A controversial tower development proposed for downtown 麻豆精选, which is entangled in a lawsuit, has been stalled again.
Council voted 7-2 at a public hearing Tuesday (May 13) to deny development permits for a 25-storey building on the site of the former RCMP detachment. It was the second public hearing for the project on city-owned property.
The decision came after several impassioned pleas from residents to maintain 鈥渃ivic values鈥� and further the city鈥檚 cultural scene at the site.
鈥淭his site sits on the heart of the cultural district,鈥� Ellis Street resident Les Bellamy told council. 鈥淎 place designed to foster creativity, community and civic life鈥攏ot towers.鈥�
The proposed development at 350 Doyle Avenue has been a focal point of community debate, legal challenges, and shifting city policies since its inception.
Appelt Properties and Wexford Developments have proposed a building that includes 259 rental units, ground-level commercial spaces, and an extension of the city's Art Walk. The design features a single tower atop a five-storey podium with tiered setbacks to minimize street-level impact.
鈥淚 want council to think about the future of our cultural district and the best use of that property,鈥� implored Myles Bruckal, president of Citizens for a New Performing Arts Centre. 鈥淭here are many other sites in 麻豆精选 that are proposed for residential purposes鈥攖here is not a high need for this.鈥�
That message was heard loud and clear by council.
鈥淲e鈥檝e heard from a lot of folks who are really concerned, even at the same time saying 鈥榠t鈥檚 beautiful, just not here,鈥欌�� Councillor Gord Lovegrove noted.
Coun. Ron Cannan questioned if the development was the best use of the land.
鈥淒oes it reflect our long-term vision for our cultural district?鈥�
The height of the building, which was originally 13 storeys, was a concern for several councillors.
鈥淭his is way too big according to what we had ordered up,鈥� Coun. Charlie Hodge noted. 鈥淔or me鈥攖o get to 25 storeys鈥攊s something I can鈥檛 do.鈥�
Coun. Mohini Singh was on the same page.
鈥淎sking for extra height in my humble opinion鈥攊t鈥檚 a bit rich,鈥� she said.
The project's journey has been tumultuous. Initially approved by council in 2022, the development faced backlash when it was revealed that several individuals who spoke in favour at a previous public hearing were compensated $250 each. The revelation led council to rescind the development permits in August 2023, citing concerns over the integrity of the public consultation process.
In response, the developers filed lawsuits against the city and Mayor Tom Dyas, alleging that rescinding the permits was driven by political motives and improper conduct. The city has denied these allegations, asserting that due process was followed.
At Tuesday's hearing, Dyas voted against approving the development permit which asked for several variances including height, and parking stalls for vehicles and bicycles.
鈥淲ith regard to the variances鈥攋ust not in agreement with them,鈥� the mayor said.
Councillors Maxine DeHart and Loyal Wooldridge also voted against the project, although Wooldridge said the re-submission had given him pause.
鈥淚 am in support of density and housing throughout the city, what I鈥檓 challenged with though is this being public land and increasing substantially in terms of height,鈥� he added.
Only Councillors Rick Webber and Luke Stack voted in favour of granting development permits for the project.
鈥淭he public amenity art walk is very attractive, and when it鈥檚 designed in partnership with the city it will be a major improvement to our downtown,鈥� Stack said. 鈥淭he 259 residential housing units in the city core鈥擨 mean鈥攐ne of our goals has been to bring more and more people into the downtown and this will actually do that.鈥�
The 麻豆精选 Legacy Group (KLG), which Mayor Dyas was formally involved with, has been a vocal critic of the project. KLG argues that the development's scale is incompatible with the surrounding neighbourhood and questions the terms of the land lease, which the claim allows the developer to lease the city-owned property for approximately $2,300 per month over 88 years.
Following council's rejection, the future of the development is now uncertain.
