Despite rejections by the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake and the Ontario Land Tribunal, developer Benny Marotta is trying again to obtain approval for a residential project on the historic Rand Estate.
An open house is slated for next week, Sept. 2, to discuss plans to redesignate lands at 200 John St. E and 588 Charlotte St. in Old Town for low-density residential development.
This comes after the Ontario Land Tribunal sent Marotta’s company Solmar (Niagara 2) Inc. back to the drawing board last October to re-evaluate its plans for 172-unit subdivision on the Rand Estate, following a lengthy trial in 2024.
The tribunal said the developer should take on studies and revisions to its plan to address concerns related to the alteration of its heritage features and its plans to create an access route to the planned subdivision through the “panhandle” on the east boundary of 200 John St. E, among other issues.
Instead, Solmar tried to appeal the tribunal’s decision, which the tribunal denied in January, then dismissed for good in April.
The open house notice says the applicant wants to redesignate lands on the east boundary of 200 John St. E. to “low density residential” from “agricultural” and establish a site-specific exception to create “primary and emergency access” to the land.
At the time the appeal was dismissed in April, the town’s director of community and development services, Kirsten McCauley, told The Lake Report that Solmar could submit a new application, or, if Solmar sold the property, another developer could.
However, community group Save Our Rand Estate, one of the parties in last year’s hearing against Solmar, is calling parts of this latest application unnecessary and is criticizing Solmar and Marotta for what it says is an attempt to go back to the town with a part of the application the tribunal already denied.
In a letter to the town clerk from Aug. 25, group representative and attorney Catherine Lyons says the part of the application that looks to redesignate the subject lands to “low-density residential” from “agricultural” is “completely unnecessary,” as the tribunal’s final order from last October already approved this change.
“The (official plan amendment) redesignating a portion of the subject lands … is in full force and effect,” she says in the letter.
The only part of the tribunal’s ruling that no longer applies was the option it presented the developer to revisit its plans and make revisions, which, as the town states in a notice for the open house, “no longer has standing.”
The bulk of SORE’s criticism, however, is that Solmar, it says, is going back to the town with its request to create an access point for a future subdivision on the panhandle of land on the Rand Estate property.
In its October ruling, the tribunal said the panhandle next to the neighbouring McArthur Estate is too narrow for a proper entrance, referred to as being about the size of a lane driveway, making it unsafe for “present and future inhabitants.”
“That Mr. Marotta has the audacity to again ask council to approve a panhandle subdivision street after all that has transpired leaves us speechless,” says a statement from SORE published Aug. 26.
“A panhandle subdivision road is a non-starter,” it adds, stating that the group believes the tribunal will “make short work of this latest attempt to impose his will on the town and the Rand Estate.”
The statement cites town planner Denise Horne’s report from 2023, which notes that there are many mature trees in the panhandle that would be cut down to make way for the subdivision street.
The tribunal echoed the report in its ruling, stating that in several instances, trees, sometimes more than 100 years old, contribute to the cultural heritage landscape of the property and may not be removed, even for the construction of new roads and paths.
The public open house on Sept. 2 will take place starting at 5 p.m. A public meeeting in front of council will follow it on Tuesday, Sept. 9.
The Town of NOTL did not respond to questions from The Lake Report by press time, nor did the legal representatives for Solmar at the past tribunal hearing, attorneys Sara Premi and Mark Flowers.
