No rush decisions on Graywood waterfront proposal, city says

By Joel Wittnebel/The Oshawa Express

It was just over a year ago that the Oshawa council chambers at city hall experienced something it rarely gets a chance to see, that being a packed house.

The public meeting on Jan. 16, 2017, saw more than 200 residents attend. It lasted for nearly seven hours as resident after resident took to the microphone in order to share their disdain with a pair of development proposals brought forward by Graywood Developments on a pair of land plots in southern Oshawa owned by SO Developments Inc.

Since that marathon meeting, a lot has happened, but a lot still remains undetermined.

In a most recent statement, Warren Munro, the city’s director of planning tells The Oshawa Express that the city is not rushing to any decisions on the matter and that discussions and planning are ongoing.

“The revised plan of subdivision for the site south of Renaissance Drive and west of Park Road South (‘Block B’) now proposes 180 units (146 singles and 34 semis), down from 216 in the original proposal, although it also is not approved as yet. The applicant’s environmental consultant has undertaken a monarch butterfly survey and submitted a new environmental impact study. City staff continue to review these revised plans and supporting studies and reports in consultation with the Region of Durham and the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. Staff also continue to have discussions with GM Canada in regards to the proposed development on Block A. The City and the applicant have ensured that all plans, studies and reports submitted to the City are available for access through the City’s website. The City is in no rush to make decisions on the applications and will take the time necessary to make the right decisions.”

With that said, here’s a look back at what has happened over the last year.

January 2017

During the marathon meeting, Oshawa residents got their first glimpse into the plans for the two plots of land.

The first proposal, known as Block A, is a 1.12-hectare wedge of land directly on the corner of Phillip Murray Avenue and Park Road South. The original application brought before council would see eight block townhouses, each as tall as three storeys, being constructed with a total of 56 dwellings and 132 parking spaces. The second, known as Block B, is a much larger proposal for a nearly 26-acre site sitting directly on the waterfront of Lake Ontario south of Renaissance Drive west of Park Road South. Block B would see 216 units erected on the site, including 184 single detached dwellings and 32 semi-detached units.

During the Jan. 16, 2017 meeting, a number of residents bring forward concerns relating to the size of the developments, traffic impacts, and concerns for the environment. Block A also drew the ire of General Motors, as the development sits directly across the street from the Oshawa General Assembly, and could impact the automakers ability to develop the southern portion of their site if they so chose.

“It has to be one of the dumbest development ideas ever proposed,” said former councillor Brian Nicholson, who also lives in the area.

A number of the consultant reports, including environmental impact reports prepared by consultants for the developers were challenged as inadequate by many members of the public.

A week after the original meeting, residents are told that it will be months before any update comes forward regarding the proposals.

Ryan Guetter, a representative with Weston Consulting, who presented the developments at the initial meeting, noted the developer is interested in hosting a public open house of their own to gather information and thoughts from residents.

February 2017

Letters upon letters upon letters begin to flood the inboxes and committee agendas at city hall, many of them noting the same concerns from the original meeting and calling on the city to put an end to the proposals.

At the meeting of the development services committee, over 90 pages of correspondence from various residents is received, the large majority of them strictly stating their opposition to the pair of proposals being put forward by Graywood Developments. Others detailed their various concerns, including the damage to wildlife habitat, loss of trees, traffic issues, noise pollution, safety concerns and the loss of privacy.

During the meeting, Councillor John Aker, the committee’s chair, assured residents that any movement on the project was going to take time.

“These two proposals are going to take, at minimum, a lot of work,” he said at the time. “We’re working on your behalf, that’s all I can say…Nothing is going to happen on this file for some time.”

It’s also noted that Graywood has set a date for their public open house on Feb. 23, 2017. In the notice announcing the open house, it’s described as an “informal meeting” to discuss the proposals with the proponent and their consulting team.

At the open house, held at Lakewood Public School, many of the same concerns are raised by approximately 50 residents in attendance. However, the initial proposals remain the same as the original meeting in January.

March 2017

Determined to prevent the proposals slipping from the public eye, a band of residents is formed, calling themselves Stop the Sprawl, and formalize a letter writing campaign to Oshawa city hall in opposition to the developments.

“Our goal is to stop the rezoning and keep our lakefront natural, safe and beautiful,” stated Barbara O’Brien with the Stop the Sprawl organization. “They can build homes anywhere in Oshawa. We only have one lakefront.” An early meeting of the group saw nearly 30 residents pack into a neighbour’s home to get organized. O’Brien notes the group is looking to grow further and had recently started erecting “Stop the Sprawl” signs around the city. Those on municipal property were quickly removed.

“We have a great group of neighbours and our voice depends on us sticking together,” she said.“All are welcome to join our group that are interested in stopping this rezoning and keeping this beautiful lakefront intact.”

In response to questions from The Oshawa Express, Guetter notes that Graywood has initiated conversations with GM to rectify any outstanding issues.

“They indicated they would review the application materials and would be following up with us at the appropriate time to meet again and discuss the project,” he stated, noting that despite the concerns, plans had been in place with the city’s official plan to develop the Block A lands for some time.

“Block A lands are designated for residential purposes in the city’s official plan, which has recognized the existence of GM for several decades. We anticipate working further with GM to identify the appropriate solutions to address their concerns in a manner that would permit the development of Block A for residential purposes.”

April

As the winter fades away and the greenery begins to return to the land slated to fall beneath the plow, residents renew their efforts, calling on city hall to initiate a peer review of the developer`s reports, which they’ve been saying for months have many issues, including not noting the presence of monarch butterflies on the land, a common site in the warmer months.

“We do believe that there was a lot of information that was left out of the reports. It seems that they did the bare minimum according to the laws that pertain to these sorts of reports and applications to municipalities,” said Szanne McNutt with Stop the Sprawl.

However, Munro notes that no such call had been made to date.

“We do peer review documents when there is a determined need to do so and yes we would charge that back to the developer,” he says. “It is 100 per cent cost recovery.”

He added that those decisions would be completed at a staff level without going to council, but no such requests have been made up to this point.

“Not as yet, we’re still reviewing the information that has been submitted to determine whether there is a need to,” he says. Munro was hesitant to guess when an update would be coming forward.

“We will continue to process it in our normal manner.”

June 2017

The work begins to pay off for Stop the Sprawl as they deliver a petition with over 1,000 signatures on it to council, a strong sign of the opposition to the proposals in the community.

This is on top of the myriad of letters that continually filled council agendas, usually packaged together due to the sheer volume.

In total, approximately 107 letters are received in opposition to Block A, while approximately 149 came in stating opposition to Block B. Many of the letters reviewed by The Express included the names of multiple residents on a single letter and many stated their opposition to both developments. Only six letters were received that did not state outright opposition to the projects, but listed several concerns.

“Our goal has been to make sure that this wasn’t about a small group of people worried about their view,” said resident Cindy Joncas. “This is about a community worried about losing a lifestyle.”

The overwhelming amount of letters had city staff on their heels, turning to council for relief in a motion that would allow them to stop sharing the letters online.

The motion noted that staff had received “considerable correspondence” related to the developments and that, “due to the volume of correspondence received concerning the applications it has become time consuming for staff to make these documents accessible for posting on the website.”

The motion was withdrawn before it could be voted on.

At the same time, the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority releases a report highlighting many issues in the developer reports, affirming what residents had been saying all along.

In terms of the Environmental Impact Study (EIS), CLOCA found a series of gaps, including information related to breeding birds, drainage, significant wildlife habitat and the migratory function of the lands. Gaps were also found in the reports related to the proximity to Lake Ontario, and the hydrogeological investigation.

A timeline has still not been provided for when an updated report on the developments will come forward.

September 2017

A letter to council from Stop the Sprawl notes their petition has grown to 1,200 names as the campaign against the developments continues in earnest.

“This land consists of two wetlands, forest, fields and is a migratory path for many animals, bird species and monarch butterflies. The forest and open space are home to hawks, owls, rabbits, fox, coyotes, deer and numerous other species,” the Stop the Sprawl petition reads. “We are the voices for all of the animals and wildlife that call this land their home. We do not support a development of homes on this lakefront property and would like to see it remain in its natural state.”

At the same time, revised proposals for the two projects are released online. Many residents are infuriated that no notification was given regarding the revised proposals.

For the updated Block A, the number of townhouse units remains the same at 56, but one of the residents main concerns is addressed with the removal of entrance into the housing development from Park Road, which many feared would cause traffic issues coming in and out of the development.

The much more contentious issue with Block A, that being the proximity of the development to the GM plant and impeding their ability to expand on the southern portion of their site is also addressed.

In terms of the updated proposal for Block B, 36 units are shaved from the project, dropping the total number down to 146 single detached units and 34 semis. A small park space and wetland are also added to the western portion of the site.

However, issues concerning the proximity to the lake, the potential for erosion, and the sheer density of the development, which many residents feared the environmental impacts on the animals that rely on the open field space, as well as the threat to at-risk species like the monarch butterfly that use the field, are scarcely addressed.

A briefing note explains that these issues will be further identified moving forward.

November 2017

Following queries from The Express, the city releases a statement noting that no further updates will be provided on the project in 2017.