Out from the shadows

Something is terribly amiss in the County’s land planning process. More tears are shed, more anguish is stirred at Shire Hall over planning decisions than anything else the County does. That includes marrying people.

Land use planning issues draw many more average residents—those otherwise disengaged from municipal governance—to Shire Hall than anything else council does. Far too many emerge from the process feeling bewildered and frustrated—vowing never to return.

The challenges go well beyond two recent high-profile issues involving a gas station/restaurant in Wellington and an LCBO outlet in Picton. Those cases, however, highlight a consistent failing in the County’s troubled planning track record—that is terribly poor communication.

Sadly this is not a new condition, for at least the past decade, and likely longer, the public planning process in in this municipality, has been characterized by a confounding pattern of silence, spasms of inexplicable decisions and blank stares. When they speak, they rush to make clear that they are merely creatures of the province, with little authority to do anything more than to prosecute provincial rules.

It need not be this way.

Public planning at its best should demonstrate, through its decisions, a vision for the community that inspires and reinforces the best qualities of the place while simultaneously encouraging investment and growth that aligns with that vision. It must do so with a persistent and clear-minded focus on protecting the values the community hold dear.

It sounds absurd, however, to talk about vision in the context of County planning. There is no vision—no unifying idea about what the County is, or should be. This is a place, after all, where a senior citizen with a wrecking ball rolled up one Sunday morning to a 135-yearold iconic church on Main Street in Picton and began smashing it until it was a pile of rubble.

The County’s planning department has historically consisted of checklists. Drawers and drawers full of checklists. Is your project consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement? Check. The Official Plan? Check. The comprehensive zoning bylaw? Check. Quinte Conservation? Check.

We have rules piled on rules, coated in a thick, gooey layer of process. Even after you’ve navigated the swamp, you are not free of the muck. For example, you want to sever a lot from your property? And you pass all the tests? Fine, but our roads departments wants part of your lawn for future road widening in exchange. They insist more than ask.

We believe these are protections. But instead, they are obstacles to all but those with the resources to overide them or, as in the case of Jim Sinclair and the like, the willingness to ignore them.

The recent issues in Wellington and Picton point, however, to a more urgent need in the County’s public planning process. Neighbours of both developments were largely kept in the dark about specific plans until days before each matter was to be decided. In both cases neighbours felt ambushed by the process.

In both cases, it turns out there was considerable to and fro between the developer and regulatory authorities, including the County’s planning department and, in the case of the LCBO redevelopment, the Heritage Advisory Committee. But those discussions and negotiations were conducted largely out of the light of day—away from the community and neighbours with a largest stake in the outcome.

The fact is that in both instances, the municipality had limited leverage. Neither development required a reworking of the rules. Both developers were proposing to rebuild what was already there.

In Picton it could have been much worse. Left to their own choosing the LCBO likely would have preferred a box on the edge of Picton—a box like the one in Wellington and Rossmore. Instead a historic house has been salvaged (for the moment) and the LCBO outlet remains, more or less, in Picton’s core.

The County’s limited leverage, however, ought not to have been used as a basis to marginalize the neighbours and community from of the process.

For many years, County finances were managed, if I can use that word, in the dark—out of sight even from those elected to govern them. That changed in 2009 with the arrival of a new chief and director of finance. It was as though a light had been turned on. Today, any resident can peer deeply into the municipality’s operating and capital expenses. It can see how and where their money is spent—on a granular level against meaningful context.

It is time to cast that same bright light upon the County’s land use planning process. Let us see what you, our planning department, have in mind for Main Street or Niles Corners. Show us early and show us often. Don’t quiver in fear that information will elicit objection and criticism. It will—but that is okay. That is how public processes are supposed to work—messy and organic. Have faith in County residents’ ability to sort through the arguments and conclude what is reasonable, right and fair.

Ideally Mayor Quaiff and council will lead this enlightenment project—rather than continue to react to public outcry. This is a great opportunity to demonstrate council is serious about governing—to show leadership.

And perhaps one day we can return to a discussion about vision.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca