The Town of Aurora has rejected a proposed 45-unit townhouse development near protected marshland on Newmarket’s border due to concerns about environmental impact and access.
Council voted 5-1 against the proposal for 45 units in seven attached buildings at 65 St. John’s Sideroad, east of Yonge Street. Citizens voiced concerns about the project's impact on the nearby McKenzie Marsh.
Paul Martinelli, and his wife, Angela, who lives nearby and helped promote the issue to nearby residents, said he is happy with the decision of council.
“Yes, development needs to happen. Yes, we need to expand certain areas of housing,” he said. “But not at the risk of wetlands, wildlife, forestry, safety, traffic.”
The proposal from Medal Homes called for the three-storey homes to be built on the vacant 3.21-acre property, with the area zoned as “stable neighbourhoods” and “private parkland.”
The developer planned to build around the environmentally protected floodplain lands on the property. Within the stable neighbourhoods portion, residential use is allowed, according to staff. The proposal also included rezoning some environmentally protected lands to allow for a portion of the townhouse development.
Macaulay Shiomi Howson consultant Nick Pileggi said the developer tried to respond to community concerns on the environment and eyed some revisions to address them. Regarding possible floodplain issues, he said planners submitted floodplain analysis that is under review.
“We want to continue to work with the town and the commenting agencies to resolve these comments,” he said.
But those environmental concerns prompted council to reject the proposal. Mayor Tom Mrakas said those environmental issues meant the proposal did not constitute good planning.
“Every community in this country is facing the same crisis — a need for more housing. But the impacts and solutions of the housing crisis affect each community differently; it cannot be solved with a one-sized-fits-all approach,” Mrakas said. "We need to be sure that any proposed development aligns with the values and vision we have for our community as outlined in that plan. And this proposal does none of that. Regrettably, the current proposal falls short on multiple fronts, from density to emergency access design.”
At issue is also York Region determining the proposal could only have a right turn, right-turn out only access point from St. John’s Sideroad, which Mrakas said could cause issues in any new community built there.
“They will need to travel around the town to get back home as there is no other access to their home other than St John's, and they can’t make a left,” Mrakas said. “To suggest that they make a U-turn in what is already a hectic area for traffic is unreasonable and obviously unsafe.”
Many in the public were opposed to the proposal, with dozens attending the planning meeting to speak out against it.
Resident Steve Fleck said he has mixed feelings about it, though he opposed it due to concern about the wetlands.
“We are in a housing crisis, and here are 45 houses in Aurora that won’t be built because of these decisions. That’s why I have mixed feelings,” he said.
Residents are not discounting the possibility that the land owner could still seek to develop the property. The decision could eventually reach the Ontario Land Tribunal, or another proposal could come forward.
Fleck said the current provincial government is invested in building.
“This may not be the end of this, and we may see something built on this piece of land anyway,” he said. “In this particular location, density’s not the best thing.”
Martinelli said this is not a case of NIMBYism (not in my backyard), but a situation of wrong development in the wrong location.
Regardless of what happens next, he said the wetland should be protected.
“We’re hoping to maintain Aurora’s jewel in the McKenzie wetland” he said.
