Part 1: Loyalist Heights, Hillier Consents, and Environmental Oversight – 07/17/2024
- PECConnect
- Jul 17, 2025
- 3 min read
The Planning and Development Committee met on July 17, 2024, to review several planning applications under the Planning Act, including consent requests, rezonings, and a major subdivision proposal tied to the Waring’s Creek watershed. The meeting was held in Council Chambers at Shire Hall and livestreamed for the public. Councillor Phil St-Jean chaired the meeting and guided the committee through a long and detailed agenda focused on land use, environmental protection, and development pressure in and around Picton.
View the entire PEC Council meeting, or continue to speaker comments and councillor votes.
Technical Consent: 321 Quaker Road
After confirming the agenda and hearing disclosures of pecuniary interest, the committee moved into its statutory public meeting portion. Early items focused on smaller consent and rezoning applications. A technical consent involving lands near 321 Quaker Road was discussed in detail, including long-standing boundary issues related to septic placement and drainage conditions. The committee ultimately approved the application after removing two drainage-related conditions, following debate between the applicant, planning staff, and committee members about long-term impacts and municipal protections.
Another consent and rezoning application for 70 Pleasant Bay Road in Hillier raised concerns of a different kind. Planning staff flagged missing zoning language and inconsistencies in draft by-law schedules. While the applicant agreed with the conditions, several councillors expressed discomfort with approving an application that required last-minute corrections. The committee voted to refer the matter to the August meeting, allowing staff time to fix the errors and bring back a clearer recommendation.
Major Application: Loyalist Heights, Loyalist Parkway
The meeting’s longest and most complex discussion centered on the Loyalist Heights proposal, a large subdivision, official plan amendment, and zoning application for lands along Loyalist Parkway in Ward 2. Planning staff presented a detailed overview outlining why the proposal did not meet the County’s planning objectives. Key concerns included the subdivision’s relationship to the Millennium Trail, insufficient density in some areas, fragmented parkland dedication, and potential impacts on the headwaters of Waring’s Creek, a cold-water stream with environmental protections embedded in the Picton Secondary Plan.
Public Input and Environmental Concerns
Staff recommended denial, arguing the proposal did not represent good planning in its current form. The applicant responded with their own presentation, pushing back on several points and asking for clearer direction from the committee. They emphasized affordable housing commitments, preservation of woodlands, and compliance with density targets, while acknowledging that trail design and park placement remained unresolved.
Public input played a major role in shaping the discussion. Residents, environmental groups, and farm representatives spoke at length about wildlife habitat, groundwater recharge, agricultural soils, and cumulative traffic impacts along Sandy Hook Road. Speakers repeatedly returned to the long history of stewardship around Waring’s Creek and urged Council to uphold existing protections.
After a brief recess, the committee debated whether to deny the Loyalist Heights application outright or allow more time for negotiation. While a denial motion was introduced, council ultimately chose a different path. By the end of the night, the committee voted to refer the Loyalist Heights application back to staff for further discussion with the applicant, focusing on environmental design, parkland layout, trail integration, affordability clarity, and public concerns.
Key Takeaways
The committee relied on referral rather than immediate approval or denial to manage complex planning files. This means several applications will return for further review instead of being finalized right away.
Waring’s Creek and its environmental protections were central to the discussion. Concerns about water systems, habitat, and long-term ecological impact clearly influenced both staff recommendations and public input.
The Loyalist Heights proposal remains unresolved after being sent back for more work. Large-scale developments near Picton will continue to face revisions and scrutiny before any final decision is made.
Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 2:50:38. 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