Councillors were skeptical that a proposal to build four-bedroom units is intended for senior residents.
Despite presenter Daniel Romanko’s claim that some seniors enjoy sharing a four-bedroom apartment—equipped with one common kitchen and living area—with other seniors, council wasn’t buying it.
Asked by Coun. Ken Sentance if the development was “open to senior or affordable housing,” Romanko replied, “Yes, we lowered it so there’s an accessible grade entrance, and that will accommodate the needs of the senior population.”
Speaking on behalf of developer Better Neighbourhoods Inc., Romanko recapped the proposal to convert the northeast corner of 22 Cunningham and 10 and 12 Lyndon Street West into two apartments, each containing three storeys of six units.
A zoning by-law ammendment is needed, and requested, to accommodate the proposed development.
But when asked how many bedrooms each of the 12 units would have by Coun. Anthony Longo—and told four in each—“This is geared to senior living?” he enquired.
“This concept was modelled after a student residence,” said Romanko, “which the owners also own, and the intent was to provide a more social atmosphere” for senior residents.
Coun. Jim Handley asked staff what recourse the proponent would have “If council doesn’t permit this proposal.”
City planner Denise Landry said the applicant would have the right to appeal, “As staff is in support of this application. We can’t control who occupies the dwellings. We desperately need housing stock, and we have an intensification target.”
Landry added that there’s “an apartment directly across the street.”
“Yes, but they don’t have four bedrooms,” said Handley.
He asked if any councillors would “have an opportunity to speak at the appeal process about the effect this would have on our community. I think the taxpayers need fair representation, and the government bodies need to know how it affects Thorold.”
Planning manager Tamara Tannis explained that “Normally, council would retain a lawyer, and if the lawyer thought a witness should be called forward, they may call a councillor or another person, but it’s based on the law,” she emphasized; “not opinion.”
“It’s obvious it’s another student housing project,” said Handley. “There’s no senior housing project that has four bedrooms and four bathrooms.”
“I had high hopes for senior possibilities,” agreed Sentance, “but I’m not supporting this today. I don’t think it’s meant for seniors, which we desperately need.”
Longo concurred, saying, “In my opinion, we need housing stock for seniors and families trying to get into the housing market, and we continue to cater to this sort of build. We are turning the city into a disaster, in my mind. Four bedrooms, four bathrooms—I’m not going to allow it. It’s driving people out of our community, and this will be the one time I will go against staff and I will fight this, and this is wrong. This serves one purpose, and that’s Brock students.”
Tannis reiterated that “Under legislation, we cannot discriminate.”
Coun. Victoria Wilson asked Romanko, “You say you are marketing this to seniors. What are you going to do differently to attract seniors, not students?”
According to Romanko, the proposal offers “more upscale apartments.”
He added that developers “are finding a market for that type of demographic for seniors. If this works, that’s great,” he said. “If not, there’s the alternative of reducing the number of bedrooms, but it is intended to be directed towards that population. The owners are looking to get out of the student market and go where they see a need, and that’s the senior population.”
In answer to her follow-up question, Wilson was told that the proposed units would be rentals, not owned.
“I don’t buy this is what seniors are looking for,” she stated.
Coun. John Kenny asked for specifics, and was told that each unit measures “around 1,400 square feet,” with a common kitchen and living space, plus four bathrooms, one for each of the four bedrooms.
Longo said that with four potential new renters in each of the 12 units, it would mean 48 new residents in the neighbourhood.
Making a second appearance to council to object to the proposal, Jerry Fleming balked at the prospect of sharing his quiet Lyndon Street area with what he assumes would be Brock students.
The resident began by accusing council of supporting the developer.
“I know the corporate crooks have probably contributed to your election campaign,” he said.
“I did get some money from developers,” said Kenny, “but I’m voting against it. I’m a little offended about you coming here and calling us crooked.”
Fleming said he’d previously presented council with a petition, signed by residents.
“Everybody on Cunningham and Lyndon Street said, ‘No, we don’t want it here.’ I won’t be able to sit in my backyard.”
Coun. Fred Neale said he was “Shocked and disappointed staff didn’t let us know about the four bedrooms,” and added the proposal should be deferred “back to staff and the developer to see if we can change his proposal to one that is senior-oriented, and good for the community, before we go to the OMB (Ontario Municipal Board), which will cost money.”
Council voted unanimously against supporting the zoning change.
