The surplus, sale, and development of the parkland at 791 Arundel St was a done deal long before City Council’s August 11, 2026 decision to approve the rezoning and Official Plan amendment allowing Terralux’s massive apartment complex to be built on the western tip of Boulevard Lake Park. In fact, in 2023, our current City Council decided, without public consultation, to target parkland across Thunder Bay.
To be clear, it was actually Councillor Etreni who first suggested the City target parkland when she distributed her memo to that effect at the March 20, 2023 Committee of the Whole (aka Council) meeting. A majority of the councillors thought it was a great idea, so they passed a motion directing City Administration to go forth and find city-owned lands, including parkland, for potential surplus and sale.
Our research and investigation into Council’s decision to sell our parkland uncovered some very interesting information. For example, the City has been collaborating with the development community in Thunder Bay for quite some time. Developers, like all business people, have the best interest of their bottom line top of mind. They want to build market-rate apartments or housing that they can sell or rent and receive the best bang for their buck. They are not in the business of providing “affordable” housing without substantial government subsidies that come directly from our tax dollars, whether municipal, provincial or federal. Read more about what “affordable” actually means in our article The City’s Definition of “Affordable Housing”.
Even if developers are offered some of our tax dollars, for example to help subsidize 10% of their built units as “affordable” for a ten year period, they’re going to want to build on land that provides a good return on investment for their entire project. They don’t want to build in the downtown cores or on Simpson St. They don’t want to build on land that needs to be remediated. Developers want to build on pristine greenfield sites that are easy to clear and will attract tenants who are able and willing to pay the going market rate for housing.
Council was more than willing to oblige the desires of Thunder Bay’s development community. Instead of doing the hard work of incentivizing development in our downtown cores and Simpson St, leveraging the more than $30 million the City has already spent on “revitalizing” those areas, it was easier and quicker to give the developers what they wanted…our parkland.
In response to Council’s decision on targeting our parkland, a small group of Current River residents formed a grassroots organization, TBay Greenspace Preservation (TBGP). The purpose of TBGP is to raise awareness about the need to preserve urban greenspaces and parkland. We are not anti-development, we are pro-parkland and pro-greenspaces. We believe that where the City builds is just as important as what the City builds.
TBGP pointed out the lack of compliance with the City’s various planning and development policies, plans, and strategies. TBGP raised concerns about the inconsistencies in applying good urban planning throughout the City. Some new developments are receiving the “gold standard”, while others don’t receive basic urban infrastructure like sidewalks. TBGP asked why the City was not following the recommendations of the “Thunder Bay Housing Land Needs Study & Strategy”. TBGP questioned why Council invented their own uninformed process for dealing with the “housing crisis” when they commissioned a report from HTFC Planning & Design which provided a fact based, comprehensive strategy tailor made for Thunder Bay.
Residents from across Thunder Bay started paying attention. TBGP’s followers grew. They realized that the City wouldn’t stop at 791 Arundel St. Other parkland was also being targeted. Yet our councillors failed to listen to their constituents.
Some councillors used social media to spread incorrect information. For example, one councillor even stated that 791 Arundel wasn’t “parkland” because it’s zoned “Community Zone” under the City’s Zoning Bylaw. They even blamed City Administration for choosing the parkland at 791 Arundel, even though the development of City-owned lands, including parkland, was and still is, an initiative commenced and led by Council.
Another councillor posted their own propaganda videos, never showing the parkland in its full beauty, never filming the multi-use trail or gravel paths which wind through the property. No, they chose only to film a small portion of the 7.82 acres in the early spring or fall, when the parkland is in hibernation.
Even at the August 11, 2026 meeting, a councillor had to ask if 791 Arundel was in fact parkland. How can our councillors make informed decisions if they don’t understand what it is they’re being asked to decide?
City Council and City Administration have lost the public’s trust. Our City routinely demonstrates uninformed decision making, a lack of transparency, and an unwillingness to conduct meaningful public consultation. Although these issues are not new, the selling of our parkland at 791 Arundel brought it into focus. The City will look to surplus, sell, and develop 755 Arundel St next, and spend our tax dollars building a collector road from Algoma to Arundel, or realigning Lyon Boulevard, all to support more development of Boulevard Lake Park and its lands, because that’s where developers want to build.
City residents can demand our next City Council put an end to sacrificing our parkland. They can demand that Council direct development in the many areas of the city in need of revitalization and multi-residential housing. These are areas where more than $30 million of our tax dollars have already been spent. It is where another $19 million of our provincial tax dollars are being spent to build out the infrastructure for the Central Ave lands development.
The City knows where it should be building, but as Councillor Etreni said at the August 11, 2026 City Council meeting, “developers don’t want to build there”. So, if you want the next City Council to represent the residents of Thunder Bay instead of the developers of Thunder Bay, you need to vote for the candidates who will protect our parkland now and into the future.
To help you ask the right questions of this slate of candidates, please review the information and timeline below. The information clearly shows how our current City Council went about targeting parkland for development. The information was compiled from local news articles, publicly available information on the City’s website, and from documents received via Municipal Freedom of Information & Personal Privacy Act (MFIPPA) requests, as well as from correspondence with City employees and community members.
Whether it’s closed session meetings, conflicts of interest, refusing to release information to the public, collaborating with developers, or bulldozing ahead with their own uninformed ideas instead of implementing commissioned reports that undoubtedly cost thousands of taxpayer dollars, you will recognize this Council’s pattern of disdain for transparency and good governance, as well as the complete disregard for the will of the people they purport to represent.
We can keep the status quo this October or vote for change. What will you do with your vote?
Timeline and Information – the Surplus/Sale/Development of 791 Arundel St
Yes, 791 Arundel St was considered “parkland”
“Parkland” is a term used by the City and is a catchall phrase for our parks, golf courses, open spaces, greenspaces, and parkettes, etc. The City uses its Zoning Bylaw and the Official Plan to identify different types of land use. For example, under the City’s Zoning Bylaw, parkland like Boulevard Lake Park, Centennial Park, Strathcona Golf Course etc is zoned “Community Zone”. The City’s Official Plan, adopted on April 30, 2018 and approved and modified by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing March 11, 2019, designates that parkland as “Community”. This zoning type and designation does not allow residential building. Prior to Council’s August 11, 2026 approval of Terralux’s Application for rezoning and the amendment to the Official Plan, 791 Arundel St was deemed parkland by the City, and was zoned “Community Zone” and designated “Community” under the Official Plan.
Whether or not certain councillors wanted to admit 791 Arundel was parkland is irrelevant. The City knows it was parkland and so did the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC). In a GeoWarehouse Property Report generated on August 19, 2026, 791 Arundel St is both described and coded as a “Municipal park” in the Province of Ontario’s Land Registration Information System. That data comes from the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC).
Unfortunately, Council saw this particular piece of parkland as an expense. They believed it was “in the city’s best interest to surplus and sell” because it would reduce “the amount of city-owned land that might need operating or capital investment such as parking lots, vacant land and parkland.”
This tells you everything you need to know about the mindset of our current Council.
Timeline
2022 – At some point in 2022, the City of Thunder Bay commissioned HTFC Planning & Design to prepare a housing strategy. The first stakeholder workshop was held in January 2023. The final report, Thunder Bay Housing Land Needs Study & Strategy, was presented to Committee of the Whole (aka Council) on June 3, 2024, along with Report 171-2024. That report, signed on May 27, 2024 by Kayla Dixon, Acting General Manager, Infrastructure, Development & Operations, states:
“The Housing Land Needs Study and Strategy will be used to guide development policy, Zoning By-law and Official Plan Review and staff recommendations for Planning Applications and infrastructure investments.”
Nowhere in the Strategy does it recommend the use of parkland for development. In fact, the Strategy states that the City has more than enough land for the next 20 years and “identifies ten future development sites that are best suited to meet the City’s needs for various densities of housing”. Not one of those ten future development sites is the parkland at 791 Arundel St.
March 6, 2023 -Regardless of the forthcoming commissioned housing strategy, Councillor Etreni came up with her own idea of what the City’s housing land needs were. She wrote a memorandum with the subject line: “Request for Report – Potential Surplus of Property Committee of the Whole – March 20, 2023” to Krista Power, City Clerk. In her memorandum, Etreni recommends “Administration be directed to bring forward a list of city owned lands, including parkland, available for surplus and sale.” Her memo was presented to Committee of the Whole (aka Council) at their meeting of March 20, 2023.
March 20, 2023 – Committee of the Whole discussed Etreni’s memo and again, regardless of the forthcoming housing strategy, they passed the following motion:
MOVED BY: Councillor Kasey Etreni SECONDED BY: Councillor Rajni Agarwal
WITH RESPECT to the memorandum from Councillor Kasey Etreni, dated March 6, 2023, we recommend that Administration be directed to bring forward a list of city owned lands, including parkland, available for surplus and sale; AND THAT Administration provide recommendations on the top potential parcels of land that would bring the city the highest financial benefit; AND THAT Administration bring forward this report on or before September 18, 2023.
CARRIED
September 18, 2023 At this Committee of the Whole meeting held in closed session, Administration discussed the “Availability of Lands for Potential Surplus & Sale”. Report 2023CLS.030 was distributed. This report was not made public as it was delivered in closed session. .
Later on in that same meeting but in open session, Councillors recommended Administration proceed as directed in closed session by way of the following motion:
MOVED BY: Councillor Michael Zussino SECONDED BY: Councillor Rajni Agarwal
WITH RESPECT to Report 2023CLS.030 (Infrastructure, Development & Operations
Development Services) we recommend Administration proceed as directed in
Closed Session;
AND THAT O/S Item 2023 002 DEV be removed from the outstanding list;
AND THAT any necessary by laws be presented to Council for ratification.
CARRIED
December 4, 2023 – At the Committee of the Whole meeting in open session, a memorandum from Deanna Walker, Manager – Realty Services dated November 8, 2023, was provided to Councillors. The memorandum updated Committee of the Whole regarding the direction City Councillors gave to Administration on March 20, 2023 and September 18, 2023.
The third paragraph of that memorandum states:
On September 18, 2023 Administration presented to Council a closed session report providing a list of nearly 40 City-owned properties (the “Identified Properties”), together having the ability to support up to or greater than an estimated 1000 dwelling units, potentially suitable for surplus and eventual sale. Council directed that Administration proceed with a series of surplus property reports having first completed the prerequisite surplus process.”
The “list of nearly 40 City-owned properties” was not made public. A request for the list via an MFIPPA request was refused.
February 9, 2024 Aaron Ward, Senior Project Manager, sent an email to Realty Services asking for the list of the 2nd round of potential surplus lands. He also asked if the City’s lands at Toledo / Arundel had been considered. Realty Services replies with a spreadsheet of all City-owned lands reviewed to date and advises they will have to “remove the 10 that are going up to Council this week (if approved). The reply further states “I don’t believe 791 Arundel was on our radar. I can add it as future surplus and run it by Werner”.
Realty services replied and included an Excel spreadsheet of ALL properties Administration had been discussing as possible surplus.
April 29, 2024 Aaron Ward emails Woodland Heritage and requests Archeological Assessments for the following “City Surplus Lands”
- 125 Birchwood Crescent
- 661 Thornloe Drive
- 168/172 Woodside Street (parkland/parkette)
- 300 Tokio Street (John & Junot) (Land study advised against selling)
- 316 Black Bay Road / 307 Frederick Street (Parks “tot lot” – Public opposed previous attempt at surplus in 2017)
- Richard Street Unopened ROW (Black Bay & Leslie Ave intersection)
- 791 Arundel Street (parkland – western tip of Boulevard Lake Park)
- 144 Fanshaw Street
- InterOcean / Central Avenue
May 2, 2024 Aaron Ward emailed Tyler Rizzuto of Stantec and requested quotations “to evaluate 5 parcels of City owned land that are being considered for surplus – to be made available for public sale.”
He requested evaluations that“would be of similar detail to the concepts we discussed at the 2105 Sills Street City parkland, and that 2 to 3 different scenarios could be provided for each parcel.”
In other words, Ward wants Stantec to provide concept proposals for the following five properties:
- 864 Hudson Ave
- 300 Tokio Street
- 316 Black Bay Road
- 791 Arundel Street
- 144 Fanshaw Street
For Arundel, Ward added the following comments:
“Currently zoned CM – we are proposing to re-zone these lands to UM…” and
“This is likely the most politically / neighbourhood sensitive parcel”
May 13, 2024 Aaron Ward emailed Allan Harris and requested he conduct Scoped Environmental Impact Studies for the following parcels:
- 864 Hudson Avenue
- 837 Hodder Avenue
- 300 Tokio Street
- 791 Arundel Street
- Fanshaw Street
- Jasper Drive / Fulton Boulevard
TBGP Note: Allan Harris is also the President of Thunder Bay Field Naturalists (TBFN). TBFN is conducting a Gray Fox Project so naturally we contacted them for assistance to help protect this parkland from development. We sent them photographic evidence of a gray fox within 50 meters of the parkland. They replied “…we don’t yet have sufficient data to speculate or conclude that the Arundel Street area is important gray fox habitat.”
June 3, 2024 City Administration presented Committee of the Whole with the commissioned Housing Strategy, along with Report #171-2024.
October 9, 2024 The 10 opportunity sites listed in the April 29, 2024 email above, were presented to the “Development Community at the Build Thunder Bay Stakeholder Roundtable chaired by the City Manager”. Note: this was 8 months prior to the public launch of the Call for Proposals – Opportunity Sites process. So, Terralux and other developers knew about the City’s plans long before Thunder Bay residents.
October 29, 2024 Tyler Rizzuto of Stantec emailed Aaron Ward with a link to access the Arundel Street concept plan. In the email, he stated:
“Because there was a proposed city ROW for this concept, we completed it as part of a Draft Plan and created 4 blocks for future development. We then prepared a concept plan for each block. Providing a combination of apartments and townhomes.”
TBGP Note: We believe the “proposed city ROW” refers to the proposed connector road from Algoma to Arundel, which is identified in the City’s Traffic Management Plan. The “4 blocks for future development” may also explain Stantec’s “Subject Lands” photo (see below) they included in both their initial Traffic Review Letter, and their follow-up Traffic Study. However, neither Stantec nor the City would explain why this photo depicts a much larger area than 791 Arundel.
January 30, 2025 Woodland Heritage emailed Aaron Ward with the draft copy of the Stage 1 Archeological Assessment for 837 Hodder Ave and 791 Arundel St, and recommended Stage 2 assessments be performed.
February 7, 2025 Aaron Ward emailed Realty Services and Development & Planning staff and advised the Phase 1 Archeological assessments came back clear for 7 of the 10 properties identified in the April 29, 2024 email and advised additional work is required for 537 Hodder Avenue, 791 Arundel, and 114 Miles Street E.
TBGP Note: Evidently Miles St has potential for deeply buried archeological artifacts, therefore any future construction would require an archeological monitor during construction to witness and observe excavations.
June 2, 2025 The official launch of the City’s Call for Proposals – Opportunity Sites process was made public on June 2, 2025. TEN city-owned parcels were listed. Reminder – the City’s Development Community (aka Terralux, etc) were informed of the availability of city-owned lands in October 2024, 8 months earlier.
According to the City, more than a dozen submissions were received for six of the ten properties. Of those submissions, four were chosen by City Administration for the following properties:
- 300 Tokio St
- 144 Fanshaw St
- 791 Arundel St
- 211-223 Tupper St & 224 Camelot St
Late October through November 2025 The City held “public consultation” regarding the FOUR city-owned parcels referenced above. According to the City, this “public consultation” included:
- November 5, 2025 – regularly scheduled Current River Ward meeting. The City alleges this was part of its “public consultation”, however, the agenda for the Ward meeting did not include the proposed development on Arundel. City officials were in attendance only to discuss the “Smart Growth Plan”. More than 100 Current River residents who attended were there to voice strong opposition to the Arundel development proposal.
- Two open houses were held November 19, 2025 for all FOUR parcels. These open houses did not provide details of the history and use of the parkland at 791 Arundel, and did not mention the proposed 600 unit development contravened the City’s Zoning By-law for Urban Mid-rise.
- A survey was launched on the City’s Get Involved page on November 12, 2025. The survey failed to state that the land at 791 Arundel St was in fact PARKLAND and used by City residents for decades for public recreation. The survey merely asked the following:
- How important is it for the City to support infill development considering Thunder Bay’s housing shortage?
- How supportive are you of the conceptual development proposals for each site?
- The City also allowed comments/inquiries from residents but these were, by their own admission, largely site specific from neighbourhood residents. They stated “Each submission was acknowledged and responses to questions provided where possible”.
- TBGP Note: This statement is not truthful. At the time that statement was written in Report 387-2025 for Growth Standing Committee, dated November 24, 2025, at least two residents had not received an acknowledgement, nevermind a response to their questions. In fact, it required an email to City Manager John Collin in January 2026 before an acknowledgement was received and many more months before any of their questions were answered, although most were not. The lack of response prompted a MFIPPA request.
- Administration stated the consultation process for all FOUR city-owned parcels “generated strong public engagement with responses from 89 individuals… and 142 survey responses.”
- TBGP Note: The City considered 142 survey responses and 89 responses (only 52 related to Arundel) from residents “strong public engagement” but completely ignored the engagement demonstrated by the 2624 people who signed the petition against the development at 791 Arundel St, the 100 plus residents at the November 5, 2025 Current River Ward meeting that voiced opposition to the development, the 60+ residents who protested before the August 11, 2026 Council meeting, and the ~15 deputants that spoke against the rezoning and Official Plan amendment before City Council on August 11, 2026.
November 4, 2025 The City publicly released the first, in our opinion, poorly executed concept proposals for the four city-owned parcels. Notices to the Public were issued by the City, advising the following four properties would be considered surplus and therefore available for sale:
- 791 Arundel St
- 300 Tokio Street
- 144 Fanshaw Street
- 211-223 Tupper St & 224 Camelot St
Surplus Notices for 791 Arundel were mailed to residents within 100 metres of the property as required by the Planning Act.
The names of the developers for these four proposals was not released.
Version 1 – Concept Proposal for 791 Arundel St
November 5, 2026 A small, coroplast, approximately 24” x 18”, “Notice to the Public Surplus of City-owned Lands” sign was posted at the edge of the ditch, beside the multi-use path entrance to the parkland off of Arundel St. In that location the sign could not be seen by the majority of parkland users. As such, a local resident relocated it further within the property. Although the parkland at 791 Arundel can be accessed using the multi-use path from Lyon Boulevard and Toledo St, the City failed to post signs anywhere else on the property.
November 19, 2025 The intent to surplus the Opportunity Sites and conceptual development proposals were presented to and endorsed by the Mayor’s Taskforce on Building More Homes. For those unaware of this taskforce, it was developed as part of the pledge the City made to the Province to achieve 2,200 units of housing by 2031. The Committee is comprised of:
- Mayor Boshcoff
- City Staff
- A representative of the Real Estate Association – Karen Hill
- A representative of an institution delivering construction & trades training – Justyn Desjardins
- An Indigenous-led stakeholder with affordable housing development experience – Paul Magiskan
- A representative from a public/non-profit housing organization involved in affordable housing – Ken Ranta
- A member of the public with working knowledge of research involvement in housing and housing affordability and development – John Stephenson
- TBGP Note: The development proposal for 791 Arundel is for market-rate apartments with only 10% of the units at an “affordable” rate as defined by the City of Thunder Bay. Currently, that rate is $1660/month. Unit size/type is at the sole discretion of the developer. The “affordable” rate is only valid for 10 years, after which the units will be increased to market-rate.
- Terralux will be receiving Housing Accelerator Fund dollars (our Federal tax dollars) to subsidize the building costs of including those “affordable” units in their market-rate apartment complex.
December 1, 2025 Growth Standing Committee meeting. Multiple Thunder Bay residents gave deputations against the proposed developments at Arundel, Tokio, and Fanshaw.
January 6-8, 2026 The agenda for the City Council meeting scheduled for January 13, 2026 was posted and included revised concept proposals for Arundel, Tokio, and Fanshaw, along with a document entitled Memo to the City of Thunder Bay, prepared by Brook McIIroy Ltd. Note the memo is “to the City”, not “to Terralux”. Even at this late date, the City has not released the name of the developers for the four city-owned parcels.
TBGP Note: Brook McIIroy Ltd is a firm the City has used over the years, including assisting with the Waterfront visioning exercise. It was the City, not Terralux, that put forth the revised concept proposals. As a result, we question whether our tax dollars were used by the City to prepare the revised concept proposals.
The Brook McIIroy Ltd memo states:
“The chart below describes the changes made to the concepts for the three sites; 300 Tokio, 144 Fanshaw and 791 Arundel, and how the changes have addressed the summarized feedback received from both the public and Standing Committee-Growth. Please note, the designs are conceptual and would be subject to change based on technical studies undertaken, as well as feedback/comments/requirements addressed through the site plan control process.”
TBGP Note: For Arundel, it states the buildings have been reduced from 3 to 2, the number of units reduced from 600 to 400, and the buildings are now one 6-storey and one 5-storey. This is important to note because Terralux ultimately ignores these changes in what we refer to as Version 3 of the development proposal.
Although Councillor Hamilton posted some information about the revised conceptual proposals on social media, the City did not update the Call for Proposals – Opportunity Sites webpage. As such, only residents who follow Hamilton on Facebook, pay attention to Council meetings or read the Council agendas would have knowledge of the changes.
Version 2 – Concept Proposal Incorporating Feedback
January 13, 2026 Ignoring the concerns raised by Thunder Bay residents who gave deputations at the December 1, 2025 meeting, City Council declared the four aforementioned city-owned parcels surplus,
April 7, 2026 The names of the developers are finally released. City Council sold Arundel, Tokio and Fanshaw to Terralux. 211-223 Tupper St & 224 Camelot St were sold to a numbered company.
July 3, 2026 The City mails Notice of Application and Notice of Applicant’s Information Session to residents living within 120 metres of 791 Arundel St as required by the Planning Act.
TBGP Note: Terralux’s THIRD version of their site sketch is included in the Notice and is completely different from the January 2026 revised concept proposals. Version 3 literally ignored all the feedback and recommended changes identified in the Brook McIIroy Ltd memo. This site sketch version also removes a section of the multi-use trail, something both City Council and Administration assured residents would not happen.
Version 3 – Site Sketch Disregarding Everything Outlined in the Brook McIIroy Ltd Memo
A small coroplast sign was also attached to a utility pole on Arundel St, near the multi-use path entrance to the parkland. However, due its flimsy nature, the wind had bent it in half so it was unreadable by passing motorists and even passing pedestrians.
The Notice advised recipients that an Information Session would be held on July 20, 2026 from 5 – 8p.m. This information was only made available to recipients of the Notice. It was not posted on the City’s website or on social media. We point this out because this parkland is used by residents across the City and as such, they have a right to know what’s happening.
July 9, 2026 less than one week later, the City issued an Updated Notice of Application / Notice of Applicant’s Information Session / Notice of Public Meeting at City Council. This notice includes the FOURTH version of Terralux’s site sketch, reversing the layout of the development from the July 3, 2026 notice. However, there are now TWO 7-storey buildings just under 20 metres tall, with 130 units each, and a total of 450 parking spaces. The site sketch also, FOR THE FIRST TIME, shows a future entrance on the east side of the property which, according to Stantec, will enter onto the future collector road (aka ROW) that is identified in the City’s Transportation Master Plan.
Version 4 – Site Sketch Rendering
July 20, 2026 Stantec, Terralux’s engineering firm, hosts an Information Session in Current River. Stantec had two engineers on hand to answer questions. Renderings of the development, including renderings of how the buildings shadow adjacent properties, including the apartment building on the north side of Arundel, were set out on easels throughout the room. No representatives from Terralux were present. This was not a formal presentation with Q&A. The session was designed for attendees to review the posterboards and ask questions. Over 140 people attended and the small room was packed.
July 21, 2026 The City issues yet another Notice of Public Meeting at City Council scheduled for August 11, 2026. There were no further changes to the site sketch.
July 24, 2026 This was the final day to submit comments about the development to the City. These comments, according to the Notices, would be considered in the evaluation of the application and used to prepare a recommendation to City Council.
Comments and concerns included issues with:
- Stantec’s Functional Services Report
- Stantec’s Traffic Review Letter, and the Traffic Study
- Terralux’s competency with respect to a development this size given the drastically different concept proposals
- Conflict of interest issues regarding the City commissioning Stantec for this initiative, who in turn became Terralux’s engineering firm.
- The Environmental Impact Study
- Lack of compliance with the City’s Official Plan, the Smart Growth Plan, the Net-Zero Strategy etc.
August 11, 2026 City Council voted to approve Terralux’s Application to rezone 791 Arundel St from Community Zone to Urban Mid-rise, and to amend the designation for the parcel under the Official Plan from Community to Residential.
They ignored the 2624 residents who signed the petition against developing the parkland, the 60+ residents who protested prior to the Council meeting, and the ~15 deputants who identified numerous concerns about the loss of parkland, loss of biodiversity, impact to wildlife, issues with the development itself, and non-compliance with the City’s own planning and development documents.
With the exception of three Councillors, every other councillor and the mayor ignored those concerns and voted in favour of allowing this development to proceed. Mayor Boshcoff even referred to the deputants’ comments as “NIMBY arguments”.
What Will You do with Your Vote?
Terralux still has work to do before building can commence. There are more reports and studies to be prepared. There’s a process called “Site Plan Control” which the City alleges will deal with issues going forward. We have lost this beloved piece of parkland and there will be more. We can demand the next Mayor and City Council put an end to selling off our parkland for development, but that means asking questions, demanding answers, and voting in the right people. What will you do with your vote?
