Too much growth

Residents object to Drake expansion plans

There appeared to be little appetite for the Drake Hotel Properties expansion plans, especially as it pertains to the Drake Motor Inn on upper Wharf Street in Wellington’s downtown. A consent planning and re-zoning application for the Drake Devonshire and the Drake Motor Inn came before the Planning Committee last Wednesday. A number of local residents voiced their views on how the Drake’s ever-expanding presence is becoming too much for the small village of Wellington, as well as expressing concern that residential homes, especially historical character structures, are being lost to commercial enterprises. The application being considered included an Official Plan amendment and zoning bylaw amendment for the Drake Hotel properties located at 20, 24, 41, 43, 45 and 47 Wharf Street, as well as 266 Main Street, Wellington.

After hearing some members of the public speak, Council, after some discussion, voted not to approve the application as it currently stands. Councillor Mike Harper’s amending motion moved to send the file back to staff to seek their further recommendations, to include consideration of the feedback from the statutory meeting. Council also agreed the application for the Drake Motor Inn and the Drake Devonshire should be split into two separate applications.

Ruth Ferguson Aulthouse of RFA Planning Consultant provided a little background on the application, where she noted the village’s core extends along Main Street, from Belleville Street to Consecon Street, as well as crossing Maple, West and Wharf Streets. She further noted Wharf Street is designated as an activity route in the Wellington Secondary Plan. “The Wellington Secondary Plan policies permits a whole range of commercial uses to serve residents and visitors in a pedestrian-oriented format with the buildings located close to the sidewalk,” said Aulthouse. “Within the core area, shopping, businesses and tourism uses are to be concentrated. It supports specifically the tourism-related uses in the core area and this is to support local businesses and help promote a healthy, vibrant commercial area.”

Proposed for the Drake Devonshire Inn is redevelopment of part of the existing inn, together with re-development of 20 Wharf Street, something Aulthouse describes as a “modest expansion”. It will include an upgraded kitchen and dining area, 15 additional guest rooms over three floors (to add to the 12 existing), with re-development and expansion of the multi-function pavilion. “The addition is visually compatible to the existing historic Niles house,” said Aulthouse.

The proposed amendment for the Drake Motor Inn at 47 Wharf Street would bring it into the village core area and village residential, with the existing property on Niles Street to remain as village residential. “The building at 47 Wharf has been used in the past several years for staff housing by the Drake,” she said. “However, it is not considered structurally sound and is proposed to be removed.” Aulthouse also noted the two-storey tourist buildings existing at 43 and 45 Wharf have 12 guest rooms, with the two-storey expansion at 47 Wharf having six guest rooms proposed. There is also a proposal to allow the off-site parking for the Devonshire Inn to be permitted on this property. Further, Aulthouse said there was a surplus of parking at this location that would be re-developed as an amenity with a landscaped area for the Motor Inn.

Five members of the public (of the eight registered) spoke at the meeting. Written comments were also received from the public and form part of the agenda package (available on the County’s website). Long-time Wellington resident Diane Riley said the Drake’s plan to re-zone and expand further development north on Wharf Street was “totally inappropriate and unwelcome”. She described the area as a quiet, intact, healthy residential area and part of the old residential area of old Wellington. “We look to the Drake as a member of the neighbourhood, not dominating it,” said Riley. “With a chunk of Wellington residential area being taken away little-by-little, we are in danger of becoming left with a Swiss cheese village.”

Wellington resident Heather Ford also had concerns about the request to rezone residential properties to commercial “for the sake of more visitor accommodation”. She also spoke to how Wellington’s old established neighbourhoods should be protected. “We have limited housing in Wellington, we need to be reclaiming residences as homes rather than losing more to guest accommodation,” said Ford. “I am particularly concerned with more commercial creep up Wharf Street into the old residential neighbourhood.” She also noted the demolition and re-development at 47 Wharf Street will set a dangerous precedent.

Councillor Phil St-Jean noted the staff report considered 47 Wharf Street to be structurally unsound. “The plan calls for replacement of that building which currently houses staff of the Drake. Is that building genuinely structurally unsound, does it have to be demolished? asked St- Jean. Scott Hart with Drake Properties said it is a safe residence. “For long-term use of that building, definitely some structural integrity would need to be addressed.” Matt Coffey, Approvals Coordinator, said while the application does confirm with what’s permitted in the village core, he noted that the Official Plan amendment to demolish 47 Wharf needed to demonstrate than an extension of the village core area in the residential area is warranted. “There is an interpretation that this is a logical expansion given the minor nature of it; it’s one residential lot and overall it does conform to the vision of the Secondary Plan.”

Councillor Janice Maynard asked if any thought had been given to re-designing the front to the buildings (43 and 45 Wharf) so they at least maintain some of the character of the street. “They seem out of place,” she said. Hart said the architects used specialize in heritage conservation. While Maynard said she would be looking at a re-design of 43 and 45 Wharf, of at least the facade, Hart said that was not a consideration. Councillor Harper said the sentiment he was hearing around town was the Drake’s presence is too much of a good thing. “For others, it’s basically more of what they didn’t want in the first place,” said Harper. “What we are talking about is the expansion and whether all of that expansion is appropriate; we need to strike that balance between tourism and resident and we have a tremendous amount of tension in town over this.”

While Mayor Steve Ferguson said the Drake Devonshire part of the project was “appropriate” and “makes sense”, he noted the upper Wharf Street Motor Inn project “is more problematic”, especially about the facades. He also asked if there was any discussion of relocating or constructing the new units on the Midtown Brewery property, either in the parking lot or elsewhere and asked if there had been any discussion on proposed alternatives. Coffey said there had been no discussion about the Midtown site. “I’m okay with what’s proposed for the Drake Devonshire; the Motor Inn proposal needs further discussion,” said Ferguson.

The April 13 Planning Committee meeting is available for viewing on the County’s YouTube channel (bit/.ly/LiveStreamPEC) with associated documentation available as part of the agenda package found on the County’s website. Planning documents are also available at thecounty.ca/residents/services/planning/active- planning-applications. The Times coverage of the first public meeting held on November 24, 2021 can be found at wellingtontimes.ca/expansion-plans.