<div>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.
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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. 
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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:
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>"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."
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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. 
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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.
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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..."
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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.
</div>
<div>On November 8, 2022 Halifax Regional Council refused to approve a request to amend the Districts 14 &amp; 17 MPS to remove the requirement for road connection over the CN rail line connecting Ingram Drive to Cobequid Road.
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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:
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>NO waste-water system.
</div>
<div>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).
</div>
<div>NO sidewalks.
</div>
<div>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.
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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.
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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.
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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. 
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>One can only be left with the question, why would Opportunity Site C be ordered a Special Planning Area when:
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>It does not meet the criteria of the already established Municipal Planning Strategy.
</div>
<div>It does not meet 6 of the 7 Special Planning Area evaluation criteria.
</div>
<div>It's been rejected on multiple occasions by HRM elected officials. 
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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).
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>The community has expressed a willingness for meaningful engagement with government and the developer that could potentially lead to an appropriate alternative development proposal. 
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>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. 
</div>
<div><br />
</div>
<div>Please donate to help us fight the fight and voice our collective concerns regarding this special planning area and it's development.
</div>

Anonymous

Dale Schimpf

Glenn Macisaac

Dennis Joudrey

Marty Stephenson

Margaret Perry

Sue Morrissey

Jacqueline Steudler

Elizabeth Hilton

Connie Reynolds

Lionel and Sue Hindler

Robert Sampson

Celine Kilford

Suzanne Dubois

Help support the judicial review for special planning site C

platform

Platform is iOS

Android

Adyen Google Pay Development Audience

$opt_dummy_attribute

English only

Deprecate Stripe Legacy

dyn_template_ids

Adyen V6 Bene Transfer & MyMoney Campaign Organizers - test01

Bene transfer V6 and AdyenV6MyMoney Campaign Organizers - production

OneTrust next-app audience

fundCountryCode

NextDoor Share Option Users

Fundraisers with Reactions feature capability

fundCurrencyCode

US + Non-charity COs Only

locale

fund country is US and user language is English

personId

comms-internal-person-ids

Enhanced Story Experience Users

Suggested Goal Experience Users

user language is English and fund country: US, AU, DK, FI, IE, NO, SE, CA, GB; 

Poster share - new funds eligible (newest 9/18)

Streaming widgets beta user

paymentProcessor

3DS payment method

user language is English and fundCountry: US, AU, DK, FI, IE, NO, SE, CA, GB; 

GoFundMe Employees

ipAddress

Mark Rieth IP Address

Version 9.2.0 and above

Fund is in English speaking country

desktop

Android v12.11.0 and above

Platform is Android

paymentMethodType

checkoutType

Payment method type group to be vaulted on success

admin pr kit prod

EUR Donation Upsell

Share Text generation Skip Fundraiser

(prod) new funds eligible for amp12 (UGC gallery)

fintrac_cad_idv_form_v2 audience

paymentProcessorAccountId

fallback mode accounts

proCampaignId

p2p legacy startfundraising page

AMP24 New Funds Only PROD (DO NOT MODIFY)

countryCode

charityId

UKCharities

Federated Search Internal Testing

route.pathname community

US Donation Upsell audience 

Auto Thanks Feature Audience

Supporter Comments Eligible Funds

International Only

fundId

braze fundraiser group 

Payment Identity Transfers ATO Risk Check (Targeted) - Production

Fundraiser Saved Payment Method Rate Limit Bypass (Production)

leaderboard-partner-id-audience-givepanel

Version 9.2.1 and above

AUD Donation Upsell audience

fundraiserCountryCode is US/EN

Active Fundraiser - Smart Default Cadence

DAF Internal

Vault on success card payment method

Platform is iOS v11.0.0 and above

Desktop users

Person ids

United States (US) users

allow yuno fundraisers for test

Mexico country code

Posters INTL

NPO Profile Opted-In

iOS at or above 12.4.0

non-US recurring donors

Canada Campaign Owner Group

Fundraiser Without Meta Link

Scheduler payment tester gorup

charityCommunityId

Charities allow to be claimed unclaimed (PRD)

Canada (CA) users

currencyCode

UC Tipping v20250115 International

pymk_production_xplr_fe_team

Android at or above 12.2.0

Profile photo entry point audience

smart goals (fundraiser/manage) on test01

Activity Tracking v1 Beta Testing

writePath

Stream Notification

start gfm intl allowed locales

Platform is iOS v11.2.0 and above

unclaimed charities

prod_ach_audience

AI Chatbot Audience

amp13 only new funds (prod) (anyword auto)

UC Flow Enabled (Prod)

Payment Identity Beneficiary Verification - Production

shared notification bell audience

Custom users

ach frontend audience

Android v11.0.0 and above

Users Receiving Payments Paused Notifications

smart goals test01

Manage Coach - US English Organizers Only + new funds only

Team EGG - IP Address list

Fundraiser Without Instagram Deep Link

Native 11.4.0 and above

UC Tipping v20250107

Users Receiving Braze KYC Validation Failed

Native 11.3.0 and above

Influencer - Prod

US fundraisers and US users

ai_title_page

anyword

openai

control

manual_entry

userEmail

template_id

userId

fundUrl

isCharityCo

email

appVersion

shouldBucketIntoExperiment

partnerId

donationCadence

isActiveFundraiser

isPartner

isMobile

npoProfileOptIn

fundIsLinkedWithMeta

hasSessionDonation

isCampaignOwner

fundHasInstagramDeepLink

Native 11.4.0 and higher

New funds eligible - Video Sharing (PROD)

GB Donation Upsell audience 

Auto Thanks V3 Rollout Audience

Thank you V3 testing whitelist

isRecurringFriendly

Is Recurring Friendly

Excluded funds - Video Sharing

Logged In Users

CH Donation Upsell audience

Android v10.6.0 and above

userCurrencyCode

Localized Currency

v11.5.0 and above

testAudience

pathname

Survicate

appVersion is at or above 12.8.0

Non-charity fund

isChallengeFundraiser

challenge-fundraisers

Payment Identity Launch Verification - Production

New funds eligible - Posters v2

CAD Donation Upsell Audience

Braze Email Tester

NPO Profile Opted-Out

iOS App Version

hasKnownDonors

PYMK has donors

iOS v12.3.0 and above

Help support the judicial review for special planning site C

Still $3,410 to go. Help us build momentum.