Still time for public input on Sarnia planning appeal process

Sarnia’s potential to invoke a ministerial decision on a controversial plan to expand the city’s settlement boundary in Bright’s Grove has been met with silence so far when it comes to public input, the city’s planning manager says.

Sarnia’s potential to invoke a ministerial decision on a controversial plan to expand the city’s settlement boundary in Bright’s Grove has been met with silence so far when it comes to public input, the city’s planning manager says.

Advertisement 2

Article content

“We’ve not yet received any comment back from the public or any of those Indigenous communities that we reached out to,” said Eric Hyatt.

Article content

That included at a public meeting earlier this week in council chambers, where there were no speakers other than city staff, before the meeting was abruptly adjourned.

Council voted to give staff until January to receive any feedback that may still come in about the potential community infrastructure housing accelerator (CIHA) application, to add 215 hectares in Bright’s Grove for potential future development.

The owners of all but 54 hectares have paid for the process to proceed, and those who don’t pay – $16,230 per owner— before a secondary plan is put together, potentially years from now, would not be included in development plans, Hyatt said , noting that’s in keeping with a council decision from July.

Advertisement 3

Article content

Sarnia’s official plan includes the proposal to build in what’s been dubbed Development Area 3, south of Lakeshore Road in Bright’s Grove.

That aspect of the plan, though, was rejected by County of Lambton planning staff because it doesn’t mesh with existing provincial policy to use existing land for new development first. Sarnia has a glut of employment lands that could be rezoned instead.

The city has appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) to allow Development Area 3 to be included regardless.

That appeal and others continue to be heard, Hyatt said.

“There’s a number of appeals related to the plan so (the OLT is) kind of working through the process on all of them at one time, including the settlement area boundary piece,” he said.

Advertisement 4

Article content

The official plan, minus those components which are under appeal, is in force and effect, Hyatt said. The city’s old official plan is used when evaluating any planning matters that touch pieces under appeal, he said.

If council opts to proceed through CIHA in January, it would ultimately be up to Housing Minister Paul Calandra to approve, reject or modify the application, and that decision cannot be appealed, Hyatt said.

A new provincial planning statement in the works, meanwhile, could negate the whole process, and let municipalities set their own boundary expansions in a different manner; but there’s been no more word on its progress since August, Hyatt said.

“Ultimately, there’s still a few tests, but it’s not the same requirements as what’s currently in the provincial policy statement,” he said.

Advertisement 5

Article content

Whether fees collected from landowners for CIHA would be refunded, if that process proves unnecessary, is unclear, he said.

There’s been no cost to the city so far in the CIHA process, he said.

Public input on the matter can be made by emailing [email protected]or mailing city hall, he said.

Details are at speakupsarnia.ca/ciha.

City officials have said about $500,000 would be needed for preliminary studies and assessments before building could take place in Area 3, and have noted about four-fifths of the area is currently marked as environmentally protected.

Coun. Terry Burrell argued Monday it doesn’t make sense to expand there given doing so is unnecessary to meet the city’s current housing commitments and projections. He also warned about the “enormous, enormous cost” to construct roads, sewers and other infrastructure for development.

An application must be made within 15 days of council’s decision, if the decision is to proceed, community services general manager Stacey Forfar said.

“As such, we are looking to return back in January to provide the end of the year for additional feedback, get through the holiday season in case there’s any appeals or any back and forth, and provide a clean slate for the January (council) meeting.”

[email protected]

Article content

Comments

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourages all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to one hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notifications—you will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

    pso1