A major firm is making a last-minute attempt to open up the Purcells Cove backlands to development. The backlands were zoned “urban reserve” in the 2006 regional plan. That designation prevents the area from being developed for the 25-year lifetime of the plan, or until 2031. At that point the area will be reassessed for its development potential.
A required five year review of the plan commenced in 2006, and has wound its way through at least four committees, and has included significant public consultation along the way. The finalized review document, revising the plan, was placed on regional council’s February 11 agenda for a “first reading.”
Typically, first readings are non-controversial, and are intended merely to let all councillors and the public know that the issue will be debated at the next meeting. But at the meeting, councillor Brad Johns, who represents Upper Sackville, argued that the first reading of the revised plan should itself be delayed to the next meeting. Johns said that proceeding would be unfair since three suburban councillors were absent from the meeting—David Hendsbee and Barry Dalrymple were on city business and Linda Mosher is on medical leave. That delay was approved.
But wilderness activists noticed that the agenda also included a letter from a law firm representing the unnamed owners of 10 parcels in the backlands, with the bulk of the property owned by just one firm: Clayton Developments, which is also one of the largest contributors to councillors’ election campaigns. The letter, dated after the deadline for public comment on the plan review, was sent to councillor Stephen Adams, who somehow managed to get it included in the council agenda packet.
The letter asks that council rezone the backlands to “rural commuter,” which would effectively open the entire area to low- to medium-density development. The suspicion is that some councillors believe they will only have the votes to approve the rezoning request if the missing councillors are present. Adams did not return a call for comment.
Related Stories
A glacial pace for Blue Mountain–Birch Cove Lakes park
Shaw Wilderness Park sets dangerous precedent for future land deals
This article appears in Feb 20-26, 2014.
So Adams is now a puppet for the Taxi Commission AND Clayton Developments now?
I didn’t vote for him based on his Pro-Sobeys/McDees Anti-Bikelane position, guess I made the right call. Too bad I was one of the few who did. Those people on Purcells are gonna get Halifax Water forced on them one way or another and this is a step in that direction.
I am so sick of corrupt Halifax city councillors! I don’t blame people for voting them in. Their job is to be charming and smooth. I’m sure they justify their shady ways by telling themselves that their elected positions (made possible with slimy lined pockets) allows them the power to still perform several good deeds for their respective constituents. That doesn’t make it okay though and it also doesn’t make it okay that is it so hard to do something about it when they do things that are so clearly illegal, immoral, and/ or inappropriate.
Lilac, not all the councillors supported these motions. Some quite strongly opposed it–blame the visionless, old-boys club sprawl-boosters like Hendsbee and Adams who have no idea how to build a great city, or any interest in doing so.
In any case, this isn’t a done deal, and frankly, developers in the future are going to respond to what buyers want, which will increasingly be in the form of more urban infill. If this passes it might open up vast parcels of land for suburban-style development, but that doesn’t mean it’ll all get gobbled up by tract housing. Consumer preference is still number one, and that’s turning (somewhat) into the city’s existing built-up areas.
But, definitely, opening up natural areas to tacky crap projects isn’t a positive step.