Appeal to stop controversial Walkerville housing project fails

A push by neighbours to stop a controversial housing development in Walkervillehas failed.

The Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) dismissed an appeal filed by residents who said that the development did not fit the city's official plan on Dec. 5.

The 4-storey, 23-unit building at Devonshire Court and Kildare Road was approved by council March 2022after listening to delegates that included 13 neighbours speakingout against the project.

At the time, residents told council that the proposal was too tall and would over-power other homes.

They also cited a staff report from 2016 that stated three single-family homes should be built on the vacant lot that sits inside of the Walkerville Heritage area.

"I vehemently oppose this development," said Antonio Buttice, who haslivedacross the road from the lot for more than two decades.

Butticefiled an appeal of councils decision though the OLT on April 21, 2022and the matter was heard over three days in last October.

From church buildings to single family homes

The vacant land was once the site of a church and hall owned by the Diocese of Huron who said the buildings could not be repairedand needed to be demolished.

The Diocese of Huron asked the city for a demolition permit for the buildingsand for the vacant lots to be zoned residential for three houses.

In 2016, a report for city council was completed by former heritage planner John Calhoun.

Council voted to approvethe demolition of the buildingin 2017 and then rezoned for three single-family houses.

The next year those lots were sold to Vanderbilt Homes and sat empty until 2021 whenthey submitted a proposal for a multi-unit residential building was submitted to the city.

Council would approve thatapplication in a 7-3 vote.

Walkerville councillor Chris Holt voted in favour of the project whilecouncillors Jeewen Gill, Fred Francis and Jo-Anne Gignac opposing the development

Windsor mayor Drew Dilkens was absent for the vote and current Walkerville councillor Mark McKenzie said during his election campaign that he opposed the development because it's not what residents want.

Building would ruin character of the neighbourhood, OLT hears

Butticetold the OLT that city staff and council did not act appropriately because of their disregard of the Calhoun report.

Roger Bastiaan, another neighbour, made similar comments during the hearing, telling the tribunal that he felt that if this approval goes forward anyone in Walkerville will be able to demolish their home and built an apartment.

He said that would ruin the character of the neighbourhood.

Maged Basilious, a professional architect who appeared on behalf of the appellants, said that the proposed development does not have enough parking, that the building will block neighbours views of the sky.

Basilious said the building is seven times larger than any nearby home and the building's front facing windows might prevent people from using their front yards.

'Cloak and dagger' tactics hinted at, but no evidence

In it's findings, the OLT said that the city gave people ample time to review and comment on the re-zoning process.

The tribunal wrote that the project will act as a transtion from a commercial arterial road to a residential neighbourhood and provide housing units the city says it needs.

"The Appellants may not agree that the proposal is compatible; however, the Appellants did not provide any land planning evidence to refute the position of the Applicant and the City," wrote OLT member Steve DeBoer in the decision.

DeBoer noted that the appellants could not find a land use planner to presentfor their case.

"Throughout this process, the Appellant has hinted at what it deems as "cloak and dagger" tactics by the City and the Applicant to force through this proposal. The Tribunal has not found evidence of this," wrote DeBoer

The tribunal, in its written findings,did not mention the Calhoun report.

It was addressed by Adam Szymczak, the city planner who recommenced the application for approval and appeared for the city.

He told the OLT that the Calhoun report was not relevant because it is not a planning report and was not necessary to the application before the city.