Five families who faced eviction from their Blair Road homes got some relief Tuesday, but not before Cambridge councillors acknowledged their fight likely isn't over yet.
Owners Arbent and Setmir Faikovski want to build two stacked townhouse buildings with 32 units at 220 and 22 Blair Road. Those properties are occupied by a rented single detached home and a four-plex apartment building, both of which would have to be demolished to accommodate the development.
The owners requested an official plan amendment and site specific zoning that would permit 84 units per hectare instead of the 40-unit per hectare limit in the city's current official plan.
In recommending approval of the development, staff said "the proposal provides an opportunity to increase the housing stock to meet the growing demand for housing options." Staff also said the proposed density is in line with what a "medium density development" should be in "today's time" and called the city's official plan "grossly outdated."
But council couldn't stomach the thought of displacing five families and in a 7-1 vote they refused the proposal.
It almost certainly sets the stage for an appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal.
And while council acknowledged that likelihood, it didn't deter many from voicing their abject disapproval.
As the lone vote supporting the proposal, Coun. Ross Earnshaw noted that going against the expertise of city planning staff means the city will be required to hire outside experts at taxpayer expense to defend council's decision.
"We're not doing our taxpayers much good," he said while also cautioning tenants of the Blair Road properties that a victory at council is only the first step in "what could be a long and difficult journey."
"If it goes to the OLT, it goes to the OLT," Mayor Jan Liggett said. "But that would be shame on the provincial government who put the OLT in place, as well as the OLT."
She called the developer's offer to help tenants find alternative housing meaningless in a market where no affordable units exist.
Earnshaw's comment about the cost of fighting this at the OLT irked Coun. Adam Cooper who said he "absolutely despises" the influence the tribunal has over land use planning in the city, adding it undermines the work of elected officials to represent residents.
"I'll be damned if I'm going to change my decisions because the developer holds the OLT to my head like a gun," he said.
Coun. Sheri Roberts said she is very concerned about the loss of occupied homes in the middle of a housing crisis, and said the developer had the opportunity to rework the proposal to protect what's there now, but chose not to.
They could have created "a truly gentle infill development," she said.
"Yes, we need to build more homes, but definitely not at the expense of affordable ones," she said.
Coun. Mike Devine said he found the lack of accommodation for five families "very disturbing" and couldn't support more than doubling the number of units permitted in the city's zoning bylaw.
He later equated city staff's decision to permit a density of 83 units per hectare to going more than double the speed limit on a residential road.
"You're going to get a ticket," he said. "I don't believe it should be any different until the regulations change."
Coun. Corey Kimpson agreed with Devine, saying she's frustrated council is continually being asked by staff to approve developments that are at greatly different densities than what's currently allowed.
Coun. Helen Shwery said she was conflicted in her decision not to support the proposal knowing that putting roadblocks up for developers not only delays adding to the housing supply, it increases costs of homes when they're eventually built.
But despite the need for more housing, Cooper said he couldn't be party to a decision that would put five families on the street for the sake of building 32 new units that aren't affordable.
If the developer truly wanted to help the existing tenants, they would create a legal, binding agreement with them that provides a home at the rent-controlled rate they are paying now, he said.
"That would be genuine help. I suppose they'd lose a few hundred on those particular units, but I'd like to think that their happiness and not putting them on the street would be worth that. Otherwise everything we've said to them is just lip service."
