Questions swirl around stalled affordable housing plan in Niagara Falls; Thorold rethinks space for cars at Memorial Park
Niagara Democracy Watch is The Pointer’s feature aimed at increasing the public’s awareness and political involvement in the Niagara Region by highlighting key agenda items, motions and decisions.
City Council
Date: December 9 - 4:00 p.m. | Delegate | Full agenda | Watch live
4500 Park Street development returns to council, lack of transparency continues
Bookending Niagara Falls Council’s 2025 Planning applications, 4500 Park Street returns to Council on December 9th for Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments. The City-owned property, which is being proposed for a mix of affordable, attainable and market rental units, was the subject of Planning applications at Council’s first meeting of the year on January 14, 2025.
At the earlier meeting, Council approved the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments to permit a maximum 20-storey building, allow ground floor dwelling units and require a screened parking structure.
The December 9th application is to exempt the property from the municipality’s Transit Station Secondary Plan requiring a mid-block laneway between Park Street and Queen Street and reduce rear yard and exterior side yard setbacks to “implement the building design concept”.
The related staff report indicates that the current proposal is for a 10-storey residential building offering approximately 38 affordable bachelor units, another 38 attainable bachelor units, with the remaining 286 market rental units to be a mix of bachelors, one, two and three-bedroom units.
The report also discloses that the municipality is working with Elite Developments “through a public private partnership”. While there has been no related Council report detailing the arrangement between the parties, on November 24th, a groundbreaking took place on the property announcing the 362-unit project.
It is unclear if the property remains in the ownership of the municipality, though the staff report and related public notice indicates that Elite Developments initiated the December Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments, a process typically initiated by the landowner.
4500 Park Street was the location of one of the City’s farmers’ markets until the mid-1990’s and was subsequently used as a municipal parking lot for downtown businesses and patrons.
It has been well documented that 4500 Park Street is being proposed for an affordable housing project by the municipality. It was identified in the City’s 2021 Housing Strategy and was part of the municipality’s unsuccessful application in 2024 under the Federal Housing Accelerator Fund program.
In 2024, the City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) to “developers and property manager partners” to develop and manage a purpose-built rental property, with 40 percent of the units to be affordable. In the document, the City indicated that it would be contributing “land, zoning, and other expertise” with an expectation that it would be “a minority equity partner for this contribution and will expect to obtain a return on investment that is aligned with its risk exposure.”
Despite the intentions outlined, the RFP did not lead to a private partner and was terminated. The January 14th Council report did not mention the RFP’s termination, only indicating that the City “put out for an RFP” and that “the City proposes to redesignate and rezone the parcels to facilitate future development.”
The Niagara Falls Review, in an article regarding the November 24th groundbreaking, reported that Elite Developments and the City of Niagara Falls are “project partners” with the City retaining a “forty percent share” in the project. City of Niagara Falls Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) Jason Burgess is quoted in the article indicating that “council opted to contribute the land as part of a business arrangement.” Marko Juricic of Elite Developments, in the same newspaper report, describes the arrangement as a “joint ownership” of the project, now called Parkline Apartments.
A review of the City’s procurement pages shows no evidence of a further public process to come up with a partner on the project and a review of Council agendas since January offer no detail on the arrangement between the parties.
Niagara Falls City Council has held closed meetings related to a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land, on at least eight occasions this calendar year. While the municipality has the discretion to have such meetings behind closed doors, the Ombudsman’s Office of Ontario recommends that the municipality pass a resolution in public that includes “meaningful information about the issue to be considered (not just the exception under the Municipal Act) before closing the doors” and “to the extent possible, report back publicly in open session about what occurred in closed session.”
It is conceivable that Niagara Falls Council has discussed 4500 Park Street and any arrangement with Elite Developments in their closed meetings, but the municipality has not provided details, such as addresses associated with any property dispositions, and has not reported in public regarding any formal partnership between the City and Elite Developments.
The only reference to 4500 Park Street in City documents since the original January Council meeting is a line item in Mayor Jim Diodati’s proposed 2026 Capital Budget.
Under the CAO’s Department section, $750,000 is allocated to the project, which is described as an “investment to support the development of attainable purpose-built rental housing units in Downtown Niagara Falls.” How the $750,000 is proposed to be used is not specified in the budget, with the amount listed under the category of “Other”. The “business case” in the budget document repeats the line from the January Council report that the City will be “providing land, zoning, and other expertise/resources to the development of the property.”
As for Elite Developments, the Burlington-based real estate development company held a ribbon cutting last month for their development, the Ambrose Condos, in Brantford. The company is also behind 88 James Street in St. Catharines, the former Gord’s Place property that has been approved by St. Catharines Council for Community Improvement Plan incentives, but has yet to break ground.
Criticism of the lack of transparency regarding the 4500 Park Street development was levelled in January by Peter Colosimo, a retired professional planner, who was the Director of Development Services at the Niagara Region.
Mr. Colosimo pointed out at the time that there were no “digital copies of plans and documents submitted with the application” as promised in the Notice of the Public meeting. He argued that because lands are owned by the municipality and may be conveyed it “elevates the importance of an open and transparent process.”
While other planning applications through the municipality’s website routinely contain proposed site plans and even floor plans, there continues to be no associated files providing any project details associated with 4500 Park Street, other than an artist’s rendering of building elevations provided as an appendix to the staff report.
The December 9th staff report states that “Elite Developments have been refining the design to balance financial feasibility with the City’s objectives for housing choice, urban design, and transit-supportive density.”
As for the matters related to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments, City Planning staff is recommending that the project be exempt from requiring the mid-block laneway between Park and Queen Streets. The report indicates that the intent of the policy is to provide “safe and efficient” circulation that is already satisfied without the need of a rear street.
Staff concludes that the proposed amendments “implement planned intensification on fully serviced urban land, to help the City meet intensification and housing targets” in keeping with provincial, regional and City policies.
The related Council report can be read here.
City Council
Date: December 9 - 6:30 p.m. | Delegate | Full agenda | Watch live
Will a scaled back parking lot expansion satisfy Memorial Park neighbours and Thorold Centre 50+ members?
The phrase “politics is the art of compromise” is often quoted to describe the effort of political decision makers to balance the competing interests of stakeholders. By balancing those interests, politicians hope for a “win-win” situation, however, they can often find themselves not satisfying anyone.
On Tuesday, December 9th, Thorold City Council will consider a report recommending a scaled back, revised version of a proposed parking lot extension at 8 Carleton Street South. The City-owned parcel of land currently houses Thorold Centre 50+, a social activities centre that caters to people over the age of 50, a yoga studio and the City’s Building and By-law Department. Council members are juggling the parking needs of the members of Thorold Centre 50+ and City staff, while trying to placate nearby neighbours concerned that the parking lot will mean the loss of green space at the adjacent Memorial Park.
As previously reported by The Pointer, the November 18th Thorold Council meeting witnessed a packed Council Chambers populated by the Friends of Memorial Park, a quickly formed group of neighbours that were opposed to a plan that proposed the paving over of a portion of the park, described on the City’s website as “an outstanding example of Thorold’s natural heritage”. In addition, the Friends were present to denounce a lack of due diligence and transparency on the part of the City related to the parking lot extension.
Also present at the November 18th meeting, were representatives of the Thorold Centre 50+, a social club whose membership has reached 300 members, which has made it increasingly difficult to find adequate parking on the City-owned property, especially for those in their ranks with mobility issues.
Both groups at the November 18th Council meeting were sympathetic to the other's position and had recently become acquainted with each other. Councillor Henry D’Angela asked Centre President Brenda Bator if her group was willing to work with the Friends of Memorial Park to “come up with a better plan.” Ms. Bator politely pointed out to the longtime politician that it was not her job to do, as it is the City that owns the property, and her obligation is to consider the safety of her members.
Gloria Leahy, the delegate representing the Friends of Memorial Park, appropriately quoted the line in Joni Mitchell’s song Big Yellow Taxi regarding paving over paradise to put up a parking lot, while questioning the lack of public consultation on the plan that called for 40 additional parking spots, the removal of green space and an exit onto Albert Street East.
With open green space running contiguously along the south side of Albert Street from the intersection at Chapel Street to the Thorold Museum at 2 Carleton South, it was understandable that neighbourhood residents would be concerned over the imposition of a parking lot. The City’s own original plan depicted about half of the proposed parking spots occupying current green space just east of the boundary of the existing parking lot at 8 Carleton.
Regarding the process, Ms. Leahy’s criticisms were justifiable. While private development applications are often subject to public information centres and related statutorily required meetings, municipalities are often not bound by the same requirements related to their own lands.
What was present on the November 18th agenda of Council was not a report asking for Council’s approval of the parking lot extension plan but a memo from staff informing Thorold Council that the tender related to the parking lot extension had been awarded and had come in under budget.
The building at 8 Carleton Street South opened in 1914 as Central School, later renamed L.G. Lorriman. When enrollment dropped and the school closed, the building was repurposed as Town Hall in 1982. City staff vacated the building in 2006. Since then, the Thorold Centre 50+ facility and a yoga studio have occupied the premises. Recently, the City deemed it necessary to return to the building to accommodate some staff that could not be housed at the current City Hall at 3540 Schmon Parkway.
The municipality’s capital budgets over the past three years have included $1.7 million for the building, mostly for retrofits, with $250,000 in the 2025 budget being allocated to the parking lot expansion on the property. The November 18th memo to Council noted that the increased size of the parking lot was required to “accommodate the increased parking demand associated with the City’s Building and Planning Department operations and visitors to the Development Services Office.”
The staff memo also included a site plan that alerted the nearby residents that some green space and mature trees would need to be removed to accommodate the parking spots proposed at the northeast corner of the plan.
The Council members that spoke at the November 18th meeting seemed to agree that there was a need to accommodate more parking, especially for the Thorold Centre 50+ facility, but that any proposal should minimize impact on Memorial Park and increase the buffering between the parking lot and green space. This consensus prompted Mayor Terry Ugulini to comment that “this might lead to a win-win for everybody.”
Council concluded their discussion on the matter on November 18th by passing a motion that directed staff to review the design “for the purpose of ensuring enhanced landscape and tree retention and adding parking spaces in the area immediately south of 2 Carleton South.” Staff was also directed to hold a Public Information Centre to present alternative design options to the public.
The Public Information Centre was quickly scheduled for November 24, 2025, at the Thorold Centre 50+. As per the staff report on the December 9th agenda, the event was “well attended with over 30 signatures on the Sign In sheet.”
Presented at the meeting was a revised design proposal that reduces the additional parking spots to 25 from the originally proposed 40. The new design removes the planned exit onto Albert Street that staff admitted at the November 18th meeting was a “narrow exit” to a narrow road that would hopefully only be used in emergency circumstances. As well, the revised plan avoids the need to remove mature trees and even contemplates the planting of additional trees.
As previously reported by The Pointer, after the November 18th meeting and around the time of the Public Information Centre, by-laws were discovered that would reveal the land being contemplated for the parking lot was actually protected by a heritage designation.
Staff’s December 9th report does not go into detail, merely indicating that “new information was received” which informed the new design presented at the Public Information Centre.
The report notes that the new design complies with By-Law No. 129-2007, which re-zoned the greenspace adjacent to the existing parking lot on the property at 8 Carleton from Institutional to Open Space. The City’s Zoning By-law precludes access driveways, ramps, and parking in Open Space zones. In addition, the report states that the “lands are also subject to By-Law No. 103-2008, which extends the Heritage Designation from the adjacent Memorial Park.”
Based on the revised plan included on the December 9th agenda, the parking lot extension will not encroach upon the Open Space lands or remove any of the green space complained of by the neighbours.
The staff report also details the public feedback received. Of the 63 responses, staff characterizes 42 in favour of extending the parking lot, with 19 of those identifying support for the smaller lot. A collection of 18 responses urged staff to explore other alternatives, delay the project, or cancel the project entirely.
A number of the individual comments, included as an attachment to the report, question the lack of study into how the current lot at 8 Carleton is being utilized, whether parking issues could be solved with greater enforcement and why City staff moved back to the building if there was inadequate parking. These comments were best summarized by an email from resident Emily Goodwin, who wrote:
“The secondary design option is an improvement -- retaining existing trees, keeping the extension in line with the current parking perimeter, and avoiding an entrance/exit on Albert Street are all important concessions. But the fact that this compromise has been extended is a sign of the troubling abruptness of this plan and lack of meaningful engagement with community members. Like other commenters, I'm not convinced that this additional parking is truly necessary.”
The supporters of Memorial Park, in anticipation of the Public Information Centre, had circulated a list of 15 questions they wanted answered in light of the plan “to pave over a large section” of the park. While a number of the neighbour’s questions would appear to be not applicable in light of the revised option and the preservation of the Open Space, a number of their concerns remain unanswered such as what consultation with municipal committees had taken place, what steps has the City taken to address the current parking concerns in the lot and what evidence supported the need for the additional parking. The December 9th staff report does not answer the lingering neighbourhood questions.
For the Council, the staff recommendation will likely be viewed as the “win-win” the members were seeking: the Thorold Centre 50+ members will have greater parking options at 8 Carleton, while Memorial Park and the adjacent open space will be preserved.
The related Council report can be read here.
Past reporting:
Email: [email protected]
At a time when vital public information is needed by everyone, The Pointer has taken down our paywall on all stories to ensure every resident of Brampton, Mississauga and Niagara has access to the facts. For those who are able, we encourage you to consider a subscription. This will help us report on important public interest issues the community needs to know about now more than ever. You can register for a 30-day free trial HERE. Thereafter, The Pointer will charge $10 a month and you can cancel any time right on the website. Thank you
Submit a correction about this story
