Residents at my Ward 2 Citizens Advisory Committee had raised concerns about the use of Section 37 community benefits (named for the relevant section in the Planning Act), and specifically about the benefits negotiated on the Molinaro project on Brock & Elgin. It was approved 6-1 by council (I dissented) at 14 storeys, where the Official Plan allows seven; $500,000 in community benefits were negotiated, including burial of hydro wires, landscaping, playground improvements and public art.

My take: We’ve taken two steps in the right direction to improve public input on major developments and on community benefits, and I’m pleased to have worked with residents and my colleagues to achieve that. I remain concerned about the use of community benefits, and can see only limited opportunities for their use, for example securing low-cost assisted living units. I don’t support community benefits funding items that should be funded as part of our regular budget, for example public art.

I'm frequently asked by residents: how can city staff and other councillors support projects that are clearly out of line with the Official Plan, and aren't supported by residents?

There are several of the arguments given, but I don't think they hold water.

Residents understand we must meet growth targets and that we can do so without overintensification. Residents understand that our targets can be met with jobs or housing, and are asking for a greater focus on meeting our targets through jobs. Residents understand that its important to protect rural greenspace, but that it's equally important to protect our urban greenspace. Residents understand that the Official Plan allows for changes, and expect these changes to be modest and well-justified and that major changes will occur through the Official Plan review.

A 14-storey highrise at the corner of Brock and Elgin streets that is double the height and density permitted in the Official Plan has been approved, over the objections of dozens of residents, by a 6-1 vote (I was the dissenting vote).

Adding this apartment on this site will create a create a forest of highrises with nary a blade of grass in site. The picture to the right says it all - and it doesn't even include the remaining parcels which could be similarly developed.

To add insult to injury, this project will be registered as a condo, but only offered as rental suites - a significant tax dodge since condos pay less property taxes than rental units.

My take: This is another example of a missed opportunity for balanced intensification in the downtown, one that respects the vision for growth articulated in the Official Plan. It is overintensification that ignores community input, creates a forest of highrises on a single block and provides no private greenspace for the residents who will move in. A seven storey building would have achieved intensification goals - this goes well beyond what is necessary here.

Residents expressed concerns about the height of the building (it's between multi-storey buildings to the West and single family homes to the East) increased traffic and noise, and mostly about overflow parking onto nearby streets. Staff and the builder will continue to work with residents to mitigate these concerns.