Council extends olive branch to self-storage company that removed woodlot

Location of a woodlot removed from the property at 455 Highbury Ave. N. (File)

The owners of a self-storage company who cut down a woodlot in east London will have more time to reach a resolution with city hall.

By a narrow margin, city council referred the matter back to staff for further discussions with the property owner.

Last year, council rezoned the property at 455 Highbury Ave. N. to permit the vacant industrial building to be repurposed into a self-storage facility.

A woodlot at the south end of the property was to be maintained.

However, most of the trees were cut down prior to a new rezoning application that seeks permission to add five buildings (65 additional storage units) on the southern half of the site.

A planning consultant representing Apple Self Storage told the Planning and Environment Committee (PEC) earlier this month that the trees were removed because the woodlot was experiencing “vagrancy issues.”

At the time, members of PEC unanimously recommended that the rezoning application be refused.

Apple Self Storage at Highbury Avenue and Brydges Street, seen on Aug. 15, 2024. (Bryan Bicknell/CTV News London)

On Tuesday, Councillor Susan Stevenson urged colleagues to refer the report back to civic administration for more discussion with the applicant, “If we're going to say no to people investing in our city and additional tax revenue, I just think I'd prefer to be on the side of yes, at least in this case, for a referral to continue to allow staff to talk.”

Stevenson suggested there might be common ground if the expansion were smaller to permit an adequate replanting strategy.

Councillor Skylar Franke, who sits on the planning committee said, “I won’t be supportive at this time. I'd encourage any future applicants that if they're struggling with social issues, I encourage them to try and properly secure it with fencing, as opposed to cutting down trees.”

Despite concerns that the delay would allow the applicant to appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal for exceeding the 120-day deadline for a council decision, the referral was approved eight to seven.

Voting in favour of the referral were McAlister, Pribil, Cuddy, Van Meerbergen, Hillier, Lehman, Lewis, and Stevenson.

All other members of council were opposed.

"There's been some good faith issues that we've experienced, but I think it seems right now that these investors want to show some good faith,” said Councillor Peter Cuddy. “I think that we should extend that courtesy to them."