.png;w=960)
After two years of planning, consultation and compromise, Cambridge council believes it found the right development fit for a vacant former brownfield at 55 Kerr St.
On Tuesday, council voted 7-2 in favour of a staff recommendation to allow two 18 storey towers of 445 units to be built on the property, despite a 1,000 signature petition from a neighbourhood liaison committee opposing the high-density development.
Near the beginning of three hours of discussion on the project, Coun. Nick Ermetta brought a surprise motion forward asking staff to work with the developer and head back to the drawing board to explore the possibility of a new design, this time with a maximum height of 12 storeys.
“I know we’re trying to do a lot of good here. Making better use of land, but there are unintended consequences if we do it the wrong way,” Ermetta told council. “With great creativity a similar density can be achieved at a lower height.”
But his motion ultimately failed after council considered the work that had already been done to reduce the scale of the project. That concern was coupled with the threat of a costly appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal that might end in favour of the developer for something at an even greater scale than what council was being asked to approve.
The initial proposal in 2019 sought approval to build a 30-storey tower and a 24-storey tower for a total of 592 units.
The idea of reducing the size of the project further prompted MHBC planning partner Eldon Theodore to suggest his client is eager to move forward with the design that’s currently on the table, suggesting an OLT appeal could be on the horizon.
Bringing the development down a further six storeys in height, he said, would “create a monolithic building that would fill the footprint of the site” instead of articulating the transition to the towers with setbacks and landscaping away from the road.
Coun. Shannon Adshade voted against Ermetta’s motion, saying he didn’t think a 12-storey cap on the development was feasible and he was concerned it would be appealed.
“I’m worried we won’t have a very strong case,” he said. “We’re cleaning up a brownfield site and it’s a fair compromise.”
Coun. Mike Mann agreed, saying the effort from the developer to reduce the scope of the project by 30 per cent already was a compromise he thought would put the city on the losing side of an appeal.
“I know many residents think it’s too high but it would be a much better result than trying to force 12 storeys on that site,” agreed Coun. Pam Wolf.
It’s better design to have two thin buildings and setback rather than massing at the sidewalk, she added.
Coun. Scott Hamilton couldn’t accept the motion either, saying the project achieves the city’s goal of getting more people living in the core.
“If we want to see that vibrancy we need to get people living and working there,” he said.
Despite appeals from Ermetta, who said he’d be “willing to stake his reputation” on his belief that a design at 12 storeys would achieve the same density and be a better fit for the neighbourhood, council voted 3-6 against the idea with only councillors Jan Liggett and Mike Devine wanting to see a 12-storey design.
Mayor Kathryn McGarry disagreed with Ermetta’s idea entirely, citing a Tuesday discussion at the Region of Waterloo horseshoe that outlined more intense growth targets in the municipality’s revised official plan.
Those targets, she said, are efforts to prevent “paving over our agricultural lands.”
Council needs to consider more than height, she said.
“There’s mandated provincial growth, there’s density targets, there’s major transit areas that have to be complied with and the province has mandated growth in our downtown Galt core.
“How do we do that if we don’t achieve these pockets of higher density?,” she asked, adding the more compact tower design is a more efficient use of land.
Members of a neighbourhood liaison committee who weighed in Tuesday said they believe buildings of this size will result in massive intensification with little or no give back to the community.
High rises of the scale proposed, they said, are too much of an abrupt transition from the older, existing homes and the core’s Heritage Conservation District, they promote gentrification and inequality, and go against efforts to reduce the impacts of climate change by being less sustainable and using more energy than mid-rise buildings.
Cambridge resident Michelle Goodridge pointed to the fact that $5 million in development charges are being waived on this project and others to encourage development in the cores. She questioned how the city plans to make up for that loss.
“I wanted to make it clear that not charging developers in our core areas is not fiscally responsibile,” she said. “It is also not responsible to not ask developers to pay their share when they obliterate our streetscapes and natural and built heritage.”
The comment prompted deputy city manager Hardy Bromberg to say the city’s policy to waive development charges in the city’s core areas will be coming to council for review in the first quarter of 2022.
