ORILLIA - The city’s recent agreement with a developer to permit a controversial condo project on Orchard Point “undermines the entire planning process,” says long-time Ward 4 Coun. Tim Lauer.
The developer had filed an appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal that was cancelled after the city agreed to permit the project.
“Not contesting the appeal, in my opinion, undermines the entire planning process and begs the question: why do we have planning meetings, ask for public input, pretend to listen, if we have no intention of defending our decision?” Lauer asked in an emailed statement to OrilliaMatters.
Last week, the City of Orillia struck a deal with Coland Developments Corporation to permit an eight-storey condominium development on Orchard Point, near the shore of Lake Simcoe, despite strong neighbourhood opposition against the project.
Among the numerous concerns raised by residents are the project’s incompatibility with the neighbourhood, that it could set a bad precedent moving forward, as well as its impacts on neighbourhood traffic and shoreline wildlife.
Many of these concerns were initially heard by council, when a decision on the developer’s requested zoning bylaw amendments was deferred following a public meeting last December, with council requesting the developer reconsider a lower building height and density, and consider limiting vehicular access along Driftwood Road.
However, Coland Developments Corporation would go on to file an appeal with the Ontario Land Tribunal in January, and a subsequent city staff report noted litigation on the matter would require an initial budget of $100,000.
As part of the settlement, vehicular access will be limited along Driftwood Road, while the project’s built form — including a height of eight storeys — will remain intact.
At last Monday’s council meeting, Lauer and Coun. Whitney Smith were the sole city politicians to vote against a closed-session motion on the proposed minutes of settlement for the project.
For Lauer, upholding the municipal end of the planning process — even if it requires litigation — is a responsibility the city should “protect to the maximum” given the large role provincial planning policies play in development.
“Although it is quite apparent that the province has taken over the planning process through their provincial development and intensification policies, and their control of the land tribunals, a municipality who is spending thousands of hours and dollars on the maintenance of Official Plans and zoning bylaws needs to protect to the maximum the integrity of the process that is left to us,” Lauer said.
“Failing that, we need to come clean with the public that we are helpless.”
While the city’s Official Plan suggests eight storeys “could be considered for the project,” Lauer noted the city’s zoning bylaw “states that four storeys is appropriate and permitted,” and he questioned why there was no external consultation on the matter of litigation.
“Why was there no consultation with an external planner to establish a defence, or to establish if there was a defence?” he asked. “The position that we wouldn’t be able to find anyone to take or defend the case, to my knowledge, was not a question ever put to the greater planning community.
“When a developer asks to go beyond that zoning permission, there are arguments on both sides that deserve a full hearing, and a full hearing includes the appeal process.”
Following the settlement, city staff told OrilliaMatters a “middle ground” had been reached on the project, given vehicular access will be limited along Driftwood Road, which Lauer said is “far from a meet-in-the-middle solution” given the broader concerns about the project.
City staff also said the settlement will negate “significant costs at the expense of the taxpayer” through litigation, a rationale Lauer does not agree with.
“The reality is that we live in a litigious world — especially true for municipalities — that’s why we have two lawyers on staff,” he said. “How can the city provide and participate in a quasi-judicial process, but have their decisions influenced by dollars and cents?”
Lauer also raised questions about whether discussions on the appeal should have been held in closed-session meetings, which he said left residents in the dark about the city’s position on the matter.
“Certainly, the discussion could be confidential, but the actual decision to negotiate or settle being withheld from other stakeholders and the public in general is debatable,” he said.
“I don’t see it as best practice to surprise potential hearing ‘participants’ from the neighbourhood so late in the process. Had these folks known the city was not interested in a defence at the Tribunal, they could have arrived at that pre-hearing better prepared.”