Editor,
“Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”. This famous quote from Winston Churchill now applies to the Municipality of Meaford. The developer of the floodplain condominium to be located behind the Meaford Library has again succeeded by having the building’s Site and Heritage Plans referred to the Land Tribunal. The vast majority of the Tribunal’s decisions are made in favour of the developer.
In the words of the Tribunal, the referral is again due to the Municipality’s “neglect to make a decision”. Again, the developer’s proposals were not rejected as being incomplete but facilitated by being neglected. Rejection would indicate that a more reasonable development is expected.
There are some interesting features associated with the repeated referral to the Land Tribunal. The developer’s Site Plan Application was accepted as complete on January 28, 2025. However, there were several instances of both missing information and misinformation. The Geotechnical Report on the foundation needed to support a massive building on a silty-sand footing was described as preliminary and required more information. How could it then be “complete”? The required foundation is perhaps more appropriate for a building permit. Why is it included in a Site Plan? Presumably, it enables the developer to have an incomplete foundation pre-approved by the Land Tribunal.
The building is again being touted as affordable apartment units. This is identical to the first proposal and was changed shortly thereafter into a luxury condominium. A private deal involves changing the Berry St. road allowance into a trail. This benefits the developer as residents of the building will not have their river vista obstructed by the parked vehicles of persons engaged in the popular Meaford pastime of recreational fishing. It also restricts a fire route to the south side of the proposed building.
The developer again fails to identify that the proposed blasting and pile driving for underground parking are in close proximity to sub-river sewage siphons. Also, that excavation creates a 4.6m perpendicular drop between the proposed building and the Meaford Library.
Deceptive diagrams are again being used by the developer. The vehicle entrance to underground parking is shown as a level surface. In fact, Trowbridge St. East descends a hill and the entrance will cross a sloped sidewalk. The sidewalk elevation is below the road surface and will require rebuilding to meet the developer’s demand for underground floodplain parking. There are also extra costs in extending the wall protecting the Meaford Library.
A diagram that is not deceptive is the illustration of the building. The stepped staircase roof design is radical even by Toronto standards. The developer is also Toronto-based and uses a shell company presumably to protect the parent company, Avrance Corporation, from high-risk liability. The potential liability being loaded onto Meaford taxpayers is enormous. It includes foundation failure; lack of safeguards for some obvious public health and safety risks; the developer’s agents disclaim all future liability for their opinions; the Insurance Bureau of Canada is reluctant to insure floodplain development; and a Site Plan request that indemnity be included in the event that the building sinks into the Bighead River was ignored.
The purpose of this letter is not to point fingers but to suggest solutions. Tribunal approval of the Site Plan is almost guaranteed because of neglect to make a decision. The Heritage Plan is more promising. Use council@meaford.ca to request that the proposed development be reined in by hiring a lawyer with heritage plan experience and accompanied by a capable heritage planning consultant. Without good representation at the impending Land Tribunal a massive, towering, hare-brained, high-risk and non-conforming structure will reflect on every house and building in Meaford.
Jim Molineux, Meaford
