'Tainted’ process stalls water bottling decision

BY TRACEY DUGUAY

For the second week in a row, the owners of Crystal North, a water bottling company, left council chambers without knowing the fate of their business.

Last week they appeared before the planning committee seeking approval to change the zoning on an old church they bought in Minnow Lake, from residential to industrial. They wanted to move their business to the new space, along with operating a fitness centre on the main floor.

With one member of the planning committee missing, the remaining four members ended up split down the middle. A tie vote results in a lost motion, meaning there wasn’t any decision made on the application.

At the time, Ward 10 Councillor Frances Caldarelli, who is also the chair of the planning committee, said she planned to pull the minutes at the next city council meeting. This would result in council as a whole discussing the issue and making a decision on whether to allow the business venture.

However, at the city council meeting Wednesday night, it was Ward 11 Councillor Janet Gasparini who requested the minutes be pulled. Only she didn’t ask council for a decision, she wanted the matter referred back to the planning committee.

“The process to date has been tainted,” Gasparini said in way of an explanation.

She was referring to a meeting held by a citizen’s group against the rezoning, which took place on Sunday, after the planning committee meeting. 

The standard planning application process is to encourage the applicants to hold a neighbourhood meeting to hear any concerns and explain their plans. At the planning committee meeting level, a public hearing is held to give anyone, either for or against the proposal, an opportunity to speak. It’s only after these steps that a decision is made.

When the citizen’s group “solicited” people to attend the Sunday meeting, it skewered the process. Not only did it take place after the planning committee meeting, the property owners didn’t have the opportunity to present their side of things.

“There has been considerable more information in the community,” Gasparini said.

This community lobbying, along with the tied vote by the planning committee, opens the door for either side to file an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board if the decision doesn’t go their way.

By sending the decision back to the planning committee, Gasparini thought it gave them a way to get the process back on track and lessen the chance for an OMB appeal.

This way, concerned citizens would get another chance to speak at the public hearing, as would the business owners or their representative. If the meeting takes place with all five planning committee members present, a tie vote wouldn’t be possible either.

Council voted unanimously in favour of Gasparini’s motion. The matter will be back before the planning committee Feb. 5.