Cambridge council says it will consider consulting affected property owners on future Minister’s Zoning Order requests after approving a policy they say gives the city some latitude in how to deal with the controversial planning tool.
The policy, adopted by council Tuesday and criticized for being too late for the residents of Blair, will require a planning justification report from developers seeking MZO support from council.
It will also give council the option of consulting affected stakeholders and asking for further studies on a case-by-case basis.
As a report on the policy explains, MZOs have been part of Ontario planning law for decades and were put in place to expedite priorities like transit, affordable housing, long term care homes and economic recovery by removing barriers and delays.
The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing is not required by legislation to give notice or consult with a municipality prior to enacting a MZO, which are designed to bypass the typical Planning Act requirements for processing development applications.
Last year, the province adopted Bill 197, the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, which included amendments to MZOs and gave Minister Steve Clark enhanced powers related to lands located outside of the Greenbelt, including Cambridge.
The three most recently enacted MZOs in Cambridge were deemed integral to economic recovery during the pandemic, including the most controversial project; a million-square foot “e-commerce” distribution warehouse on the outskirts of Blair in the city’s west end.
Close to a dozen delegations spoke about the city’s draft policy during Tuesday’s council meeting.
Many were from the group that fought approval of the warehouse in Blair and directly criticized council for failing to follow its own policies around public engagement as outlined in the city’s strategic plan.
Blair Engaged member Tim Armstrong called the policy disappointing and a return to status quo.
“This council is incapable of doing the right thing,” Armstrong said, adding the “most egregious omission” in the policy, especially during Truth and Reconciliation week, is the failure to even mention consulting First Nations for developments seeking MZO approval within the Haldimand Tract.
“The result is a theme from this staff and council: trust us,” he said. "Any controversial development that could impact a neighbourhood could be a backroom deal.”
Mary McGrath said it appears “the city has done the absolute minimum work” in drafting a policy she urged councillors not to adopt.
She called the MZO an undemocratic tool that should only be used in extreme situations and said the city’s own strategic plan outlines measures promoting sustainability, collaboration and engagement with residents, all of which the city failed to uphold in its decision.
Representing the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario, Karen Scott Booth reminded council of the minister’s expectation that municipalities “perform due diligence in their communities,” including consulting local residents before any MZO request comes to the minister.
In Blair specifically, Minister Clark sent a letter to the city to encourage them to continue engaging with local residents and other impacted members of the community, she said, adding the policy falls short by not requiring further studies that are integral to the planning process.
“The ACO asks these components be a requirement of the policy to ensure appropriate protection for the environment, sensitive landscapes and significant cultural heritage resources.”
Consultation should not be a “may” but a “shall,” Scott Booth said, adding that meaningful consultation must not only be made with the public, but the Region of Waterloo, the Grand River Conservation Authority and the Six Nations.
Danielle Lindamood asked the city to refuse the draft MZO policy and doesn’t believe an MZO should be considered in Cambridge at all.
All steps in the planning process are necessary, she said, not only to ensure proposals are a good fit and consistent with the official plan, but “that it won’t poison our drinking water, that our children can safely breathe the air, that the volume of traffic can be accommodated, that traffic safety has been adequately addressed, that heritage sites will continue to be protected, that expert agencies have been consulted.”
She wants assurance that residents and taxpayers of Cambridge have a say in determining what projects fit the definition of “for the broader public good in Cambridge.”
This draft MZO policy only asks for a planning justification report, she said, “a very simple report that is prepared by someone on the developer’s payroll.”
It “barely breaks the surface of what should be considered when deciding whether to move a development ahead and makes a mockery of the robust planning processes we’ve worked decades to create in this province,” she added.
Joanna Manz reiterated the city’s own Cambridge Connect strategic plan which encourages community engagement and provides the public with a wide range of ways they can be involved in decision making and responsive to emerging local concerns.
City council has failed to follow its own strategic plan, she said, adding the city should implore Minister Steve Clark to rescind any MZOs granted after the strategic plan was enacted in January.
Cam Crawford called the policy an effort to put “lipstick on a pig.”
“We don’t need a new motion to deal with MZOs,” he said. “We have well defined processes in place and I would encourage us as a city to act consistently with the guidelines we have in place.”
Calling council’s history with MZOs a reflection of “poor leadership,” Alan Van Norman said council has repeatedly favoured developers over long-established neighbourhood interests.
“Without public consultation, a planning justification report is an advocacy piece that is not a balanced presentation of existing community interests,” he said. “Council should not be allowed the sole discretion to accept a planning justification report while simultaneously excluding public consultation.”
“Neighbours are balanced stakeholders that deserve your respect,” he added. “This is about people’s lives, not just dollars and cents.”
“Most egregiously, this doesn’t acknowledge Indigenous consultation and makes a mockery of Indigenous territorial acknowledgement at the beginning of every council meeting,” he added.
“You have not engaged with us any time in any matter and you have misrepresented your voters to Mr. Clark and to the very people that elected you,” said Theresa Hacking.
Her remarks prompted the mayor to ask that she refrain from using language that is “disrespectful of council.”
Speaking on the motion that council approve the policy, Coun. Scott Hamilton asked it to be reworded to include the word “and” in the list of requirements council can ask be included in the process.
“We don’t want to create the impression that every single person that wants to do a development in the city of Cambridge goes reaching for an MZO,” Hamilton said.
Deanne Friess, manager of policy planning said the policy is designed to be left open so council can consider each request on a case by case basis.
There could be circumstances like a rapid affordable housing development where council will want to consider the type or extent of consultation, she said.
“This isn’t something that we will use very often. I can see in planning justification where might use it for affordable housing,” said Coun. Pam Wolf, adding the MZO is useful in speeding up the process and eliminating room for appeal.
She said it’s often the case where staff and council goes through the entire planning process, everybody agrees, it’s passed by council and then an individual or “small group” can appeal the decision and it ties the whole thing up in court, costing money and time.
Coun. Mike Devine reminded council that Minister Clark requested municipal support be attached to all MZOs and that a change in government could eliminate that requirement.
Devine said he knows developers in Cambridge “are literally lined up for MZOs” because the planning process is cumbersome.
“I don’t think we should even touch this,” he said. “It does not by any stretch of the imagination have to go to city council.”
Coun. Donna Reid said she doesn’t “particularly like” MZOs but sees the need in certain circumstances.
“When we approved this, we did so with it in mind that we wanted the economic recovery as quick as we could have it. We felt the need to have something there that would help out with employment and also help the city with tax revenue,” she said.
“It has been a very difficult time for all of us. I appreciate the people who came forward and gave their opinions. Even if we don’t want to hear it, we need it from time to time.”
“I wish some of the comments had been more respectful.”
Coun. Nick Ermetta recognized the MZO makes a statement that “this is too important not to do,” but said it needs to be used sparingly, not routine. “Public engagement is paramount.” he said.
Coun. Jan Liggett, who asked staff to draft a policy said she expected something more in depth and wants to see Six Nations along with GRCA in the initial review, not simply added as optional groups to consult with. That would “elevate them to a level that shows we have much greater respect,” she said.
Liggett asked for a deferral so staff could return with a more robust policy, but a council vote defeated the motion.
“We need to show we are listening and do understand how destructive these can be,” she said, adding the minister can still turn over an MZO despite all the work we can do.
“This is a provincial policy,” said Mayor Kathryn McGarry, adding that council has been put in "an untenable position."
The mayor said she agrees public consultation should be part of the process, but said in certain situations like building affordable housing units, an MZO would be critical to getting shovels in the ground within a one-year time frame required by government funding grants.
“We have to have that flexibility to look at each project individually and decide if there’s enough merit. Now we have a policy before us that gives us that flexibility,” McGarry said. She reminded councillors that “even if we do public consultation it can still land on the minister’s desk. He still has the ability to say yes or no.”
