LOWBANKS — Residents of Lowbanks are up in arms as Burlington-based developer LJM Developments has applied to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) to move forward on a seasonal development at 63 Pyle Road adjacent to Lake Erie, despite Haldimand Council’s opposition.
Currently, the site is designated under both ‘Agriculture’ and ‘Hazard Lands’ in Haldimand’s Official Plan. Neither designation permits a seasonal residential development, leading the proponents to request Official Plan and Bylaw amendments to facilitate the proposal, which is listed under ‘upcoming residential projects’ on LJM’s website.
According to County Planning and Development Manager Shannon VanDalen, the initial plans included 175 seasonal cottages, a community centre with a multi-use sports field and double tennis court, and outdoor facilities, such as a multi-use trail.
“The application was originally recommended for refusal at Council-In-Committee on August 25, 2020; however, prior to ratification by Council at the August 31, 2020 meeting, the proponent requested deferral to provide additional opportunity for review, revision, and discussion with the County,” explained VanDalen.
Ward 5 Councillor Rob Shirton expanded, “Council deferred the recommendation, suggesting the developer reduce the number of units and also to make changes to reduce the concerns of the public, re: erosion, traffic impact, and wastewater management.”
Shirton said that, to LJM’s credit, they “did try to accommodate the concerns of the public. The developer reduced the number of units, did a study for septic waste, made suggestions for traffic improvement by way of a turning lane, as well as upgrades to Pyle Road (and) offering shoreline protection for the parcel.”
In 2021, the application came up again as the County prepared for an Official Plan update. The proponents hoped the lands’ designations would be re-classified as part of the resort residential node boundary for the area.
“The County did not feel this parcel should be zoned residential and left it zoned agriculture,” said Shirton. “Many residents still were against this development.”
VanDalen elaborated, “The applicant asked that the application be heard by (Council) in February 2023, then asked for another delay to address comments received from the public. The application came back again in the fall of 2023 with the request that it be heard by (Council) on January 16, 2024.”
That final meeting would not come to pass, however, as the County learned on January 11 that the proponent had appealed to the OLT, effectively removing Council’s authority to make a decision.
“The matter is now jurisdictionally with the Tribunal,” said VanDalen, noting the reason provided to the OLT was Council’s delay in providing an official response.
She explained, “Council has a certain number of days to make a decision on an application before an applicant can appeal to the (OLT) for non-decision. It is exceptionally rare that a developer would take this route in Haldimand County, especially within a few days of the Council-in-Committee meeting, as the OLT process is much slower than the County process.”
Shirton believes that the proponent is expecting a better answer from the OLT: “I feel the developer felt that staff and residents were not in support of the project.”
He noted the County was “not responsible for the delays,” adding that despite all the changes the developer was willing to make, staff still “could not support this development.”
The appeal is not sitting well with residents who live near the proposed development and remain opposed to the project. Adrian and Hortense Verburg shared a comprehensive letter sent to Council earlier this month, listing their concerns.
“This piece of land is one of the most environmentally vulnerable pieces of land in Haldimand, due to elevation, wind, and water erosion,” the letter reads, noting the site “is often subjected to gale force winds” that have damaged the existing buildings.
The letter asserts that erosion means establishing safe access to the beach is questionable: “The top of the bank continues to collapse and can fail at any moment. Anyone on the top or below can be seriously injured.”
They believe the development will disrupt the quiet life enjoyed by current residents, bringing unwanted traffic, noise, and danger to the area, stressing the roads were not designed to safely handle higher volumes of traffic.
“Last year a vehicle missed the turn from Dickhout to Villella and ended up in the lake at the base of the 12-metre bank,” said the statement. “This corner will, in all probability, not exist in a very few years due to the ongoing collapse of the bank.”
The couple says the heavy clay composition and shallow topsoil has a limited ability to retain moisture, so the proposal would “dramatically reduce the water retention capabilities of this site and make the possibility of the proposed septic system working and retaining the effluent on site an impossibility.”
Ron Vander Kooi has resided on a farm across the road for nearly 70 years: “I’ve been opposed to this development from the beginning.”
His greatest concern is the increased likelihood of an accident near the cliff and beach due to the increased population, as “there is no access to the top of the cliff for vehicles” from the emergency department.
If the proposal moves to the site plan stage, VanDalen noted “there would be setbacks applied from the top of bank and the Conservation Authority would be involved from the natural hazard perspective.”
Vander Kooi’s other major concern relates to water: “I can still cup my hands and drink fresh clean water that bubbles out of the ground 200 years after it was first settled here. I think that’s worth fighting for.”
“Once you leave the footprint of this hill, all the wells have a very high sulphur content due to the natural gas deposits in the area. Water trucks are constantly busy trying to supply those homes,” he continued.
He fears the development will dig up the hill for water, sewage, and hydro lines, alongside roads and parking areas “crisscrossing the hill…. I’m sure you can picture the water quality from an asphalt parking lot with 200 cars and trucks.”
Currently, LJM has a septic system, septic tank, and weeping bed on top of the hill built into their plans. Vander Kooi noted the planned system’s proximity to the nearby Highbanks Cemetery: “My father used to dig the graves there in the late 1950s. The following day the grave would have .6m (2′) of ground water in it from seepage. My parents and friends are buried there, and I find it disgusting to have sewage anywhere near them.”
Resident Lori Franze shared concerns that the County, and thus taxpayers, could end up on the hook for water and septic services if the developer abandons the site one day.
Franze noted, “That there were delays that forced this isn’t great and we wonder if Council didn’t want to really vote no and it unfolded this way so they shoulder no blame.”
She is concerned the OLT will lack sufficient knowledge of the area and its challenges, adding, “I’m still working to see how we, as residents, can fight this or at least be heard at OLT.”
Another nearby resident, requesting anonymity, shared, “In a time when we are looking at housing crises, it’s preposterous to think that the land would be used for vacation homes.”
No date has yet been set for the OLT appeal, leaving both County staff and area residents with nothing to do but wait for updates.
VanDalen concluded, “If the land use change were to be approved, the proponent would have to complete a Site Plan Application where all the technical components of the development would be reviewed…. At that time, additional comments and concerns would be brought forward by staff.”
Stay tuned to The Press for updates on this story.
