A Brampton council meeting to decide the future of a controversial townhouse development was halted as security had to rush in to calm the raucous crowd while councillors rushed out of the chamber.

Eventually, they came back after many in the capacity crowd left or were escorted out.

Councillors then voted 9-1 in favour of the development Thursday evening.

That prompted those still in the audience, mostly from the city’s large Punjabi community, to continue jeering.

Residents in the Springdale area say townhouses will decrease property values, overcrowd schools and prevent large, extended families from having the type of housing they desire.

Most of the dozen residents who spoke at the meeting emphasized that the Metrus development for 333 townhouses was not what the land was zoned for when the company originally planned a commercial project.

“We are not against development, we are not against townhomes, we are not against small, affordable homes,” said Anil Khanna.

He repeatedly told council that residents oppose the construction of residential units on land zoned for commercial use. He mentioned the loss of badly needed jobs that will result from the reduction of commercial space.

However, a Metrus spokesperson pointed out that the land is actually designated for residential use.

After members of the public began raising their voices in disbelief, Brampton chief administrative officer John Corbett confirmed that the site is indeed designated for residential development under the city’s official plan.

It was rezoned for commercial use, but Corbett and an independent consultant hired by the city explained the builder is allowed to incorporate residential because that was the original intention for the site.

After the crowd grew agitated, shouting a chorus of “No” when the consultant needed extra time to present his report backing the development, some questioned who paid the consultant and whether he’s a Brampton resident.

One resident wheeled in a large box on a cart and told Mayor Susan Fennell there were 20,000 signed petitions asking her to reject the development.

Councillor John Sprovieri, who voted for the development, said Metrus will still build all the commercial space it can fill while scaling back the number of townhouses, from 446 units. It will also provide green space, a water park and land for a library and community centre.

Harkanwal Thind, who came in second to Sprovieri in the 2010 election, said: “Please don’t play politics with this sensitive issue.”

Sprovieri has suggested the only reason some are taking on the development is to make a name for themselves ahead of next year’s election.

Sprovieri has repeatedly told his constituents that if they fight the new plan Metrus will win its case at the Ontario Municipal Board, which rules on such disputes.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

He and other councillors warned the crowd that all the concessions (the reduction of housing units and all the amenities) would likely be lost.

A city staff report recommended support of the updated Metrus plan, saying it meets provincial density targets.

But the community is convinced it can win at the Ontario Municipal Board.

Many of the delegates noted councillors voted unanimously against the development at a March planning meeting, questioning why they would now vote for it.

Vicky Dhillon, the only councillor who voted against the development, echoed the words of many delegates, saying the OMB is just a threat used by developers.

“Municipal politicians always make wrong decisions under this threat,” Dhillon said.

When Sprovieri tried to read an email from a resident supporting the development, the crowd erupted, some accusing him of making up the email and telling all council members they would be replaced in the 2014 election.

After the meeting was restored to order, Dhillon said, “The fight is not over.”

Councillor Gael Miles said: “We know that a lot of you want to be candidates in the next election. . . . Threaten us if you want, but we believe this is the best decision.”

Fennell, who was not at the March meeting and had remained quiet on the issue, supported the majority of her council colleagues.

“The option of no townhouses is not real,” the mayor said.

Read more about: