Lantzville councillors are interested in an old memorandum of understanding signed between the district and developers of the Foothills and what it could mean for the community.
Lantzville councillors voted in favour of receiving a report providing a status update about the MOU agreement, which was signed more than three years ago.
Coun. Mark Swain, who brought forward the motion, told councillors that it would be nice to have an update from staff about where the MOU is at and what it could mean for the district as a whole, noting that construction has begun on the Foothills.
“It’s well-known to the public and council that this development is underway, yet we have this MOU just sitting there doing nothing, gathering dust,” he said.
- RELATED: Foothills development project officially breaks ground
- RELATED: Construction on Lantzville Foothills starts
In 2014 the District of Lantzville signed an MOU with Lone Tree Properties, the company leading the development of the Foothills. As part the agreement, Lone Tree agreed to dedicate land and pay for the construction of a new reservoir, dedicate more than 300 hectares of parkland, provide roughly $6 million in infrastructure funding and property for a new fire hall and public works yard.
Swain said it’s concerning that nothing has been mentioned of the fact that there is a possibility for the district to receive millions of dollars from Lone Tree throughout the lifespan of the project.
“That money is just slipping away and it could be greatly used in our community,” he said.
Swain said although the MOU is a non-binding legal agreement, he wondered about the fact that Lone Tree has agreed to pay 100 per cent of the costs for a reservoir replacement, even though Lantzville is slated to pay for the construction of a new reservoir within the Foothills.
“At this point the district is bearing some of the costs of that … and this reads that if we are partnering with this developer, possibly we wouldn’t be paying a cent,” he said.
Frank Limshue, the district’s community planner, confirmed that the district is not acting on the MOU and that in order to do so there would need to be direction from council.
“The document was executed back in September of 2014 and effectively just sits there,” he said.
Coun. John Coulson said this is the first time it has come before council, adding that Lone Tree has already proceeded with the development and that it is very likely the district has missed the opportunity to receive the amenities spelled out in the MOU.
“In many ways we missed the bus,” he said. “The agreement is quite simple. The Foothills wanted a different phased development agreement in exchange for these features of amenities. They have proceeded under the existing development agreement. A lot of these amenities that were spoken of … I doubt we’d get. While we still have a signed MOU, I doubt it is really applicable.”
Coun. Will Geselbracht said he was a little bit uncomfortable discussing the topic because it is an active development application that is still underway. He said there is a substrata agreement that known as section 219(9), a covenant registered against the title to the land.
“It doesn’t matter who own the lands but the convent stays there until the parties … agree to change it,” he said.