By Kris Dube, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Niagara-on-the-Lake Local
January 10, 2024
Developer Benny Marotta has decided he would like to take the town up on its offer of an easement that would allow him to use a portion of the Upper Canada Heritage Trail as access from Charlotte Street to his Rand subdivision and the 172 housing units he originally hoped to build.
That information was shared with the public through a letter SORE (Save our Rand Estate) has posted on its website. The letter, dated Jan. 8, is from Davies Howe, one of the legal firms representing Solmar, with the position from the developer expressed about moving forward with the Charlotte Street easement over the trail.
After a closed session with Niagara-on-the-Lake councillors in December, the town made its offer public that Charlotte Street easement over the trail could provide access of the subdivision plan, but said it would have to be requested by the developer.
Judy McLeod, a member of SORE (Save our Rand Estate), told The Local SORE members are as perplexed and as angry as the public about “why council ever entertained the Heritage Trail idea.”
SORE has “vigorously opposed” council’s offer of the trail, and the closed-door meetings process by which councillors agreed to it, without any public involvement.
“We intend to take that fight to the Ontario Land Tribunal, assuming that Council does not change its mind,” the update says.
SORE is a group of residents who have been involved in Rand property discussions, has its own lawyers and planners involved, and provides updates on proposals for those lots and for the Rand Estate development, which at one time was the site of a plan to build a hotel and conference centre. Some of them are neighbours, and some are residents who have become involved because of their interest in preserving valuable heritage attributes of Niagara-on-the-Lake.
All the public has known about the heritage trail offer since a closed session of council was held on On Dec. 15, is that a resolution was brought forward following that session about the Rand subdivision. Among other issues, it indicated that access across the heritage trail would be offered to Solmar.
“We intend to take that fight to the Ontario Land Tribunal assuming that council does not change its mind,” says a post on the SORE website, reiterating its position expressed previously that they support the idea of the “historic” access between 144 and 176 John St., as it “does not require interference” with an important town-owned recreational asset.
However, the SORE update said, it is clear that the only reason that access was not being pursued was because Benny Marotta was refusing to use property owned by another of Marotta’s companies. SORE members expect that will be part of the Ontario Land Tribunal hearing.
“The resolution made it clear that the only reason that access was not being pursued was because Benny Marotta was refusing to make it available to himself,” says SORE’s update.
SORE is aligned with the town on all other points of the proposal, with the exception of the access, and a slight difference in the number of units that should be allowed — SORE members support a plan with 128 units that they believe would be more appropriate, McLeod said.
Council and staff also recommended in December that the proposed subdivision doesn’t exceed 135 units, if the access pitched by council moves forward.
The letter sent by Solmar lawyers regarding trail access agree with the town’s offer, that it could be a “gateway feature,” with a design that would include public consultation,” that it would “celebrate and improve” the heritage trail at that location. The letter went on to say, “Solmar supports this approach provided it’s understood that the final, approved design, must accommodate an appropriate road access for the proposed residential development on the subject lands, which would function as both the sole vehicular access and an emergency access.”
During a heritage trail committee meeting on Dec. 20, the recommendation that an access over the trail be explored was raised by committee vice-chair Tony Chisholm, who said he was looking for more details about the possibility.
Subscribe to our newsletter.
Parks and recreation manager Kevin Turcotte, the staff representative on the committee, quickly advised the discussion went no further as it was a legal matter.