Part 1: Housing Development, Rezoning, and Public Concerns in Picton - 11/20/2024
- PECConnect
- Nov 20, 2024
- 4 min read
The Planning and Development Committee meeting on November 20, 2024 was called to order as a statutory public meeting under the Planning Act. The chair explained how planning applications are handled, including the difference between consent agenda items and items requiring full discussion. The public was reminded that council makes final decisions and that speaking at the meeting is required to preserve appeal rights. The agenda and disclosures were approved without issue, and the committee moved quickly into planning files.
View the entire PEC Council meeting, or continue to speaker comments and councillor votes.
Routine Planning Files
Two smaller planning applications were reviewed and moved directly to the consent agenda without comment or opposition. These involved minor consent and zoning matters and were approved as part of a single motion.
A rezoning application for 81D Treasure Cove Lane required a small correction because it was mistakenly listed as a consent file. Once corrected, the rezoning was approved without controversy.
Nicholas Street Development Proposal
The main focus of the meeting was a major official plan amendment and rezoning application for land at the end of Nicholas Street and Cumberland Street in Picton, adjacent to Delhi Park and Mount Olivet Cemetery.
Planning staff presented the proposal, which would redesignate land currently shown as open space to allow residential development. The plan includes 98 apartment units, six townhouses, and two semi detached units, for a total of 106 rental homes. More than half of the units would be affordable, with additional supportive housing units partnered with Community Living Prince Edward.
Staff explained that 65 percent of the site would remain green space, that the site is privately owned, and that multiple studies had been completed or submitted, including traffic, environmental, noise, stormwater, and compatibility studies. Staff recommended approval, stating the proposal represents good planning and supports housing needs.
Developer Presentation and Technical Details
The applicant and project consultants spoke at length. They emphasized the affordable housing crisis, noting a 0.2 percent rental vacancy rate in the County. They explained that the project would be 100 percent rental, with affordability supported through CMHC funding programs.
Design details included building into the slope to reduce visual impact, limiting height to three storeys from street level, underground and concealed parking, and a new fully accessible pathway connecting Nicholas Street to Delhi Park.
Stormwater management, slope stability, and drainage impacts were explained in detail. Engineers stated runoff would be reduced compared to existing conditions and that conservation authorities had reviewed and accepted the plans.
Public Opposition and Support
More than a dozen residents spoke, most in opposition. Key concerns included traffic increases, lack of sidewalks, road safety, parking shortages, construction impacts, loss of trees, cemetery impacts, and visual changes to Delhi Park. Many residents questioned why this location was chosen and argued that rezoning park-adjacent land set a dangerous precedent.
Several speakers challenged the affordability claims and raised concerns about long term enforcement. Others questioned land ownership history and fairness of the process.
One speaker spoke strongly in support, highlighting the accessible park connection, the alignment with the Delhi Park Community Connections Plan, and the need to add housing near services rather than pushing growth outward.
Council Debate and Decision
Council members debated infrastructure responsibility, sidewalks, cemetery protections, traffic safety, fire access, water pressure, and construction impacts. Planning staff repeatedly explained that many issues would be addressed at the site plan stage, not during rezoning.
Affordable housing emerged as a central theme. Several councillors stressed that the county is losing working age residents, that housing insecurity is growing, and that difficult density decisions are unavoidable.
A recorded vote was held. The committee approved the official plan amendment and rezoning by a vote of 13 to 1, sending it forward to council for final approval.
Key Takeaways
A 106-unit residential development in Picton was approved, with a strong council vote supporting increased housing supply.
More than half of the units are planned to be affordable, making the project a significant part of the county’s housing strategy.
Traffic, safety, environmental impact, and changes to neighbourhood character were major issues brought forward by the public.
Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 3:27:42. Due to the length of the meeting, our team was not able to independently review the full recording in its entirety. As a result, we relied on software-generated transcription, automated summarization, and automated recognition of speakers and participants, which may not be entirely accurate. All transcriptions, summaries, and related content are prepared by our team in good faith and on a reasonable best-efforts basis. The content is provided for general informational purposes only and is intended to support public understanding of the topics discussed. While reasonable efforts have been made to present the information accurately, automated processes may result in errors, omissions, or unintended misinterpretations. This article does not constitute an official, certified, or verbatim record of the meeting, and it should not be relied upon as such. Readers are encouraged to consult original source materials, official minutes, or recordings where available for confirmation or clarification. Questions, requests for clarification, or suggested corrections may be submitted to hello@pecconnect.ca for review and consideration.
Comments