‘The province is turning a blind eye’: Doug Ford’s hands-off approach to Greenbelt disputes worries residents, environmental groups

Thestar.com
July 19, 2021
Noor Javed

There has been one line the Doug Ford government has repeatedly promised not to cross when it comes to development in Ontario: the Greenbelt.

“I have not touched the Greenbelt, we won’t touch the Greenbelt, we won’t build on the Greenbelt,” said the premier in 2020.

Over the past few weeks, officials have reiterated Ford’s position at press conferences that “recognize and celebrate” rivers in the GTA, and made campaign-style promises to grow the large swath of land that surrounds the region.

But concerned residents, environmental groups and local politicians say in three development disputes, it’s not only the province’s actions, but also its apparent lack of action on upholding Greenbelt legislation that could have dire consequences for the 800,000 hectares of sensitive land.

Victor Doyle, a retired bureaucrat who spent decades in Ontario’s housing ministry says it’s “death to the Greenbelt by a thousand cuts.”

“The similarity in all these cases is the province is turning a blind eye and actually willingly facilitating the efforts of developers to get by the Greenbelt,” he said. “They are saying they are doing one thing, when they are actually doing the opposite.”

In 2018, even before he was elected premier, a leaked video of Ford promising developers that once elected, he would “open up chunks of the Greenbelt” led to public outcry. Since then, the government has maintained that it would not touch the protected lands.

A spokesperson for the ministry of municipal affairs and housing said Friday the province is “delivering a balanced approach to addressing growth while protecting the environment.”

Last month, the government added 600 hectares of the of North Gwillimbury forest into the Greenbelt, and after recent public consultations, there is “overwhelming support” to add urban river valleys and the Paris Galt Moraine as well.

But critics say adding more land into the Greenbelt is only effective if the province protects the land that is already there.

The rebirth of the Shrine of Lady of Grace at Marylake in King City as a long-term-care facility faces resistance from local residents who say the owners of the holy site may be rewriting history to get approval to develop on the environmentally sensitive site.

The 800-acre site was once the private home of one of Toronto’s wealthiest men, Sir Henry Pellatt, who built Casa Loma. It later became a monastery for Augustinian fathers, a Catholic private school and serves as a religious retreat for Catholics who can marvel at nature and the life-size statues depicting the crucifixion.

But the shrine’s storied history now faces scrutiny amidst efforts to bring a 160-bed, long-term-care facility to the property, which sits on the protected Oak Ridges Moraine, and which is part of the largest wetland complexes on the moraine, including rare kettle lakes.

According to the rules of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, a new development can only be built if it replaces a structure that has the same use and if it’s similar in size. Most of the current buildings on the property were built before the Oak Ridges plan came into effect.

Last year, Augustinian Fathers (Ontario), Inc. (AFOI), asked King Township to support a request for a minister’s zoning order on the land to build a conference centre, hotel, hospice, retirement home and long-term-care home -- as a way to bring in funds for the organization. But the township council did not support the request, which would have allowed the housing minister to fast-track the development, bypassing local planning rules.

AFOI then scaled back its request, focusing on only a long-term-care home on the site. It says that since the 1950s, long-term-care services had been provided to priests and friars on-site including serving as a “nursing, retirement and convalescent home.”

King Township staff has confirmed the long-term-care home can be built.

“We haven’t been able to obtain any documentation ... about how the town formulated their decision,” said Susan Walmer, executive director of Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust. “And even if you met that requirement, they are planning to go from 50 rooms to a 160-bed facility. That’s not small-scale expansion,”

As the residents were still wrapping their heads around the legality of the AFOI’s request, local MPP Stephen Lecce in March announced a long-term-care facility was on its way at Marylake.

Quinto Annibale, board secretary for the AFOI said they are trying to fill a need in a community that only has 36 LTC beds. He also said the building will be built “in the same location as the existing monastery, there will be no disturbance to the environment.” The new building will likely require servicing, as the current one is still on a septic system.

“We agree this development should only be permitted if it can be demonstrated the environment will not be harmed,” said Annibale, who was appointed vice-chair of the Liquor Control Board of Ontario by Ford, and who is director for Vaughan Working Families, a group that paid for newspaper ads attacking teachers’ unions in 2020.

Annibale said the project will move forward “if we receive a licence and funding from the province.”

Walmer hopes she can convince the AFOI to sell part of the lands to preserve them and as a way for Augustinian Fathers to raise funds. And if not, she hopes the province will intervene.

“We are looking at the province and Premier Ford to uphold the legislation and the promise that there isn’t going to be inappropriate development on the Greenbelt,” said Walmer. “Ford will have to weigh in.”

According to the province, the township will have to OK any planning and development approvals, and it “will have to apply the provincial policy framework, including the policies set out in the Oak Ridges Moraine Plan.”

Usually playgrounds and parks included in subdivisions are required to be built on developable land. But in Markham and Vaughan, a group of developers say they should be allowed to build them on protected Greenbelt lands that neighbour their subdivision developments -- and are pushing cities and the province to change the rules.

Municipal planning staff and some councillors have pushed back, saying that protected parts of the Greenbelt -- in particular those that includes areas deemed “natural heritage” -- should remain untouched and eventually restored to their natural state.

The province, which will have to sign off on any final decision, has declined to take a position on the matter -- even though the Greenbelt legislation is provincial policy -- and is telling the municipalities to figure it out themselves.

“The letter from the ministry wasn’t very specific in terms of what municipalities are to do,” said Lilli Duoba, a Markham city planner at a June committee meeting. “It left the decision, for interpretation, to the municipalities in dealing with parks and open space.”

When Markham sought further direction from the province, “the province was very clear: they aren’t taking a position on this,” said the city manager at the meeting.

“It is up to the local municipality to determine how it implements the designations of, and conforms with, the Greenbelt Plan,” said Melissa Diakoumeas, spokesperson for the ministry of housing.

The group of developers, led by Silvio De Gasperis, the owner of TACC, asked Vaughan for support to open up Greenbelt “fingers” -- slivers of protected land adjacent to their planned subdivisions, one of which was recently approved through a minister’s zoning order. Approximately 200 hectares of land up for discussion in Vaughan is on the Greenbelt.

In a June letter to council, De Gasperis said the land should be redesignated from “Agricultural Area” to “Rural Area,” which would allow it to be opened up for active parkland and recreational uses.

De Gasperis did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.

In support of the developers’ stance, De Gasperis gave Vaughan a letter from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, arguing it supported their ask.

But Vaughan staff said the letter was vague and did “not provide any further clarity” on whether active uses, like parks and recreational facilities, were allowed on protected land.

Markham regional councillor Jack Heath said approving this would be a “slippery slope.” He said the province knows it can’t “take land out of the Greenbelt,” but this was a way to move “active uses on to it.”

“If we actually move the active uses into the Greenbelt, then we have more room to build houses (on the developable land) -- that’s really what this application is all about,” said Heath at a June committee meeting.

Both Markham and Vaughan staff oppose the redesignation, adding that it would set a precedent, and make it difficult to say no to future requests.

Markham will make a decision on the matter on Tuesday. Vaughan decided to simply receive the request, and not take any action. York Region will make a decision in the fall.

Shrine of Lady of Grace at Marylake in King City is a monastery for the Augustinian fathers, a Catholic private school and serves as a religious retreat. The owners have asked to be allowed to build a 160-bed long-term-care facility on the protected site.

Should a 30-year-old planning application filed before the Oak Ridges Moraine legislation was enacted now be considered active? And if so, should it have to adhere to the current legislation, or those that were in play in the 1990s?

Those questions are at the heart of a complicated case making its way through the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) that could reawaken dormant development applications submitted before 2001 -- but which were never processed at the time.

And it’s also a case, critics and environmental groups say, where the province has quietly abandoned its responsibility to stand up for environmentally sensitive lands.

The case focuses on Claremont, in northern Pickering, where Geranium Homes appealed to the LPAT to build 70 detached homes on a 38-hectare farm that sits in the Oak Ridges Moraine.

The original development proposal for the property was to build 27 homes in 1990, but it never went beyond a public information meeting. A 2012 proposal by Geranium also didn’t go beyond a public information meeting. In 2018, it brought forward another plan, which is the basis of the appeal.

Geranium, Pickering and the province said they can’t comment due to ongoing legal proceedings.

In the nearly 30 years since the initial application, the Greenbelt legislation has come into effect and both Pickering and Durham Region have new official plans that place the property on the moraine.

After a lengthy pre-hearing, LPAT determined that the “clergy” principle should apply in this case, which means planning applications should be processed under the laws in place in 1990 when the application was submitted.

At the first pre-hearing meeting, before the Ford government was elected, both the province and the residents opposed the proposal because the land was on the moraine, according to David Masters. Masters, the appellant in the LPAT case, is a Claremont resident opposed to Geranium’s efforts to revive the old application.

But shortly after the Ford government came to power, Housing Minister Steve Clark asked the provincial land and development facilitator to intervene to “facilitate discussions between all parties.”

Masters said residents were never told about this meeting or that a facilitator had been assigned. Nor were they told why months later the province decided to “abandon the case” and didn’t show up for the subsequent hearing.

“The province must defend its own legislation,” wrote Masters in a desperate letter to Ford in 2020. “The parcel of land may be small ... but if its protections are removed, the negative consequences will be precedent setting.”

Masters appears to have been right.

Earlier this year, a developer in Richmond Hill appealed a 1987 application to LPAT, arguing that it should be allowed on 109 hectares (270 acres) of Greenbelt land at Highway 404 and Stouffville Road. The province recently rejected a request for a minister’s zoning order for the same parcel of land.

A number of environmental groups have signed up to participate in the hearing, scheduled for February 2022.

But at the most recent meeting for the LPAT hearing, the province was absent.