ‚ÄúSVCA finds AWS¬†‚Äôs results acceptable‚ÄĚ. No one has actually
delineated anything. This cannot be acceptable to the Corporation of the County of
Bruce Planning and Development!
There is¬†reference, in the petition,¬†to an¬†‚ÄúEnvironmental Impact Study‚ÄĚ but it appears that is the same Supplement Significant¬†Woodland Study ‚ÄstBay Street Area (as prepared by AWS Environmental Consulting Inc.) which was done from inside
an auto.
I support requiring a Comprehensive Environmental Impact Study (CEIS) for the subject property. I do not know if said CEIS includes wetland delineation, wetland quality assessments, 100-year floodplain elevations, stream assessments, stream Index of Biological Integrity studies or evaluations of high-quality flora and fauna.
I am asking you, your Department of Planning and Development and your governing Board of Commissioners to require all of the above, performed by people certified to make those individual studies and then protect those important natural resources
with buffers.
Thank You for the opportunity to comment on File Number: SSOPA32-18.48.
Dave Brandt
Donna Douglass Brandt