The Ontario Land Tribunal is sticking to its ruling made last year over the proposed Rand Estates subdivision, that the nearly-200-home proposed development in Old Town can not go forward without several revisions.
Earlier this week, the OLT issued a decision on developer Solmar Development Inc.’s request for review of the decision issued on Oct. 11, Legal counsel of Solmar submitted the appeal relating to the decision on the planning and heritage applications by Solmar for 200 John St. East and 588 Charlotte St.
“The OLT has concluded that the request does not raise a compelling and convincing case,” according to a statement issued by the town on Thursday.
The October decision “remains in full force and effect.”
The most recent ruling means that Solmar will have two months to advise the other parties and the tribunal whether it intends to pursue the studies and revisions to its proposed development as directed in the October decision.
“In the event that Solmar advises that it will not proceed as directed, the tribunal will issue a final order dismissing the appeals,” said the town’s statement.
Essentially, the OLT sent Solmar back to the drawing board with its proposal last fall.
The Oct. 11 decision about the proposed residential development on the Rand property dealt with appeals that followed decisions by town councillors not to allow the development to go ahead as proposed.
That resulted in a lengthy OLT hearing that began last April and wrapped up in August, after being paused in May before resuming again in late July. During that time, the hearing offered evidence and testimony from dozens of experts.
With status in the proceedings were the town, Solmar, Save Our Rand Estate (SORE) residents' group, and Blair and Brenda McArthur, who live nearby at 210 John St.
The OLT's ruling last year provided Solmar “the opportunity to pursue substantial revisions to the design of the proposed subdivision, consisting of about 200 homes, related to the tribunal’s findings on cultural heritage, vehicular access, tree protection, and natural heritage.
One of the most contentious issues in the hearing was an access through what is known as the “panhandle” on John St.
This access was found problematic by the tribunal due to heritage, traffic safety, mature tree and bat habitat impacts.
The tribunal held that the developer will have to find an alternative access solution. SORE members have suggested 144-176 John St. as an alternative access that could be used if the project does move ahead.
Studies related to water and wastewater as well as traffic at Queen’s Parade and John St. East have been requested by the OLT.
Other arguments made by the OLT that SORE says are important include that the historic carriage house on the property be retained where it is currently located and accommodated by a suitable lot design.
The remaining mature trees on the site are part of the estate's cultural heritage landscape, and are to be preserved, SORE noted.
A wetland at 200 John St. cannot be relocated to the corner of John and Charlotte streets as proposed by the developer, and also must be maintained in place, the OLT said.