A January 16th public meeting under the Planning Act saw Peterborough City Council recommend re-zoning by-laws which would allow for the construction of a new apartment complex on Little Lake, despite some protestations from neighbours, who worry the building’s size and height would hurt Little Lake’s ability to attract tourists.

The complex, a 17-story, up to 225-unit market-rate residential building which owner Ashburnham Realty has been trying to get built since the 2010s, would be built over the sites of properties on Crescent Street, Lake Street, and George Street South, all pending council’s official approval at their next meeting.

City Planner Ian Walker introduced the project to council, shedding light on areas of flexibility left up to the developer after discussions with City staff.

“The architects were proposing a 17-story building, again, containing a range of units. We have structured the proposed by-law so that it could be a range from 100 units up to 225 residential units, and that is purposefully done to make sure that there's at least a minimum density provided on the site,” Walker told council.

While staff were able to fulfill most of the developer’s wishes, Walker explained that the proposed floor width of 1,115 square meters was too large, and staff recommended in their motion to council that it be set at a maximum of 1,000 square meters. City staff recommended a flexible ceiling of up to 20 stories, so that the developer could accommodate more units despite the small floor plates.

Walker also noted some delays that might come from the potential heritage value of the buildings currently occupying the sites of this project.

“A heritage study had been submitted for this and it had identified some heritage value on some of the properties there,” he said. “One of the recommendations of the heritage report is that if those buildings are going to be demolished, that they salvage all the materials that they can from that… the proposed holding would incorporate the provision that that would be done.”

Answering a question from Downtown Ward Councillor Joy Lachica, Walker spoke on the importance of controlling “massing impact”—the impact of the building’s mass distribution on the ground.

“It’s basically giving them a volume of air, if you will, to work within. How they choose to work within that is kind of up to them… they had proposed a tower floor plate of 1,115 square meters, for instance, with a 17-story tower to get to 210 units. Staff would prefer to see a smaller tower floor plate, because it means it’s a thinner tower. But then, in order to do that, because they would lose some units [on] each floor within that tower, they would actually need to go a little bit taller,” Walker told Lachica.

More than the floor plate size, what bothered the first two delegates speaking on this project was its height.

“The Little Lake Master Plan distinguishes Little Lake as a special area distinct from the downtown core,” began neighbouring resident Alan Deaton.

“The master plan goes on and discusses the West Shore of Little Lake along Crescent Street, and proudly proclaims, and I quote, ‘water's edge is not hidden behind a veneer of development’... The master plan subsequently goes on and says, ‘The waterfront is not demeaned by buildings that are too tall.’”

After this, Deaton leveraged allegations of corruption against Tom Bennett of Ashburnham Realty, the developer seeking to execute this project.

“Now, after the 2010 Master Plan that demeaned development of his property, Mr. Bennett organized a city-funded study on the Otonabee trail. A part of the funds was intended to look at the relational impact of local housing to the Otonabee trail; Mr. Bennett used the funds to have a development firm sign off on Bennett's own 33-page study that was and remains tailored to set up his proposal on Crescent Street,” he told council.

This prompted a warning from Otonabee Ward Councillor Lesley Parnell, the Chair for this meeting, who asked him not to make personal comments towards Bennett.

“I would never say for one minute that there might be a conflict of interest here,” replied Deaton.

Concluding his presentation, Deaton warned council of the consequences of going ahead with the project.

“There's a need for development downtown or on Crescent Street. God only knows, because some of the properties there are run down and dilapidated. But building Trump Tower on the waterfront is not the solution to this problem. No, it is a problem.”

A second neighbour spoke to council about her objections to the project, Lake Street’s Michelle McCarthy.

“My view is westward… so my view of Little Lake is not the issue that I want to talk about today,” she remarked at the start of her speech.

“What I do want to talk about,” McCarthy went on, “is whether or not this proposal is compatible with your plans to increase the revenues for the City of Peterborough. The planning department approved the project, but they're looking at it from a narrow technical perspective.”

“It’s not their scope to consider whether or not this is beneficial for the city's coffers and the residents as a whole. They're basically operating in a little silo.”

For McCarthy, allowing this project to go ahead would do significant harm to Peterborough’s appeal as a tourist destination.

“It’ll benefit one corporation and their tenants at the expense of existing and future stakeholders. I moved here in 2024 and the landscapes and activities on and around Little Lake were one of the main draws for relocating to Peterborough,” she said.

“The New York Times listed the Trent-Severn waterway as one of 2025’s must-see destinations. And Time Magazine highlighted the Canoe Museum in the 2025 January issue. The Liftlock cruises, the voyager canoe rides, the music festival… they'll lose some of their charm with the proposed scale of this development.”

Recognizing the necessity for new housing in Peterborough, McCarthy proposed a deferral of this re-zoning by-law.

“Development should enhance and not detract from the asset that is Little Lake. So what I'm requesting is that the city defer approval until you have a chance to review the recommendation of the tourism strategy you commissioned, consult with your [Regional Tourism Association 8] partners and the Ontario Ministry of Tourism on whether this proposal is compatible with attracting visitors to our city,” McCarthy told council.

As the last delegate on this issue and an agent hired by Ashburnham Realty, EcoVue Consulting’s Kent Randall hoped to alleviate some of the worries put forth by Little Lake residents and advocate for his client’s initial plan, against the modifications made by City staff.

“Traffic impact studies concluded that the existing road network can accommodate the proposal. Staff concur,” he noted. “In terms of parking… the building will far exceed the parking requirements of the city's southern bow.”

“We can probably work within the parameters of the draft bylaw, but we would like to stay true to what was presented to the public. And as I said, overall, the development is… consistent with commercial planning.”

Following this presentation, council moved into discussions of the main motion at hand, with Ashburnham Ward Councillor Gary Baldwin inquiring with City staff about the tourism impacts of this development.

“It'd be hard at this time to draw a direct line to any negative impacts on the tourism side of things, just because of the development,” answered Director of Economic Development Darryl Julott.

With that, Mayor Leal moved the report, with a slight modification to cap off the possible height of the building at 17 stories, since the developer stated their intent not to go above that.

The motion carried unanimously, though Town Ward Councillor Alex Bierk and Otonabee Ward Councillor Kevin Duguay did not participate in the discussion or vote on this motion due to conflicts of pecuniary interest.

Ashburnham Realty’s 17-story apartment complex project in Little Lake now awaits its official approval at the next City Council meeting, pending which Randall says shovels could meet the ground this Fall.