SORE has learned that Benny Marotta is back again with another hard to believe application to the Town.
In OPA 06-25, Mr. Marotta’s company Solmar is seeking to have the Town approve a new subdivision street up the 200 John Street panhandle that the Ontario Land Tribunal explicitly and firmly rejected last October after a 7 week hearing. Solmar is also seeking approval for an access where 588 Charlotte meets John Street at the Heritage Trail.
That Mr. Marotta has the audacity to again ask Council to approve a panhandle subdivision street after all that has transpired leaves us speechless. To remind our supporters, the Town has already taken a clear position on this idea.
Denise Horne Report 2023
Former Town Heritage Planner Denise Horne tabled a 800 page report with Council on the Marotta company’s application for several heritage alteration and demolition permits for his proposed Rand subdivision in the spring of 2023. Ms. Horne noted the many mature trees in the panhandle that would be almost entirely destroyed by a subdivision street on the panhandle as well as the protected Dunington-Grubb designed landscape of which the panhandle forms an important part. She said the following in her report:
In my opinion the proposed road system would result in substantial negative impacts to the character-defining elements within the panhandle, including the arboretum-like landscape with mature trees, and plantings and the original section of the eliptical driveway, and thereby diminish the cultural heritage value of the subject property.
Ms. Horne therefore recommended that Council refuse a heritage permit for the panhandle street.
At a special meeting attended by several hundred residents in April of 2023, Council endorsed the Horne report and accepted Ms. Horne’s recommendation to refuse a heritage permit for the panhandle street.
Eight months later in December of 2023, Council passed a resolution noting that the 200 John St panhandle could not support a subdivision access street and stating Council’s support instead for the use of the historical access between 144/176 John St.
OLT Decision
At last summer’s 7 week OLT hearing on the Marotta Rand subdivision application, the Town, joined by SORE, continued to take the position through its heritage, planning and transportation witnesses that a panhandle subdivision street is unfeasible and unapprovable. The OLT agreed. The Tribunal listed five reasons for that conclusion:
- It would be unsafe from a traffic safety perspective
- Adverse and unmitigable impacts to protected cultural heritage attributes at 200 and 176 John Street
- Adverse and unmitigable impacts to natural heritage
- Negative impacts to likely endangered bat habitat
- Adverse and unmitigable impacts to numerous mature trees, which the Tribunal held formed part of the protected cultural heritage landscape at Rand, as well as to boundary trees over which the adjoining owner has common law and statutory rights.
Only one of these five reasons, each of which in their own right was sufficient for the OLT to reject a panhandle subdivision street, even purports to be addressed by the new Marotta OPA application- traffic safety. The rest remain entirely unaddressed and frankly unaddressable. And we highly doubt Mr. Marotta has resolved the very serious traffic safety issues presented by a panhandle subdivision street as found by the OLT. Our traffic experts are currently reviewing this.
In reporting to Council on last October’s OLT Decision, which sent Mr. Marotta back to the drawing board, Town counsel Nancy Smith wrote on October 21, 2024 that:
The OLT Decision "confirmed" as a "fundamental principle" that there could be "No panhandle access; Solmar must find another access solution which may, in all likelihood, involve a shared access through 144/176 John for both a future hotel and a subdivision."
Yet here we are. Again. We wonder how many times and from how many people Mr. Marotta needs to hear the word “No”. In our view, this is an abuse of process for which Mr. Marotta should be held fully accountable. Council shouldn’t even need a staff report to make short work of this travesty.
The OLT in its decision noted that “(a) rare opportunity exists here” to comprehensively plan all four parcels in the Rand Estate given Mr. Marotta’s control of all four. The Tribunal noted that “the site’s remaining mature trees help define the Rand Estate as a cultural landmark in NOTL ” and held that:
"impacts to those trees, and the cultural heritage outdoor rooms they create, should be minimized, including through the assessment of a potential shared access[for the subdivision and the hotel] through 144/176 John Street (as that would) "affect fewer trees and their cultural heritage value as compared to (the subdivision) and a hotel each having its own main access."
In this regard, the OLT Decision is consistent with OPA 92 for the Rand Estate passed by Council in March, 2024 following a special study by Urban Strategies. OPA 92 rejects the piece-mealing (and destructive) approach that Mr. Marotta has used with respect to the Rand Estate since he first acquired it:
New streets and other infrastructure shall minimize adverse impacts on existing natural features and functions….The consolidation of vehicular entrances and sharing of streets among neighbouring uses shall be strongly encouraged.
It is time, frankly well past time, for Council to put its foot down with Mr. Marotta and say “enough”. He has not acted as a responsible steward of the Rand Estate from the get-go. Recall his outrageous November 2018 clear cutting of much of 200 John and 588 Charlotte for which he was prosecuted by the Town.
A panhandle subdivision road is a non-starter. Mr. Marotta’s been told so by both the Town and the OLT. A solution has been offered -a shared access using the historic 144/176 route. If he doesn’t want to take it, let the OLT make short work of this latest attempt to impose his will on the Town and the Rand Estate, which we are fully confident it will do in a brief hearing.
NOTE- there is an electronic Public Open House on this next Tuesday Sept 2 at 5 pm and a Public Meeting in front of Council the following Tuesday at 6 pm. A subsequent web post and email blast to our supporters will provide the details on how to attend each of those.