A proposed hotel project in the scenic town of Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, has sparked concern among some local residents over its potential impact and the handling of the development by the developer and town authorities. Situated at 325 King St., on the former site of a public school, the Parliament Oak Hotel development is set to feature a four-storey structure with 130 suites, event spaces, a restaurant, bar, and green areas according to Two Sisters Resorts, the developer. Despite facing several bylaw violations during its pre-construction phase, the project is under scrutiny from residents who fear it may lead to flooding issues.
Ron Simkus, a retired professional engineer, along with a group of concerned locals, including another engineer and a hydrogeological expert, conducted an independent review of the developer’s plans. They expressed alarm at the perceived inadequacies in the proposed development, particularly regarding the potential impact on underground water diversion into nearby One Mile Creek, posing a flooding risk to approximately 90 neighboring homes.
The developer, Two Sisters, did not provide a comment in response to inquiries. On their website, they assure that their site servicing strategy will prevent any adverse effects on existing infrastructure. Niagara-on-the-Lake’s Mayor, Gary Zalepa, stated that town staff have reviewed the plans and have no significant concerns, asserting confidence in the project’s compliance.
Residents such as Lyle Hall, who resides close to the construction site, and Simkus have raised objections to alleged breaches of town bylaws by the Parliament Oak development. Despite facing multiple fines, the project has now received a conditional building permit for foundation construction after addressing the compliance issues.
Moreover, a community group led by Simkus is calling for an investigation following the approval to waive nearly $1 million in development charges for the project. The decision to waive fees was tied to a dispute over the need for additional underground parking, with proponents arguing that imposing development charges for parking could deter developers amidst regional encouragement for such projects.
While some regional councillors questioned the financial implications of waiving fees, Zalepa defended the decision, emphasizing the importance of supporting development initiatives. Concerns have been raised about the balance between developer incentives and public interests, with residents fearing a preferential treatment trend. Calls for an investigation into the decision-making process have been made to the Ontario ombudsman by the Niagara-on-the-Lake Residents Association, citing concerns over misinformation and improper considerations in the regional council’s decision-making.