The judicial review application of Hazkar Developments Inc. for the "Jones Estate" property in Gleneagles has been struck down by the Court of Queen's Bench.

In his July 22 written decision, Justice J. T. McCarthy agreed with the Town of Cochrane's argument at the June 12 preliminary hearing that the Hazkar Developments failed to serve notice of the application to affected area residents. 

In presenting their position, Hazkar's lawyer did not dispute this but argued neither the area residents or QuantumPlace Developments Ltd. were directly affected and notice was not required.

Justice McCarthy agreed there was no need to notify Quantum but believed the 10 area residents named by the town in their argument would be directly affected and struck the application.

Drew Hyndman, Cochrane's senior manager of planning services, says the applicant has a few choices available to further pursue the matter.

"They can certainly consider appealing the decision. They can reapply and address the matters that the court felt they did not address but at this time the court is no longer considering the judicial review."

Hazkar Developments also has the opportunity to reapply to the town for a change in land-use.

Longtime GlenVista resident Gary Kooistra says he's pleased the courts favoured their position but believes this isn't over yet.

"We won nothing," says Kooistra who has resided in GlenVista since 2005. "Yes, OK, the court case favoured our arguments but in essence, we have won nothing. What we're trying to do is to keep what we have. Our community in GlenVista is very very negatively affected but it, so our object to keep what we have."

Phil Lalonde, who represents the GlenEagles Estates Condo Corporation, believes this is an important ruling.

"From my perspective and the neighbouring residents perspective, the judge got it right," says Lalonde. "He threw out their appeal at the preliminary on the very important legal principle that directly affected parties have to be given notice. Hazkar did not give notice to any of the residents who have been making submissions on their applications repeatedly for the last three or four years.

"They knew of our interest, they knew of our concerns, they knew of our involvement and they didn't give us notice," says Lalonde. "The judge called them on it and threw out their application. It's a fatal flaw because they are out of time. They had six months to bring their appeal, and they can't bring it again because the six months has passed. So it's an important victory and it also illustrative of how the developer all along has never taken our concerns seriously."

In his decision, Justice McCarthy gave an overview of the concerns expressed by the 10 Gleneagles' residents listed by the town and that could impact any future decisions on the property.

Lalonde, who is a lawyer, says the options available to Hazkar Developments are limited from a legal perspective. 

"It's their choice, clearly, and they will decide what they're going to do. Should they bring on either of those two legal processes we'll be there to meet them as we always have in the past. You would hope that they would see the handwriting on the wall and decide that it's not worth spending more good money after bad, but it's their decision at the end of the day."

It's been a long and convoluted discussion on what exactly should occur on the Jones Estate. Residents of Gleneagle have long opposed developed for a long list of reasons, including concerns over drainage, traffic, slope and fear of inappropriate development.

Three times it has been struck down by town council and each was greeted by the thunderous applause of Gleneagles residents packing the chamber.

Kooistra, who is also a Gleneagles Community Association board member, has been opposed since the first proposal came forward and believes the opposition remains widespread in Gleneagles.

"There is pretty well no appetite for development there for various reasons."

Lalonde believes residents are standing strong.

"It's an important issue for all of the affected neighbourhoods and it's a pity that Hazkar doesn't seem to place any value on our legitimate concerns. If they wanted to sit down and talk to us there might be some way to find a mutual and agreeable solution but they've never seemed to be interested in that, they just want to blow through us and we're not going to be blown through."

Attempts to contact a representative from Hazkar Developments Inc. were unsuccessful at this writing.

In February, Hazkar filed for the judicial review following town council's decision to defeat a bylaw to redesignate the land to R-1 for single-detached dwellings from Urban Reserve (UR).

Last March, the developer applied to redesignate the 4.15-acre parcel R-1 from urban reserve. Proposed was the development of 11 single-family homes.

At a public hearing in October, the town's planning department said the proposal met the town's criteria and brought it forward for approval. Council was leery and amended the proposed bylaw to limit development to one single-family house.

Council feared to approve the option for one home would open the door for the developer to apply to develop an even higher number of homes on the property and defeated the bylaw a few weeks later. The town could deny the request, but the developer would be able to appeal the decision to a board outside of the town's control.

With proposals turned down on three different occasions and reports indicating it does comply for development, this issue is far from over. The door remains open for future land-use amendment applications.

The last two town councils have been reluctant to approve any of the proposed developments. Before the latest application, an application to rezone the land R-3 and develop 24 multi-family units was denied in the fall of 2016. In April 2017 an application for R-1 zoning to accommodate 16 single-family units was denied on first reading.

For years, a single home was situated on the property, home to sisters Eileen Grace and Muriel Evelyn Jones until their respective deaths. It became part of an estate with the passing of Muriel Jones in 2007 (Eileen predeceased her sister). That house has since been torn down.

The land is the sole remaining undeveloped parcel in the Gleneagles area.