Planning report: 2025-05

Submitted by John Dance on behalf of Planning Committee, May 11, 2025

1. Greystone Village Forecourt Towns (295/355 Deschâtelets)

This item goes to the Planning and Housing Committee May 21. Normally, the staff support for the various rezoning provisions sought by Regional would have meant the application would go forward without PHC considering it.  However, Councillor Menard, responding to the OOECA planning committee concerns, removed “delegated authority” so the proposal requires PHC approval.

May 6 meeting with Councillor Menard, Regional, and City staff

Last week Paul Goodkey and myself met on “Teams” with Councillor Menard, Evan Garfinkel of Regional, and city staff to discuss. Regional is adamant that they cannot make the change we requested because, Evan says, it would result in the loss of bedrooms for six of the units and the units would no longer be financially viable. Also, he says Regional has the “as-of-right” to proceed as they are proposing on the southern side of the Grande Allee.

Shift units from Grande Allee to protect critical root zone

At PHC, we are proposing to make the case for why 3 units on the north side of the Grande Allee and 3 units on the south side should shift 2 metres away from the Grande Allee to provide a full critical root zone for large mature trees and to continue the viewscape established by the southern faces of the Ballantyne and Milieu apartment buildings.

One positive thing that came out of the Teams meeting is that Regional agreed not to remove the large sugar (I think) maple on the north side of the Allee. Evan says forestry experts say it will only live another 5-10 years but we are of the view that it should be kept as long as it is alive.

Other Regional presentation comments

In his presentation, Evan noted that although the Flora Footbridge has been a success it did result in the loss of views in homes along Echo Drive. His point being, I think, that sometimes things get built that aren’t as good as some would like but nevertheless they are important improvements.

I responded that we objected to the City not putting the footbridge’s eastern ramp and the abutment on columns so that Echo Drive residents would be able to see through. We were not successful but it would have been the right thing to do, just as shifting the proposed townhomes 2 metres is, in our view, the right thing to do.

2. Proposed Changes to the OOE Secondary Plan

As noted in the letter we sent two weeks ago, the OOECA planning committee objects to the proposed 50% increased height of buildings along Main, Lees, and Hawthorne (see image below). City staff say the increase is required to conform to the Provincial Planning Statement (PPS), approved October 2024.

We disagree. We think staff are not properly interpreting the PPS and, furthermore, municipalities have discretion in how the PPS is applied. The current height restrictions of 4 and 6 storeys on defined sections of our major streets were determined through extensive community, land-owner, and City discussions that led to the approval of the secondary plan in 2011.

Although the OOECA planning committee’s position is to oppose the increased heights in the secondary plan, some residents support the increases noting that intensification should be happening in the core, rather than having additional urban sprawl. If the increased heights are approved, it will result in a windfall for property owners because their properties will become more valuable since more units will be allowed.