Video – Cobourg Council – Town Delays Action on 117 Durham Street
(Today’s Northumberland file photo)
By Cecilia Nasmith/Today’s Northumberland
Cobourg council put aside a motion to rezone 117 Durham St. for residential use and, at its April meeting, voting instead to delay action on the property.
Almost a dozen speakers outlined their concerns at the meeting, and their supporters attending the meeting overflowed council chambers into a downstairs room.
Many of them were members of Canopy Cobourg, a newly formed group to oppose the residential development of this piece of land that formerly served as a playing field for students of CDCI West.
Marie Van Hammond offered some computer-generated pictures of what the area could look like in five years if developed as a natural treasure vs. if developed as a residential development – taking into account the doubling in capacity to 400 units at neighbouring Legion Village.
Shannon Draper of the Cobourg Saxons appealed to have it left for recreational purposes, as it has been an essential space for their club and others.
A Willow Beach Field Naturalists member brought a letter of objection from that organization, noting the flooding risks and vulnerability of the wildlife there.
Katharine Spavins provided some technical details, such as flood risk and low-lying land.
As well, the property lies at the dead end of Durham Street, lined with heritage homes that leave no further room for setback, leaving a 26-ft.-wide road instead of the required 66 ft.
“It’s simply not physically possible to bring this road up to safe standards,” Spavins said.
“In an emergency such as a fire in one of the houses, there would be no access out to safety for the cars and vehicles in this proposed development.”
Naturalist and author Richard Pope noted the “almost insuperable problem with flood plains, traffic congestion and the like,” but said the basic problem is that the town is under-parked.
“And the population of the town is going to grow rapidly, and available natural space is not going to grow. Human beings need more natural space for their well-being.”
Pope wondered if some kind of compromise might not be possible, such as looking at “some kind of market opportunity in the north end” that leaves most of the field intact.
In a recent meeting, Mayor Lucas Cleveland referred to “misinformation” circulating in the community about plans for this land without saying what the misinformation is. Councillor Brian Darling offered a clue correcting speaker Alan Levy in his understanding that development contemplated for this land is 250 units – it’s closer to 70, Darling said.
Deputy Mayor Nicole Beatty made the motion to defer the decision until such time as the Asset Management Plan can be considered by council, and to direct staff to draft options for a community consultation on future use of this property, while also taking into consideration staff reports and engagement requirements for declaring municipal land surplus.
Her motivation is that there are so many moving parts that – the Asset Management Plan and Parks Master Plan, for example – that need to be in place and lined up before a good decision will be possible.
Resistance was expressed by Councillor Randy Barber and Mayor Lucas Cleveland, who stressed the housing shortage – Cleveland noting that six to seven buses of workers are bused into town daily from as far away as Burlington.
Councillor Miriam Mutton noted that the town already has enough approved land for residential development that it could double its current population.
“This pause, I believe, is one of the smartest decisions to be made, in order to get all the facts together and, as a community, figure out what we want to do,” Councillor Adam Bureau remarked.
“Green space doesn’t grow – we only take it away. Why would we rush to do that right now?”
Some of the letters/delegations presented to council
THE WATERFRONT NATURE PARK AND ONGOING CONCERNS ABOUT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT 117 DURHAM
Dear Mayor and Councillors,
I am writing as a taxpayer, resident and active community member/volunteer of Cobourg to express my concerns about the proposal to allow development on the former Football Field/playgrounds of the former West High school. Please insure that this e-mail is on the meeting agenda for the public meeting on April 30th and as a matter of public record.
The playing field on the west side of the south end of Durham Street, at 117, has been bought by the Town of Cobourg, which plans to sell it on the open market for development, having rezoned it from Open Space (OS) Zone and Environmental Constraint (EC) to Residential 4 Exception 36 (R4-36) Zone — which means high-density housing.
In this statement I will focus on my concerns about the likely impact of the proposed development at 117 Durham on the Waterfront Nature Park.
My concerns are due to the unsuitability of the land at 117 Durham for development because of: its low-lying level; high water table, sewage challenges—existing and probable—and the realistic threat of damage from such proposed development to the Waterfront Nature Park—a protected area which includes the West Beach, West Headland and the adjacent and supportive Ecology Gardens, as defined by the Town of Cobourg. The risk of flooding in this era of Climate Change is also a concern.
The Parks Master Plan (2013) and the Recreational Users Plan (2018) show this property as parkland. The Waterfront User Needs Assessment is due for a review, and it needs coordination with updated planning of waterfront parks.
The Waterfront Nature Park is constantly under threat and needs strong protection. The delicate dune ecology, bird and butterfly habitat is at risk from this proposed development and necessary infrastructure.
A motion to establish a Waterfront Nature Park Task Force passed at the February 26th 2025 town council meeting. The priority of the task force is to protect the unique dune ecology in the area, which is valued by both Cobourg natives and tourists. Of course, we all know that Cobourg attracts warm weather tourists because of the beautiful natural setting of its harbour—east and west. In addition to the love Cobourg locals have for the waterfront area, I am aware of Toronto and Scarborough residents who regularly walk the whole of Cobourg harbour from the East Beach to the end of the West Beach in spring, summer and early fall. Just like locals, they enjoy strolling with their dogs, having picnics with friends and family, bird and butterfly watching and sitting in quiet reflection—especially on the less busy West Beach.
Many nesting birds are present in the Waterfront Nature Park from April to July 1st weekend, including very close to the West Beach boardwalk. Those include flickers, killdeer, song sparrows, tree swallows and northern rough-winged swallows. Hundreds of dragonflies, Monarch butterflies, and 22 other butterfly species are often spotted feeding on milkweed and goldenrod in the Waterfront Nature Park from August to October.
Development of the land beside the West Beach, the noise, pollution risk, potential flooding risk (based on high water levels in 2018 and the higher precipitation levels predicted with Climate Change), and need for installation of more infrastructure for such an extensive development would put that habitat in the parkland at risk.
***
I strongly oppose high density residential development at 117 Durham. I am certainly not alone. I will finish by sharing some statistics, gathered from members of the public who attended the Spring Sizzle Market on Saturday April 26th. Sixty-one people who live all over Cobourg as well as outside the town, took the time on that chilly day to fill in my questionnaire about their connections to the Cobourg Waterfront. Asked if they walked the West Beach Boardwalk 58 said yes; 39 of those people mentioned bird watching as a regular activity in the area and 38 mentioned watching other wildlife as something they enjoy doing in the area.
As mentioned, people who took the time to fill in the questionnaire live in various parts of the town: a total of 31 people came from Cobourg’s East, West and North ends. Only 17 respondents came from the East Village and harbour area near 117 Durham. Six out-of-towners from Grafton, Campbellford and other locations who said they come to shop in Cobourg, took the time to respond to the questionnaire. When asked to share their opinion of development plans for the playing field at 117 Durham all 61 respondents said development in that green space is a “bad idea,” that sports teams need somewhere to play and nature and people need green space to thrive. Several respondents mentioned recently moving to Cobourg from Whitby and Oshawa to get away from the intense development in those communities. Many people come to the Waterfront and Waterfront Nature Park to be close to nature and de-stress. Housing development at 117 Durham would not only threaten the habitat of migratory birds and butterflies, but also deprive people who visit the Waterfront Nature Park of rest and relaxation.
***
Please insure that this statement is registered as a matter of public record. I request being added to the list of persons who would like to receive further notice of this item.
Kate Rogers
#405-1 Queen St.
Cobourg ON K9A 1M8
—————————————————
Speech to Council for Apr 30 V2
Thank you to all Council Members for allowing me to speak. My name is Marie-Lynn Hammond. I’m a taxpayer and active resident of Cobourg, and and also one of several founding members of CANOPY Cobourg. I’ve only lived in Cobourg ten years, which, in a small town, makes me still a newbie. But I’ve fallen in love with this place and I’ve no plans to leave. And the area I’m most passionate about is the West Beach, the Ecology Garden, and the Waterfront Nature Park, a 20-minute walk from my home.
PHOTOS #1, West beach, 1-A goslings (to be shown one after the other)
Now I am, clearly, far from alone in feeling this way. So I’d like to convey two visions for 117 Durham Street. But before I describe them, I want to note, Mr. Mayor, you’ve written that you consider it — I’m quoting here — “the highest responsibility to assess all situations for the benefit of Cobourg and its citizens.” I applaud you for that. And I believe that 117 Durham needs to be assessed with those goals in mind: the benefit for Cobourg and I assume you mean for all Cobourg’s citizens.
So one vision involves leaving the playing field as public parkland, as in the Town’s User Needs Assessment. I believe this is the wisest choice, for many reasons, not least of all because our director of Community Services described Cobourg as “under-parked.” In other words, we already has less parkland than is recommended by the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport.
And while Cobourg is growing exponentially, there’s no place in the downtown area where new parkland can be created. It’s considered a Recreational Desert, and that’s where I live. This is from a town document:
PHOTO #2 Recreational Desert – town document
Yes, housing is an issue these days, but the town owns other properties, such as part of the Tannery lands, that can be built on. So, if we keep 117 Durham as parkland, it could remain a playing field, but picture this: more native wildflowers and bushes, more trees around the perimeter. Plants that would attract birds and other pollinators. And we know that monarch butterflies, an endangered species, cluster in one of the trees at the north end of this property.
PHOTO #3 of monarchs in tree
Maybe there could also be a little gazebo somewhere, some park benches…?
PHOTO #4 Gazebo
Because we know that nature is extremely therapeutic physically, emotionally and mentally for humans, and we know we are in a full-blown climate crisis. So even more reason to keep this as green space and plant more green things in it. This would indeed benefit ALL Cobourg citizens.
PHOTO #5 of people enjoying playing field w. more trees
The alternative vision, picture this: 200 to 250 residential units on these three acres, including a 6 story building, maybe even 7 or 8. I say that because across the street, the Legion Village is also proposing an expansion from 204 units to a maximum of 400, almost double in size, Also, they’ve already removed the seniors-only designation for these units. So there will be much competition for them. But all this is what the town classified as a “minor variance.”
PHOTO #6 This is from a town document, about this Minor Variance
Remember that phrase, it will come up again. Now: picture the construction phase, which could last five years: the noise, the pollution, trees around the field being cut down, wildlife fleeing in terror, maybe never to return… including the 150+ bird species that migrate through here, attracting birders to Cobourg.
PHOTO #7: trees we could lose AND note the low rise Legion Village building: it will be replaced by a multi-story one
And when construction is completed, even if only half the total residents own cars, picture many hundreds of vehicles going in and out of these two developments daily. More noise, more pollution, more risk of accidents. Less buzzing of beneficial insects, less birdsong, far less peace.
And most crucially, none of this new housing at 117 Durham is designated affordable. Only the wealthy or the well-off, which by the way doesn’t include me, will be able to afford to buy or rent these lake-side units. Again, how does this benefit ALL the citizens here?
So I worked with artificial intelligence to create images of these developments. They’re not architectural drawings, they’re not to scale in relation to the property: they simply express what I think it will feel like emotionally and psychologically to walk the boardwalk with these buildings so close by. Note I did ask the AI program for five-story buildings, but it kept giving me 8 or 9. So I figure it also considers those to be merely a “minor variance,” and, a developer might also ask for such a quote-unquote “minor” change, who knows?
PHOTO #8 – buildings on playing field
So there’s my impression of what we could see on the playing field. Now let’s put some of the Legion expansion in on the other side of the street. And this shows only a little of what will be happening there:
PHOTO #9 Two buildings side by side
Other people speaking or writing to Council have described the environmental impacts that will result from destroying this piece of parkland. Plus, it will compromise the safety of cyclists and pedestrians using the area. Because Durham is a narrow, dead-end street that cannot be widened. Also, given that flooding is a concern in this area, why would a developer even want to build on this land?
All the more reason to preserve what precious green space we have for ALL our citizens, because as Joni Mitchell sang, don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone, pave paradise and put up, in this case, a high-density development and a parking lot.
PHOTO #10 two saplings
One last thought, this old Greek saying: “A society grows great when people plant trees in whose shade they shall never sit.” So I urge Council to do the right thing: keep the playing field as parkland, and plant trees around it in whose shade you’ll never sit. But future citizens of Cobourg will, and they’ll be forever grateful to you for doing the right thing.
Thank you
