Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/20/1993 STATUTORY PUBLIC IRFORMATIOIf MEETIIfG MINUTES A statutory Public Information Meeting was held on Thursday, May 20, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. ~. CBAIRMAII: Councillor Van Kempen ALSO PRESENT: N. Carroll B. Taylor C. Rose H. Gardiner A. smith B. Avery - Director of Planning - Town Clerk - Manager, Policy Division - Planner 1 - Planner 1 - Planner 2 (I) '- 1. 2. 3. '-' 4. 5. ...... ZOIfIIfG BY-LAW AMEHDMENT APPLICATIOIf A 3/93 IIfOT PMC IIfC. ET AL LOTS 28 TO 32. PLAN 492 An explanation of the application, as outlined in Information Report No. 16/93, was given by Brenden Avery, Planner 2. Gary Templeton, representing the applicant, stated that he is seeking a by-law change to allow 19 condominium units. A private road system is proposed to service the townhouse units and all units have been designed to enhance the streetscape. There are areas of common open space as well as private outdoor space for each unit. Randy Vaine, 1945 Glendale Drive, representing the Liverpool West community Association, stated that his Association does not obj ect to the redevelopment of the subject lands. He felt that the density should be lower and more units should be facing Glendale Drive. There should be at least ten visitor parking spaces, a play area for the children and an additional fire hydrant should be installed to service the subject development. More cars and pedestrians will be using Glendale Drive as a result of this development, therefore, Glendale Drive should be improved and sidewalks installed on the east side of the road. He was concerned that the current noise from Burger King could be magnified by this development. Terry Spinosa, 1854 Liverpool Road, stated that he is concerned that the garbage facility is adjacent to his lot line. The internal road will be disruptive to him and the garbage bin should be located next to the commercial area. Tom Jenkinson, 1924 Malden Crescent, asked if there were drawings of the rear of the buildings and if those drawings had been approved by the Town's Building Department. He asked what type of fence was contemplated and was informed that it would be a decorative wood privacy fence and possibly a noise attenuation fence would have to be constructed on a portion of the property. The internal street should be a one-way road and the appearance of the parking areas should be improved. He was also concerned that there was not enough green space on the development. 6. '-" 7. 8. 9. '- - - 2 - - Peter panayotou, 1857 Glendale Drive, stated that the proposed development was good and would clean up the area. Rick Gorelle, 1924 Glendale Drive, stated that Glendale Drive is a prime location and the proposed development is not in character with the neighbourhood and is too dense. Gary Templeton, representing the applicant, stated that the density of the project is in conformity with the Pickering District Plan. It is appropriate to face some of the units onto Glendale Drive and felt that this would be attractive. He will be dealing with the parking question further with staff. It has been noted that improvements to Glendale Drive and sidewalks on the east side of Glendale Drive are required. He will likely be required to undertake a noise study and from this noise attenuation measures would likely be required. There is flexibility in locating the garbage bins to a more appropriate area. Catherine Rose, Manager, Policy Division, gave a further explanation of the application by outlining how the District Plan is interpreted with respect to density. She will be working out the details of the contentious issues such as sidewalks, landscaping, etc. (II) ZONIIfG BY-LAW AMEIIDMENT APPLICATIOIf A 31/92 COUlfCIL OF ISLAMIC GUIDAlfCE PART OF LOT 30. COif CESSION 3 1. 2. "" 3. 4. ....... An explanation of Information Report Gardiner, Planner 1. application, as 17/93, was given outlined in by Heather the No. Zani Nacklor, representing the applicant, gave a brief overview of the Islam religion and the Council of Islamic Guidance. Some members will be attending other churches in the future as other churches are built. He wants a quiet area like Cherrywood and does not plan any major structural changes to the current building. Street parking is not required because they have ample parking on-site and the lands will be landscaped. The members have bought the building and are therefore motivated to keep it clean. The term "community centre" is a misnomer but the building could be used by the community. The roads in the area are not in good shape but he is willing to work with the community to ensure that they are improved. The building will not be used for large gatherings and there are no plans for a day care centre. Canadian Muslims have a history of non-violence and he read a positive reference from their present landlord located at Middlefield Road and Finch Avenue in Scarborough. He noted that there are no adverse comments from agencies and he will conform to all rules and regulations established by the Town. Brenda Pemberton-Piggott, Concession 3 Road, stated that Cherrywood is a small hamlet comprised of 16 homes, one general store and one church. Several years ago, the residents participated in a change to the Official Plan that designated the hamlet for residential development only. Cecil Hollinger, Concession 3 Road, stated that the Town has lost much of its heritage over the past several years. He is strongly opposed to this proposal because it will be disruptive to the hamlet. 5. '-" 6. 7. (III) 1. '- 2. 3. 4. "'" - - 3 - - Ellen Brake stated that Concession 3 Road is very narrow and the present church adds much traffic to this road. Zani Nacklor stated that their parking lot could be used on Sunday mornings to take the overflow parking from the other church in the hamlet. He also stated that he has no control over matters that have been disruptive to Cherrywood such as landfill sites, etc. Catherine Rose, Manager, Policy Division, stated that staff has identified the issues such as the appropriateness of the use, the ability to provide adequate parking and if the septic system to sufficient to handle this development. ZOIfIIfG BY-LAW AMEIfDMEHT APPLICATIOIf A 9/93 TOW IIfITIATED ZOIfIIfG REVIEW: WEST SIDE OF ROSEBANK ROAD PART OF LOT 31. COIfCESSIOIf 1 An explanation of the application, as outlined in Information Report No. 18/93, was given by Adrien Smith, Planner 1. Silvio Mattachione, 1793 Rosebank Road, stated that he is opposed to this rezoning. All property owners thought that forty foot lots would be the norm for the newly created lots. This zoning proposal pits one neighbour against another and provides for too great a density. Victor Rudik, 1855 Rosebank Road, stated that he brought his concerns about the development of lands fronting onto Rosebank Road back in 1979. He congratulated Council on continuing the policy of having frontages on the west side of Rosebank Road to be the same as those on the east side. The only official referral for development proposals is the Official Plan that was approved in 1984. He suggested that 110 to 120 foot lot depths are appropriate for those lots fronting on Rosebank Road and the rear yard severances can be studied later. Catherine Rose, Manager, Policy Division, stated that this rezoning is being considered under the new Official Plan. The zoning change is only an enabling document and does not implement any new lots. The creation of lots in the rear yards must be done by plan of subdivision which is a public process. Two different by-laws are contemplated for this rezoning, one to deal with the lots fronting onto Rosebank Road and one to deal with the interior lots. (IV) ADJOURIfMEIfT OF STATUTORY PUBLIC MEETIIfG Dated "-' The meeting adjourned at the hour of 8:37 p.m. 11/J1 /913 clerL '&7