The public will have to wait a little longer to find out how the town intends to move forward on the Poplar Regional Health and Wellness Village proposal.
The proponents behind the project (Live Work Learn Play Inc. and Di Poce Management Ltd.) brought a revamped proposal for a minister’s zoning order (MZO) to councillors this week including changes inspired by feedback from the public, town staff, council and various community groups, hoping council would now lend their support to an MZO application.
However, during the special strategic initiative standing committee meeting that took place on Aug. 11 to discuss the matter, it became apparent that the proponent, town staff and town council are not yet on the same page concerning how the town should proceed.
“This is clearly the most complicated, complex and important matter we’ve dealt with at our council table in this term,” said Coun. Yvonne Hamlin during Thursday’s meeting. “This proposal came to us five months ago. I would like to have a decision before this term is finished because our council has spent a lot of time thinking about this.”
“I like the vision. I think we’re close, but I don’t think we’re there yet,” she said.
The project proposal for 130 acres on the southeast corner of Poplar Sideroad and Raglan St. was first brought forward to Collingwood council in March.
The developers intend to apply for an MZO — a controversial provincial tool to fast-track a change of zoning on a piece of land with provincial authority bypassing the municipal zoning process — to change the zoning of the property from industrial to mixed-use to allow for the community-hub-style development. In order to apply, the developer needs a resolution passed by Collingwood council in support of the zoning change.
According to the initial vision for the project presented to council, there will be seven key areas incorporated into the design of the village including a regional health and wellness campus, a market district, long-term care/assisted living facilities, bio-science and medical research facilities, an eco-wellness centre, a regional transit hub, student and workforce housing and sports medicine clinics.
Some of the recent changes to the vision to incorporate feedback from public consultations include prohibiting uses on the site such as financial institutions, short-term accommodations, hotels, motels, and single detached dwellings. A maximum height of 30 metres, or six storeys, is now included for all mixed-use buildings.
“Attainable housing” in the plan is now explicitly defined as market-based housing, which can be either ownership or rental housing that is affordable to households with a range of incomes that are at the 30th to 85th percentile of the income spectrum and provided without cost or rent interventions from the public sector or other social housing providers. Attainable housing may also be priced to meet the definition of affordable housing under the 2020 Provincial Policy Statement. A minimum of 10 per cent of the total gross floor area for residential uses in the plan will be provided for attainable housing.
Other new additions to the overall plan include that a block plan and a phasing plan must be submitted prior to any building permits being granted for the project, and a five-kilometre, all-season, multi-modal trail system must also be constructed on the lands.
One member of the public attended Thursday’s meeting to speak to the matter. Amber Stewart, who attended as an agent of Sunvale Homes developer John Welton, said Welton had concerns with the pace at which council was moving ahead with the project, especially considering the water capacity issues the town is currently facing.
“Endorsement of this MZO will be seen as the proponent jumping the queue,” said Stewart.
As of this week, there are seven options currently being considered by councillors in regards to the possible support of an MZO for the Poplar Village project.
Options one through three are all supported options by town staff. Options one and two include assigning a “deferred development zone” category to the site, which is a special zoning category that would mean development of the site is deferred until council is satisfied with a final classification of the land. As part of the special zoning, council would be tasked with adopting a block plan for the land, which will include stakeholder consultation and supporting studies.
This option was discussed previously by council in April.
Option two additionally includes setting aside 30 acres of the property specifically for a hospital.
Complicating matters is the province’s passing of Bill 109 – The More Homes for Everyone Act on April 14. As part of the act, the province announced it would be adding a new tool to its tool chest called the Community Infrastructure and Housing Accelerator (CIHA), which would replace the MZO process but be similar with an enhanced process and controls.
While the effective date of the CIHA was April 14, the province has not yet finalized details on how the CIHA would work and the tool cannot be used until the guidelines are published.
Option four would see the town waiting on the CIHA rules to come from the province and possibly using that avenue instead of an MZO.
Option six, which is to support the revised MZO as-is and continue to refine parameters with the province – is currently the favoured option by the developers.
“Support for the vision is clear. There can be no further delay. We request that council endorse option six,” said Signe Leisk, legal counsel for Live Work Learn Play Inc. during a deputation to councillors on Thursday.
“The delivery of this project will require significant investment. It is not feasible to further restrict development while adding additional costs... onto one landowner,” said Leisk. “Options one and two do not support the realization of the vision.”
“This is not a publicly funded project. There must be flexibility,” she said.
Neither town staff, the developer, consultants or council has expressed interest in Option seven, which would be to not endorse an MZO for the project.
During Thursday’s meeting, Coun. Kathy Jeffery said she would be in support of a combination of options five (to support the revised MZO as-is) and six while also adding elements of option four, and asked for more information regarding that option from town staff to be provided at the Aug. 18 council meeting.
“We have been on-boarded with a lot of new information in a small period of time,” said Jeffery. “Based on the lack of people lining up (to depute), there’s great community support for this. It’s jobs, housing and health care without travel.”
However, Jeffery noted frustration with the lack of accessibility to the province to ask questions about the process.
“It’s been my belief all along that we’re operating in silos and it’s so difficult to bring us all together when we can’t have the Ministry (of Municipal Affairs and Housing), the town and the proponents in the same room at the same time so we get the same answers from the ministry as to what we can and cannot do,” she said.
Coun. Yvonne Hamlin agreed that she wanted to be at the table with the province to discuss the matter. She noted she understood that the project is privately funded, but the greater community also needs to be taken into account. She also said the province’s decisions regarding the Collingwood General and Marine Hospital were still a factor without many answers at the provincial level.
“In essence, they’re building another town on Poplar. Why should someone be given the keys to creating a small town with no restrictions or commitments to what they’re providing?” said Hamlin. “What’s the harm in waiting for a month? We like the vision, but we want to make sure we get the vision.”
Hamlin also reminded council that staff had confirmed that any lame duck provisions, which wouldn’t go into effect until Aug. 19, would not impact a council decision on the file as provincial decisions are not impacted and town money is not part of the process in this case.
At the end of the meeting, council voted unanimously to defer the matter to their Aug. 18 regular meeting of council for discussion. Coun. Bob Madigan and Coun. Chris Carrier were both absent from the Thursday meeting. Carrier has previously declared a conflict on any decisions relating to the Poplar Village project due to a personal relationship with the developer.
