Appealed

Twelve Trees development faces another hurdle

Council’s decision to approve the rezoning of land enabling the development of a condominium apartment building and townhouses in Wellington’s west end has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).

The project consists of a three-storey apartment building comprising 30 units in addition to six townhomes—continuing a contiguous row of homes, blending old and new, along Main Street.

Council approved the rezoning of a property at 411 Main Street in Wellington last month after a five and half month review, over the objections of several neighbours who worry about how the project will alter the enjoyment of their homes.

One of these neighbours has now decided to elevate his complaints to the OMB. According to documents filed in support of his appeal, John Gare contends the project is incompatible with the neighbourhood of mostly single detached homes in terms of scale and density. He argues the municipality doesn’t define compatibility— nor does it impose design guidelines upon such development.

Gare hopes the OMB will see these gaps and invalidate council’s approval of the rezoning.

Currently, a single home resides on the large lakefront property known as Twelve Trees. Since the home was built several decades ago, residential neighbourhoods comprising 22 homes have sprung up on either side of the large lot. These neighbours, and those across from the proposed development have become accustomed to the large green space, many trees and views of Lake Ontario.

They object to the proposed development, fearing it will alter their view and negatively impact their ability to enjoy their property.

Barry Davidson is president of Twelve Trees Development Corporation, the developer of the site.. He conceived the project after surveying Wellington and area residents seeking to understand gaps in the type and size of housing available in the area. That revealed a considerable unmet need for residential housing alternatives. The feedback pointed to a desire to be free of lawn care and snow shovelling as well as the responsibility to service and maintain plumbing, HVAC and other utilities.

Armed with this market data Davidson developed a plan to provide this alternate housing. In February last year he acquired the property at 411 Main Street. He met with the neighbours within days of the purchase to tell them of his plans. He told his story and outlined his plans in a story in the Times.

There was significant interest in the project resulting from this story. But there were also concerns about lights, density and driveway locations. Davidson subsequently altered his plans to address the concerns raised by his neighbours. But not enough for some.

Planning approval was held up for several months when the County’s planning staff, wrongly, sought to apply the province’s desire for affordable housing upon this single project. By the fall the municipality conceded it was its responsibility, not the developer’s, to ensure affordable housing in this community and recommended the approval of the Twelve Trees rezoning application.

In a gesture to the anxious neighbours, Shire Hall has asked Twelve Trees Development to produce a detailed design report that examines the local area’s character, as part of the site plan agreement process. But lacking any tests or measures regarding what constitutes a “proper fit with the existing neighbourhood,” Gare is skeptical the municipality can find a solution that would be acceptable.

He argues that it is the County’s job to ensure the development fits within the neighbourhood— not the developer.

“This is not planning, this is delegation of planning” said Gare, in his appeal.”

Meanwhile, Davidson must deal with another delay to the project. He has been advised that it could be a few months before the appeal is heard. While it is the municipality that must defend its decision at the OMB—it is up to Davidson to pay the County’s legal bills.

It all means extra costs.

It costs, however, just $125 to file an appeal to the OMB—a seemingly low threshold. But if the adjudicators find the appeal has little or no merit or that the appellant has acted unreasonably, frivolously or in bad faith, it can award costs—compelling those embarking on an OMB appeal to be serious and be prepared.

It is a provision to ensure the OMB is not employed simply as a venue to restate complaints made unsuccessfully elsewhere.