Last line of defence

Council to reconsider twice rejected subdivision plan, without preconditions

For decades, Waring’s Creek and its watershed were the tangible touchstones of an ethos of conservation, preservation and general safeguarding of the precious natural resources in Prince Edward County. No more, it seems. Council seems ready to surrender this moral untouchable for a developer’s promise of affordable housing.

Council rejected the Cold Creek housing plan last month. Twice. There were too many holes. The developer doesn’t own the land needed to enable primary access to the site. It has not yet completed the studies necessary to measure the potential impact or threat to the Waring’s Creek watershed. There are no sidewalks proposed to link the 1,000-home subdivision to town. And no requirement for the developer to pay waterworks development charges—required in Wellington and soon in Picton and Bloomfield. The plan imagines thousands of new residents, but has no means to ensure they pay for the $300 million waterworks expansion currently unfolding in the County.

After Council’s decision was made a second time last month, the developer made noises about appealing to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). So, last week, Council folded. It agreed to reconsider its previous decisions— sending the file back to planning staff for a new report in January.

The province is keen to see homes built in Ontario, so the prospect of the OLT upholding Council’s decision wasn’t a slamdunk. But there appeared to be a higher standard demanded here. The Ford government has largely neutered Conservation Authorities— leaving municipalities as the last protector of vulnerable lands in their community. Lands like the Waring’s Creek watershed.

To do this, the municipality might have sought the expertise of those who know this land best. Instead, that expertise came to them.

Dan Langridge has been farming this land for 27 years. He explained to Council that the water table on the Cold Creek land—formerly the Jenkin’s farm—is extremely close to the surface most of the year.

“The residents in this area call it an underground lake for a reason,” explained Langridge. “In 2008 and 2009, I was unable to harvest a crop of pumpkins because of a small creek running through the field down to the pines near Sandy Hook Road— the Waring’s Creek headwaters. My neighbour’s pond is spring-fed and runs 12 months a year. It never freezes in the winter—there is that much water flow.”

Langridge advised Council of a 2004 groundwater study conducted by Quinte Conservation that redflagged the property—“meaning depth to water was measured as zero to one metre.”

He pointed to another study conducted in December 2020 and January 2021 that measured the depth of water to surface at 1.7 metres.

“This was in the winter when no water was flowing in the stream,” said Langridge. “According to the Canada Weather station, 2020 was the driest year in Picton in 25 years.”

Langridge concluded that disrupting this ecosystem was “a very bad choice.”

Council had no questions for Langridge.

Les Stanfield is a stream and landscape ecologist known for his work demonstrating the negative impacts of industrial wind turbines— specifically the large concrete support bases upon which these structures sit—on the County ecosystem. Stanfield’s master’s degree studied how development impacts headwater systems. His experience and knowledge seemed particularly on point for a council charged with protecting the Waring’s Creek headwaters.

“The water table is very close to the surface through much of the year,” explained Stanfield. “It is a basin, with Sandy Hook Road acting as a barrier to flows. It could be an underground river or lake.”

He added that Low Impact Development (LID) methods—used to mitigate development on sensitive lands—proposed by the developer won’t work in these conditions.

“Stormwater ponds won’t drain. Basements are out of the question—there is nowhere for the sumps to put the water. It won’t drain away.”

Council had no questions of Stanfield.

Cheryl O’Brien heads the Waring’s Creek Improvement Association (WCIA). O’Brien reminded Council that the County had a legally binding agreement with the WCIA to undertake studies and mapping to ensure Waring’s Creek headwaters were protected.

“Nothing has been done to honour this commitment,” said O’Brien. “The County seems so driven to meet building targets that it is willing to sacrifice a magnificent underground watercourse.”

“Why is Council willing to settle for ‘later’ for a crucial hydrogeological study?” asked O’Brien. “The County seems eager to avoid an OLT even if it means permanent damage to the headwaters and watershed. The community is watching.”

No questions for O’Brien.

The Cold Creek development proponent, David Cleave, told the meeting that he was grateful that Council was reconsidering his file.

“The development plays an important role in bringing affordable-priced townhomes to our community,” said Cleave. “This project is shovelready to proceed in the new year in phase 1.”

The developer said he had lengthy discussions with his ward councillor, Brad Nieman. “We believe we have satisfied the issues that were most important to our neighbours and community.”

He said he would expand the buffer around the environmentally protected areas from 30 metres to 50 metres as well as change the open space to environmentally protected.

No questions from Council.

When it was their turn, Council quickly agreed to Councillor Nieman’s request to reconsider its previous decisions and for a staff report in the new year. He said the developer was willing to consider changes to address the issues raised by Council and the public.

“This way, it gives everyone a chance to see where the revisions are,” said Nieman. “It’s better for everybody, I suggest.”