The long-term care home that PeopleCare has proposed for 3188 Vivian Line 37 passed another hurdle Monday night, as their applications for zoning bylaw and official plan amendments was approved by Stratford city council – but not without considerable doubt over unanswered questions.
In a vote that broke 7-2 with two absences, council voted to approve the applications by PeopleCare that would allow a multitude of alterations to the project. Most notably, the primary structures on both the north and south portions of the property had their increased height requests approved; the north section, which will house the nursing home, goes from four storeys to five, while the south portion, where a retirement home will be built, moves from four storeys to a maximum of seven.
The zoning bylaws will also change for 3188 Vivian Line 37, going from agricultural and urban reserve to two site-specific community institutional zones.
Parking, green space, neighbourhood impact and light pollution were among the popular topics of discussion between councillors and several delegations, but the applications were still approved with only councillors Cody Sebben and Geza Wordofa opposing.
For his part, Sebben was disappointed that the vote passed – not because he’s against the project itself but because he feels PeopleCare didn’t show enough compromise to the numerous concerns brought to the table.
“There were some attempts to make a couple of changes, but in the end it didn’t feel like there was much will for actually making those changes,” he said. “These applications were very heavily weighted for the applicant, and I believe I counted 25 zoning changes they proposed with no compromises on their part. I felt it needed to go back to them and be looked at again.”
Sebben accepted the fact that the project was facing other application deadlines and that’s why this needed a decision, but he still doesn’t feel good about how much is being shoehorned into this project for the size of the land it is proposed to be built on.
“That piece of land is not meant to accommodate a facility of that size,” he said. “Plus, this was council’s last opportunity to have any input in this decision, so now we have to hope that our concerns will be addressed going forward.”
Coun. Jo-Dee Burbach put a pair of amendments forward prior to the vote – one that would have required the applicant to keep the greenspace at 35 per cent instead of its proposed 28 per cent, and another that would have increased the number of bicycle parking spaces from six to 12 on the north portion of the property – that were both defeated. While she eventually voted in support of the applications, she still had reservations over the number of concerns that were brought up but not definitively answered.
“I know that the funding for this project is contingent upon (the applicants) passing certain hurdles along the way - these zoning amendments and the changes to the official plan are part of those,” she said. “So I understand why this came directly to council - other times, this would go through committee and then council would have time for sober second thought. But this project is in a bit of a hurry because of funding concerns. I’m comfortable in that it seems inevitable that we are going to get these beds, and they are needed. Would I have liked more time to negotiate with PeopleCare? Absolutely.”
Burbach believes that the greenspace allocation she pushed for won’t happen but was optimistic that the space will be used better.
“There might be some minor adjustments made based on our discussions tonight, so that was a bit disappointing,” she said. “I do feel like greenspace is really important for residents and I’m disappointed those concerns weren’t accommodated.”
The difference between what was included in the original proposal and what was approved Monday night is significant, and Burbach was asked about that gap. She said she couldn’t know for sure but felt it was PeopleCare wanting to maximize their profit potential on the land.
“It’s a bit of a Catch-22 – this meets our need for more beds and more long-term care in this area, but it comes at the expense of homes that are more comfortable for people that meet their needs better,” she said. “That is especially true with the concerns that we had around COVID and being able to be outdoors and having enough space for each resident and enough care. And we have to ask if we’re going to have enough people to staff a facility of this size – that’s a real concern as well.”
