Comment

Detail and evidence

Posted: November 24, 2022 at 9:56 am   /   by   /   comments (1)

A 20-unit apartment building—designed for seniors—at the foot of Prince Edward Drive in Wellington. Ninety-six (96) apartments at the top of Maple Street. Seventy-five (75) townhomes and mixed-use commercial/residential in the broad swath of land between Main and Niles, West of Belleville Road. Two hundred and five (205) townhomes behind the Legion.

Shire Hall has advised each of these builders that their projects cannot proceed until a new wastewater plant is built. All are south of the Millennium Trail. One developer, with lands north of the Trail, controls all available waterworks’ capacity— even the not-yet-built equalization tank. It did so by agreeing to prepay a portion of its development charges upfront.

What this means, effectively, is that infill development in Wellington is at a standstill. And that a single developer controls what happens next. These are the facts. No amount of contextualizing, obfuscation, or over-heated rhetoric alters these circumstances.

So what is to be done? While the to-and-fro between this column and Shire Hall may be entertaining, belabouring it does nothing to get us out of the pickle in which we have found ourselves.

First, we must accept that limited, precise infill development won’t wreck our village.

A dozen or more apartments next to Wellington on the Lake would be a lifeline for folks needing to graduate from single-family homes in that neighbourhood. A hundred apartments in the village would ease the commute of young folks who work here. Smart, attractive townhomes in the heart of the village would provide an excellent way for young families to settle in the County. All are walkable to downtown. Think about the boon to the village economy. Consider the benefits of reduced need for motor vehicles.

We are leery of change. We worry that developers don’t share our commitment to this village—that their projects will alter the delicate balance that makes Wellington eminently livable. We prefer that things stay the way they are.

But they aren’t. And they won’t. The village is changing. Wealthy folks are replacing long-time residents. Trades, merchants, and hospitality businesses can’t find staff. This challenge is compromising current operations and precluding expansion. And when these businesses manage to recruit people, there is no place for them to live. Retiring folk may live here a while but must leave when they can no longer manage, or choose to manage, the upkeep of a single-family home.

Secondly, we need a dedicated voice for waterworks customers.

Many candidates, including Mayor Steve Ferguson, campaigned—in 2018 and again in 2022—on creating a waterworks commission— that is, a dedicated group of customers, staff and council members with a stake in the utility, focused exclusively on the governance of this complex business.

Shire Hall’s interest in the waterworks utility is not the same as customers and stakeholders. Shire Hall is, rightfully, focused on the safety of the water supply, the environment and compliance with provincial regulations. The cost of the system is not a high priority. Nor is the impact on the community it serves.

It doesn’t mean the choices Shire Hall has made were wrong or decided in bad faith, but rather that they would have benefitted from the tension and scrutiny of the folks who pay all the bills. This matters on both the macro and micro levels.

Without the backpressure of effective governance, choices ranging from which pump to purchase to the preferred method of financing major capital expenditures are calculated differently— not incorrectly, just differently.

Stakeholder-informed governance would have ensured trade-offs were evaluated in partnership with those closest to the ground, through the eyes of those who must live with—and pay for—the consequences.

Perhaps debt financing would have preserved the flexibility that was traded away. Maybe we would have retained more choices about how our village evolved. These are, admittedly, cheap and easy whatifs to pose after the fact. And perhaps the choices would have been decided the same way in any event. But it would have been better for Shire Hall, for Wellington residents, and for County waterworks customers, to have been part of the decision-making.

So let’s focus on the positive. All stakeholders will benefit from a robust discussion about how their utility functions, the factors impacting performance, and driving capital expenditures. A better-informed customer and stakeholder base will be better placed to understand the trade-offs and context of the decisions being made on their behalf, i.e., development charges. Folks would see and experience how the utility is working to serve its customers and community.

Shire Hall, meanwhile, would benefit from a community partner to advocate its needs to senior levels of government and encourage our neighbouring communities to be neighbourly. It might even ease the burden of these weighty decisions. But to do so, it will have to learn to trust the residents and customers it serves.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca

Comments (1)

write a comment

Comment
Name E-mail Website