An 11-storey apartment building on Johnson Street that was initially rejected by city council is getting the green light after all, following a ruling from the province's Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT).
In the 48-page ruling released Friday, the tribunal found the proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement on land-use planning, conforms to the Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan, and adheres to the city's Official Plan. Therefore, it should be approved.
The 1.42-hectare parcel of land is located at 37 Johnson St., just up the street from Johnson's Beach in the east end.
The site is also next to an existing 11-storey building consisting of almost 200 units, which was built in 1973.
LPAT member Helen Jackson said the neighbourhood is a mixed-use, mixed-height, medium-density area that is well served by amenities. It also complements the city's need for more rental housing.
"This proposed development will assist the city in reaching its growth objectives and will assist in developing a complete community," Jackson added. "This is a desirable neighbourhood, as expressed by the local residents, and will continue to be following the development of this proposed apartment building. The new building will assist in rejuvenating the site."
The new building does not intrude into the neighbourhood, it abuts the adjacent park, it is not higher that the existing building, Jackson noted.
The new building, to be built on vacant land along Indian Arrow Road behind the existing structure, would result in two large apartment buildings in the area of Johnson and Blake streets. Combined, they would have more than 400 units.
The new building is expected to have 215 units, including two one-bedroom units with a den, seven bachelor units, 48 two-bedroom units, and 158 one-bedroom units.
On Sept. 18, 2017, council unanimously turned down a proposal to develop an 11-storey building at the site. Council rejected both the Official Plan and zoning-bylaw amendments that were being sought.
A hearing was held back in January after the developer, D.D. 37 Johnson Ltd. (Starlight Investments), filed an appeal with the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), which has since been renamed the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal.
Peter Krysiak, the city's legal representative, told BarrieToday the matter should have been left to the municipal government.
"At this point, all I can say is that I’m disappointed that the tribunal has little regard for city council’s decision, considering that city council understands the needs of the community," Krysiak said.
Ward 1 Coun. Clare Riepma echoed those concerns.
"I was disappointed to read the decision of the LPAT," he said. "I had hoped that the council position would be respected."
Riepma was not on council when the Johnson Street application was submitted, but was president of the Barrie East End Household Association (BEEHA) at the time. The group submitted a petition with more than 400 signatures from people against the proposal.
Riepma says he was surprised that evidence from city residents was not accepted by the tribunal.
"The decision seems to say that as long as it is intensification, it meets provincial policy and therefore it is approved," he said. "We obviously need to get some strong policies put in the new Official Plan to protect existing, stable and complete neighbourhoods."
Riepma maintains the apartment project will have a negative effect on the Johnson Street neighbourhood.
"It will mean a couple of years of upheaval for the neighbourhood as the building is being built," he said. "When it is complete, there will be double the traffic in the immediate area. There will be a shortage of parking and the residents of the building will be parking on the local streets and the in the No Frills parking lot.
"While there will be more rental apartments available in the area, none of them will be affordable," added Riepma, who has previously said a project such as this is better suited to the downtown, rather than in an area that's already congested.
The tribunal ruled the project is compatible with its surroundings, and "designed appropriately to tie into the existing building by providing material sensitive to the existing building and the neighbourhood," Jackson said in the LPAT decision.
"Elements to help buffer the development from the lower density homes to the north are provided," she added. "Additional improvement will be provided through the site-plan process. The improvements and enhancements to the appearance and functionality of the site, and this reinvestment improves the overall character of the community."
Local resident Jim Cancilla, who was among those who spoke out against the proposal at the LPAT hearing, called the ruling "sad news for our east-end taxpayers," adding, "Big Brother" has overruled council's decision.
At the time of the hearing, former ward councillor Bonnie Ainsworth said she also had concerns over the project.
“My concerns have always been about dropping 300 people into the area which I know can’t handle that kind of intensification,” she said, calling it "a congestion nightmare."
However, one of the witnesses called on behalf of Starlight, Eldon Theodore, an agent for MHBC Planning Urban Designs and Landscape Architecture, said no such concerns were raised by public service agencies or the nearby businesses.
“The development also lines up well with the city’s affordable housing goals and it is my opinion that the growth management goals have been met," Theodore said at the hearing.
