No
city in the world can grow without developing its available lands,
whether to attract new residents or entice new businesses. It is
true that in today's enlightened world we have many considerations
that were not part of the planning stage of early development. In
the past most city managers were pleased to entertain any planned
levelling of trees and emptying of fields to make way for industrial
or commercial construction. A subdivision of neat new homes standing
in a row, meant more residents to fill the streets and spend their
money.
Today
we have come to understand that there is a price to pay for
uncontrolled spread, no less than that of one's waistline. After all
we are not solitary worker ants, we have a tendency to drag our
family along for the ride. Now city managers need to provide schools
for their education, parks and recreational facilities to keep them
off the streets, and efficient public transport for those not able to
jump into their own vehicles. The headaches tend to grow in size
gradually, economics and affordability become serious considerations
for all city managers. Now the shining new development has become a
magnet for the frustrated graffiti artist and the new industrial site
a run-down eyesore.
There
isn't a city in the world that is not facing the consequences of
uncontrolled urban sprawl. Redevelopment of land has provided a
potential solution. Yet we are now well aware of what 'Brownfields'
are, former industrial sites that have issues with lingering
chemicals and other contaminates left behind long after the last
employee has gone.
So a
developer today must face a great deal more than simply “can it be
built.” As city managers face many more considerations before
approving new plans, the developer must accommodate many more issues.
It is no longer simply appeasing city plans or the logistics of the
development. Environmental and community concerns play an integral
role in any decisions made by the developer. Special interest groups
can become obstacles in the approval process requiring concessions or
worse, stalling the procedures completely.
True
there are developers who will cut corners to increase the profit
margins. Environmental requirements can be ignored, site preparation
conducted without concern or appropriate approvals, and much more.
It is the special interest groups that bring public attention and
help enforce the premise of good development, or better still,
responsible development. No one expects that any new building will
stand for a short time. Therefore its impact on the surrounding
environment, cohesion within the community and overall purpose are
important considerations. Yet what can be said when a developer
accommodates all the expected requirements and even more, yet still
faces opposition from only a select few.
Supplied Photo - view from the lake |
In
St. Catharines, Ontario such a situation is unfolding at this time.
A planned development in Port Dalhousie, 'The Beaches at Port', has
come face to face with the select few
who strongly object to the plan, and have made it clear that they
intend to take their objection to the Ontario Municipal Board.
The
Port Dalhousie area of the greater City of St. Catharines is a
picturesque and idyllic location. It is home to Lakeside Park and
the shores of Lake Ontario, with a lovely public beach. A marina
filled with private boats of all sizes adds to the postcard image.
Lakeside Park is also the home of one of the very few operational
outdoor carousels in North America. Overall this is truly a
picturesque part of the City of St. Catharines. Yet St. Catharines
as a whole has suffered badly through the economic downturn and its
city managers face serious issues to find a solution.
Scenic views of Port Dalhousie. |
The
Beaches at Port is a planned development at the very west boundary of
Lakeside Park. Its developer Norm Rockwell, highly experienced in
Heritage issues, and a meticulous planner has presented a proposal to
build a 16-unit residential condominium complex. Mr. Rockwell and his
partners, Steven Massis and Perry Nitsopoulos have brought together a
soil expert, archaeologists and shore plan engineer - nothing has
been left to chance, nothing left to question.
A
City of St. Catharines 'Notice of Decision to Approve Official Plan
Amendment' issued on June 28th 2012 states, “For over
30 years the City of St. Catharines has recognized and re-enforced
the importance of protecting agricultural lands beyond the Urban
Boundary from expansions beyond that boundary. Since the mid 2000's
the Province has reinforced the principles surrounding more
efficiently using existing infrastructure and not allowing growth to
expand into the Greenbelt. The challenge has been and continues to
be accommodating intensification in existing neighbourhoods in a
sensitive manner. The purpose of the lower density designation
applicable to these lands and surrounding neighbourhood is intended
to preserve the identity of the neighbourhood. Staff believes that
the proposed medium density development supports local and provincial
plans and policies.”
Supplied Photo - view from Lakeside Park |
In
an interview with developer Norm Rockwell it was clear that his
passion for heritage and preservation issues surfaced throughout the
proposed development project. He spoke of the restoration of the
historic Wiley/Hutchinson home, only the dilapidated garage will be
removed. “The ravine between the Wiley Home and the proposed
condominium will not be placed under control of the Body Corporate of
the condominium complex, {which oversees all maintenance and future
needs of the property}, so as to ensure the future preservation of
the mature trees.”
Supplied Photo - Architectural rendering of the planned restoration of The Wiley/Hutchinson Home |
City
Planner, Mr. Kevin Blozowski had confirmed that Norm Rockwell
provided extensive reports and documentation on the proposed project,
and had the full support and approval of the city. Rockwell himself
had said, “the start date of the development was approximately
December 2010. There were many various plans submitted before that
date, but that is what I would call the starting date of working with
the city staff.”
Mr.
Blozowski of the City's Planning and Development Services said that
if he was to describe the efforts made by Norm Rockwell regarding
this project, he would say Rockwell was “an enlightened
developer.” Blozowski said he found it somewhat difficult to
understand the objections raised against this proposed development.
Responding to claims of environmental protection area lost in the
development, Rockwell said, “The loss of EPA lands is
approximately 1000 square feet, however the new break-wall to be
constructed is in excess of 1000 square feet and will be donated to
the city as park lands.”
Still
objections against the proposed development have been formally raised
and have to be dealt with. City of St. Catharines Councillor Bruce
Williamson was the only one to vote against the proposal put before
the city, and when asked for comment he provided a prepared statement
which Councillor Williamson also wrote for 'The Garden City's
Current'. “While the building itself features nice
architecture, placing the sheer vertical wall of this six story
structure a few feet from the boundary of the park near the
children's playground behind the carousel is not in the least
complimentary to the area. Once gone, the feeling of openness and
natural beauty that is this corner of Lakeside Beach will be missed.”
Perhaps
it should be noted that the proposed development will not be
replacing open space but two sadly dilapidated buildings currently
used as rentals. Though it is not Councillor Williamson who is the
leading voice in opposition to this development. Mr. Jeff Loucks,
who had previously presented his objections to the Ontario Municipal
Board in relation to another development in the Port Dalhousie area,
has stated he will do so again in opposition to the Norm Rockwell
proposed development.
Mr.
Loucks had been contacted on several occasions in an attempt to hear
what his objections are regarding this project. He has refused to
respond. Attempts were made to contact Mr. Carlos Garcia, previously
associated with PROUD and one of the opponents to another Port
Dalhousie development, and the Port Dalhousie Conservancy (which
replaced PROUD), all have remained unresponsive and silent.
Jeff
Loucks had been put on record by Niagara this Week in an interview
saying that his main reason for filing his appeal was the size of the
proposed development. “The development will result in the loss
of large swath of trees, and when it is built, park goers will lose a
place to get away from the city.” (Mike Zettel NTW July 26 2012).
Norm
Rockwell's proposed development site is the home to some six to eight
trees at this time, and not all are in a healthy state. These trees
are behind a chain link fence that stands as a protection surrounding
the two dilapidated buildings that accommodate several rental
apartments. It is not a public area and signs warn against
trespassers. No park goers may get away from the city or anything
else in this far corner of Lakeside Park.
The existing dilapidated rentals to be replaced by the proposed development. |
A chain link fence surrounds these buildings with a 'No Trespassing' sign, keeping all beach goers, including little children, away from the property line. |
Mr.
Kevin Blozowski was clear that it is hard to understand what real
objections Jeff Loucks had in relation to the proposed development by
Norm Rockwell. According to Mr. Blozowski, Planner for the City of
St. Catharines, Mr. Loucks will not be presenting any expert reports,
or experts for that matter, to present his case. A preliminary
hearing set for November 2nd 2012, with a justice of the
Ontario Municipal Board will hear an application for dismissal by
lawyers representing developer Norm Rockwell. Mr. Loucks in turn
will have his opportunity to present his case to justify the need for
the Ontario Municipal Board to conduct a full hearing on the matter
early in 2013. Jeff Loucks has inferred that he plans to present his
case to the OMB on his own, without any supporting expert assistance.
PROUD, known as Port Dalhousie Conservancy has stated that they will
not be supporting Mr. Loucks this time at an OMB hearing. Though the
president of Port Dalhousie Conservancy, Mr. Hank Beekhuis had made
public objections regarding Norm Rockwell's 'Beaches at Port'
development.
In
a democratic society no voice has a right to be silenced, whether it
stands in support or in opposition. After all that is the true basis
of democracy and the freedom we enjoy in Canada. Yet should common
sense be disregarded in the name of democracy? A list of objections
had been presented to City Planner Kevin Blozowski by the Port
Dalhousie Conservancy, which are as follows...
The
Port Dalhousie area of St. Catharines has charm and beauty, and
Lakeside Park is a public space that all can enjoy. Its protection
is provided by city by-laws under both environmental and heritage
basis, and this protection is of great value for the future of this
area. Still no city can grow without development and when the
development keeps in mind and compliments the local community, it is
hard to understand the basis for objection. In St. Catharines
Pearson Park was decimated to accommodate a pool and library even
against the wishes and objections of local residents. A great
“swath” of trees were destroyed and the notion that “park
goers lost a place to get away from the city,” is evident today
not only due to the complex that was built but also the large asphalt
car park. Yet Mr. Loucks made no objections regarding this
development.
Cities
all around the world deal with issues of preservation and
conservation in relation to development of shorelines. Port
Dalhousie, St. Catharines is not pretending to become a mini South
Beach Florida. Parks in cities large and small face development upon
their boundaries. One has to only think of New York's Central Park
or London's Hyde Park. Norm Rockwell has proposed a development that
is tasteful at the very edge of the west boundary of Lakeside Park.
This development does not infringe on park users in any way as it
replaces two sad and unsightly smaller dwellings guarded by a
chain-link fence. No park goer wanting to get away from the city
will lose their place. No child in the play area will find an
obstruction. Area residents along both Lock Street and Dalhousie
Street do not find any objections with either the proposed new
building nor the restoration of the Wiley House.
The
City's final words in their Notice of Decision are, “Measures
have been taken to mitigate related to height, parking views,
shadows, and cultural heritage aspects in a manner that provides a
balance between heritage conservation and intensification.
Considering the proposal as a site specific exemption to the low
density designations of the existing Official Plan and GCP recognizes
the merits of this proposal without setting a precedent for future
similar requests.” Norm
Rockwell has said, “I
am heritage conscious and I have put together a team of experts to
cover every angle of this project. We are ready for any outcome.”
An extensive list of studies had
been submitted in support of this development which include:
Planning Report prepared by Urban
and Environmental Management (UEM) Inc.
Geotechnical Investigation prepared
by Petro MacCallum Ltd.
Stable Top of Bank Assessment
prepared by Petro MacCallum Ltd.
Coastal Hazard Report prepared by
Shoreplan
Archaeological Assessment prepared
by J.K. Jouppien Heritage Resource Consultant Inc.
Tree Inventory and Preservation
Plan Report prepared by Kuntz Forestry Consulting Inc.
Heritage Impact Assessment prepared
by Philip H. Carter and Paul Oberst
Our
freedom of speech and the right to object on grounds that affect our
community's future are never to be considered as wasteful. Still
those freedoms and rights when guided by ulterior motives can become
weapons to obstruct and delay. City of St. Catharines Councillor Len
Stack provided this statement in relation to the proposed development
to Mayorgate: “After having spent a great deal of time
discussing the proposal with the developer and thoroughly examining
the plans and the architectural design, I was most impressed with
every aspect of this residential condo plan. It includes heritage
preservation and exquisite architectural design that will enhance the
entire beach area. Another positive and interesting aspect of this
project is that many of the surrounding neighbours came out to speak
in favour of the project.”
Supplied Photo - view from Gary Road
Send comments to: demtruth@gmail.com |
One must wonder at Jeff Louck's agenda since it appears his concerns have been addressed and are now seemingly groundless. His refusal to discuss his issues with those who could make a difference leads one to become suspicious of the man's hidden agenda. The entire project headed by Mr. Norm Rockwell is an example of someone who is not only community minded, but one who has a social conscience as seen in his far sightedness. Having democratic freedom which encompasses freedom of speech (and opinion) it is refreshing to entertain discussions which are based on research and fact and not on mere conjecture and personal speculation.
ReplyDeleteBert D'Amico