Brock Weir, Auroran reporter |
The planning act and zoning amendments for the controversial wellness centre and residential complex construction on Yonge Street and Elderberry Trail continues despite a last ditch appeal from residents to get council to change their minds last week.
The effort came from residents of the Elderberry Trail neighbourhood who approached councillors Tuesday afternoon asking to hold an emergency meeting later that day to review and possibly reverse their decision to approve the amendments made just one week before.
Evidently a majority of councillors opted against an emergency meeting but the residents were heard anyway when they waived procedural bylaw to allow a resident to appear before general committee as a delegation.
"There were a number of issues that were raised as a concern to myself personally that I believe were shared with members of the community," said delegate Walter Mestrinaro, who outlined concerns regarding the planned height of the residential building on site as well as the change in density that would needed if the building went ahead.
"The density that was presented to you was 2.45 units per acre," he said. "That density can only be arrived at by doing one thing and that is by taking the number of units and dividing them by the total land area of 8.57 acres. That means you're transferring the density from institutional to residential. OPA 34 says you can't do that, and if you do that it lays precedent for other developments...that will ask to transfer their density from institutional to residential."
In response to the resident's concerns, Marco Ramunno, Aurora's Director of Planning, said the previous week's amendments permitted a maximum of 20 units within the proposed apartment building, plus one, in addition to the wellness centre. OPA 34, he said, allowed for density transfers within blocks.
"The chart in my report indicated that based on that site area the density would be calculated at 2.45 units per acre," said Mr. Ramunno. "However, OPA 34 speaks to density and that is calculated on the larger block plan scale and the block plan for this area encompasses 50 acres and the lands to the north, which has currently been developed as the Ascot residential neighbourhood. [It includes] a maximum of 39 detached housing units, and a smaller parcel to the north which would form part of that lot."
Another issue Mr. Mestrinaro brought before council's attention once again was the uses permitted in this plan.
At the May 24 meeting, council gave final approval for the plan amendments along with additional amendments to satisfy residents' concerns that an addiction clinic could be part of the development. If Mr. Mestrinaro's delegations are any indication, those concerns are still alive and well in the heart of the Elderberry Trail community.
"We have really grave concerns about that," he said. "The doctor runs an addiction clinic in Toronto and he's been holding his cards very close to his chest as to what this will be. We would like some certainty as to what it will not be."
He encouraged councillors to give the plan a "sober second thought" to ensure what councillors are voting for is "what they really think they're going to get”.
Following the delegation, councillors had an opportunity to ask Mr. Ramunno questions related to what they had just heard.
One of them who ran with that was Chris Ballard, who also questioned staff about the institutional uses permitted on the property.
This, he said, was a stumbling block in his consideration of the plan.
"We have gone to great lengths, I think, to prevent an institution here that serves the immediate neighbourhood and we've said the pharmacy can't serve the immediate neighbourhood, we didn't want ins and outs into the immediate neighbourhood, so this section 321 says only institutional facilities serving the immediate neighbourhood yet this institution clearly isn't," he said. "Perhaps if we expand the definition of 'immediate neighbourhood' to include the GTA we might fit it in there."
At this point, Councillor Paul Pirri called a point of order arguing that Councillor Ballard's remark was "out of line.
"You're Reductio ad Absurdum just doesn't make any sense whatsoever."
Mr. Mestrinaro's delegation was received by the members with only Councillor Evelyn Buck opposed.
On Wednesday, however, Councillor Ballard took to his blog to express frustration with how the day unfolded and questioned his fellow councillors' ideas of democracy in denying an emergency council meeting to again hear the arguments of the Elderberry residents.
"The objective of the meeting was simple - to reconsider the motion we approved at our May 24 council regarding the zoning application," he wrote. "I felt it would allow staff to publicly clarify many important questions residents feel have not been satisfactorily answered.
"It was not a delaying tactic - I am not happy when so many residents are angry, confused and feel that they have been shut out of the democratic process. By not agreeing to the special meeting, I feel councillors and the mayor have clearly demonstrated their version of democracy for Aurora."