Woodbridge residents putting up fight against development they feel is unfair

Pine Grove residents got more than they bargained for when they let a developer in their backyard.

Thestar.com
August 2, 2022
Brian Capitao

A proposed ‘mid-rise’ building is causing quite a stir in the quaint residential Woodbridge neighbourhood of Pine Grove. A notice suggesting 122 new units set at seven-storeys to be built on Islington Avenue and Gamble Street is already out of date. There are now 125 units being proposed for the condominium as of June 2022.

The building is now scheduled to be a six-storey mid--rise with floors set to be more than 2.42 times the area of the lot. The development will be the tallest building in the area and a departure from the previous residential homes and low--rises on the street. However, residents are up in arms over changes they say developers did not consult the community on:

“During COVID, I don’t think the communication between the city, the developers, and the City of Vaughan planning department really collaborated with residents about what was going with that proposal,” said Christopher Pinto, one of the board of directors at the neighbouring 245 Pine Grove condo.

The nook dubbed the “hamlet of Pine Grove” at the intersection of Pine Grove Road and Islington Avenue is feeling the pressure to urbanize. Traffic congestion is already an issue on Islington Avenue, according to residents.

“We have real concerns about traffic management,” said Sandra Young, a nearby resident and condo board member at 250 Pine Grove Road.

“It is a democratic society. We know everybody needs to make money. Can we just take into consideration what this one kilometre stretch of road can sustain and what the community is saying is important to them?” asked Franca Porretta, one of the key organizers.

She added residents are wary about a traffic study that was included in the application process.

The city councillor for the ward, Tony Carella, which Pine Grove is in, says that the city is under pressure from the provincial government and will experience high intensification as the city and population continues to grow.

“The traffic study said that the proposal will not adversely affect traffic. Does that mean that there won’t be an increase in traffic? I don’t think so,” Coun. Tony Carella said. “The residents think that’s not been sufficient, that the study was not sufficiently broad and doesn’t take into account other development that’s coming."

“Long--term the expectation is that more people will take public transit, and that’s why development along Highway 7 and Yonge Street is higher there than elsewhere,” said Carella.

The traffic count done for the 2020 report submitted with the developer’s application was done pre--COVID in April of 2018, under city and region guidelines.

Still, residents claim they would like to see due process from the developer, Pristine Homes Inc.

“We’re not opposed to development in the area ... It’s about the size of the development. Why could get they originally get approved a seven--storey building, when the zoning for that area was only five?” Pinto told the Vaughan Citizen.

However, an amendment to the 2010 Vaughan Official Plan and the city’s definitive zoning bylaw, bylaw 1--88 give ordinance to developers looking to reallocate subject land.

A representative for Pristine Homes Inc., Rosemarie Humphries, president of Humphries Planning Group, said in an emailed statement:

“Notice respecting the intended land use for the subject properties has been provided on numerous occasions and in several forms. The applicant was responsible for erecting notice sign on the subject site upon submission of the application, notice of a statutory public meeting and further notice of committee of the whole meeting was provided by the City of Vaughan in accordance with the requirements of The Planning Act.”

For their part, developers can apply for amendments to the existing city plan, which has been streamlined thanks to the province’s initiatives put forward to “reduce red tape.”

This includes a February 2022 report called the Report of the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force that does away some of the checks and balances in place. Recommendations include making it more difficult to contest development by “limiting public consultations to a legislative minimum” and “prevent abuse of the heritage process and see property owners compensated for financial loss resulting from designation.”

Back in April, the first of these recommendations took place under Bill 109, the More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022, which received royal assent.