Top News

Charlottetown council rejects proposed townhouse development on Brackley Point Road

Charlottetown City Hall.
Charlottetown City Hall. - 123RF Stock Photo
CHARLOTTETOWN, P.E.I. —

Charlottetown city council has rejected a developer’s proposal to build two townhouses at 68 Brackley Point Rd. mainly due to safety concerns.

The project would have seen two townhouses built, totalling 14 units. One of the townhouses would have consisted of six units while the other would have had eight.

The proposed development was located at what some councillors referred to as a blind hill with poor sightlines for traffic turning into or out of the property.

Council voted 7-1 at its regular monthly public meeting on Monday night to support a resolution to reject the developer’s request. Coun. Bob Doiron, who owns units nearby, declared a

Coun. Julie McCabe was one of seven councillors who voted to reject a developer’s request to build two townhouses, totally 14 units, at 68 Brackley Point Rd. in Charlottetown. McCabe said she was concerned about safety, pointing out that the proposed development would have been located on a blind hill. File photo
Coun. Julie McCabe was one of seven councillors who voted to reject a developer’s request to build two townhouses, totally 14 units, at 68 Brackley Point Rd. in Charlottetown. McCabe said she was concerned about safety, pointing out that the proposed development would have been located on a blind hill. File photo

conflict of interest and didn’t vote while Coun. Mike Duffy opposed the motion to reject.

A public meeting was held in late October in which Sherwood residents expressed opposition to the development for the same reasons cited at Monday’s meeting.

Residents have contended that while there are other homes at the crest of that hill on Brackley Point Road, traffic on the street has increased over the last 20 years and putting more volume on that road would be dangerous.

The developer previously put forth an application last January to construct a 48-unit apartment building at that location but it was rejected by the city’s planning board, which also recommended rejection for Monday’s vote.

“The property is at the top of a blind hill,’’ said Coun. Julie McCabe. “We do have to look at continuing development but it has to be safe.’’Councillors said there is a need for development in the city but not at any cost.

Had council supported the developer’s request, the property would have had to have been rezoned from single-detached residential zone to a medium density residential zone.

Coun. Greg Rivard, chairman of the planning and heritage committee, said he was concerned about spot zoning; that if council allowed this project to go through it would have opened the door for other developers to ask for the same thing.

Duffy pointed out that council could have rejected this request when it voted on the issue in November but chose to defer it. Duffy added that he’s been in the area and just doesn’t agree that traffic is as big an issue as people are making it out to be.

Coun. Terry Bernard said there is a reason that lot in question is vacant.

“I don’t know if standards have changed but, to me, it’s always been a dangerous (location). I’m not sure what has changed,’’ Bernard said.

Twitter.com/DveStewart

Recent Stories