Stop the proposed Ingram Drive, Fall River development

I am a resident of Fall River and live on Ingram Drive. I am one of many that are concerned with the recent order making the parcel of land at the end of Ingram Drive a Special Planning Area.

Under Bill 329, it gave the provincial government the powers to bypass municipal decisions and was able to designate Ingram Drive a Special Planning Area.

During the March 5, 2024 House of Assembly Proceedings, the Right Honourable Mr. Lohr was quoted as saying when asked by another elected MLA to explain why the proposed development for Ingram Drive wasn't approved by HRM Council:

"I can tell you something about the Fall River Special Planning Area. I can tell you that it was compliant with the Municipal Planning Strategy. So it... it met the criteria of the already existing Municipal Planning Strategy. It was recommended by HRM staff. And it was compliant with local bylaws. And what I can't tell you because I don't know, is why HRM Council or the Community Council, I think it was turned it down. I don't know why they did that. But I can tell you that they did that. But I can tell you that it met the criteria that we have that anything that we would make a Special Planning Area does mean - Municipal Planning Strategy is compliant with the Municipal Planning Strategy."

Now for the facts, which clearly the Executive Panel on Housing did not fully bring forward as Mr. Lohr rendered this Special Planning Area order.

The proposed development on Ingram Drive IS NOT COMPLIANT with the already existing Municipal Planning Strategy, which per his words would mean this parcel of land is not suitable to be a Special Planning Area.

On multiple occasions, elected HRM officials rejected the proposed development of Ingram Drive because it is not compliant with the already existing Municipal Planning Strategy. As stated in Municipal Planning Strategy, for this particular Opportunity Site C: "Direct Access to Cobequid Road shall also be required to minimize traffic impact on Fall River Village...". It is also stated in the already existing Municipal Planning Strategy: "that any development situated adjacent to a low density residential development does not result in any undue adverse impacts on adjacent properties in terms of traffic and privacy conditions..."

On October 2, 2022 North West Community Council defeated a Notice of Motion to the Development Agreement for Opportunity Site C which would allow three (3) Multiple Unit Dwellings each containing 40 dwelling units for a total of 120 units off Ingram Drive.

On November 8, 2022 Halifax Regional Council refused to approve a request to amend the Districts 14 & 17 MPS to remove the requirement for road connection over the CN rail line connecting Ingram Drive to Cobequid Road.

It was acknowledged by elected HRM officials, that the density of the proposed development (comprised of three apartment buildings totalling 120 units), had no supporting infrastructure:

NO waste-water system.

NO transit (it is a vehicle dependent community, which would further exacerbate the high volume of new vehicular traffic serving this large number of rental units).

NO sidewalks.

And it could be argued, most importantly of all, NO direct access to the proposed development as required under the already existing Municipal Planning Strategy. Surely, we've learned something from the horrific wildfires that hit our great province, and the need for direct access and secondary egress to developments.

Respectively, given these facts, Opportunity Site C at the end of Ingram Drive in Fall River Village should never have been brought forward by the Executive Panel on Housing for consideration as a Special Planning Area.

That said, if one chooses to completely ignore all of these facts, then let's consider the Special Planning Area criteria. Based on a review of the 7 Special Planning Area evaluation criteria, 6 of the 7 criteria are not applicable to this site, and as such by any measure this parcel of land doesn't meet the criteria to be a Special Planning Area.

Furthermore, each of the previously designated Special Planning Areas represent thousands of units. For example, Port Wallace with expected units of 4900, Bedford West 10 and 12 with expected units of 2800 and 2500 respectively, Dartmouth Crossing with expected units of 4100, etc.

One can only be left with the question, why would Opportunity Site C be ordered a Special Planning Area when:

It does not meet the criteria of the already established Municipal Planning Strategy.

It does not meet 6 of the 7 Special Planning Area evaluation criteria.

It's been rejected on multiple occasions by HRM elected officials.

The community has in overwhelming numbers brought forward the numerous safety, security and sustainability concerns associated with a proposed development of this scale, including over 400 petitions from the community (representing virtually all residents of the impacted area).

The community has expressed a willingness for meaningful engagement with government and the developer that could potentially lead to an appropriate alternative development proposal.

Most recently, there has been a development agreement submitted and in order to take action, members of the community have paid out of pocket for a judicial review of the special planning site C. I am hoping that through this fund we will be able to reimburse individual cost already incurred and use any further funds to offset cost to any one individual. If we proceed with legal representation, this fund would go to support those cost. Any funds in excess will be use for the betterment of the community.

Please donate to help us fight the fight and voice our collective concerns regarding this special planning area and it's development.