HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001/07/12
:Þ-
-.
-
""
. .
STATUTORY PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING MINUTES
A Statutory Public Information Meeting was held on Thursday, July 12, 2001 at 7:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers.
PRESENT:
Councillor Brenner, Chair
ALSO PRESENT:
C. Rose
R. Taylor
B. Taylor
- Manager, Policy Division
- Planner II
- City Clerk
The Manager, Policy Division, provided an overview of the requirements of the Planning
Act and the Ontario Municipal Board respecting this meeting and matters under
consideration thereat.
(I)
DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION SP-2001~03
974582 ONTARIO LIMITED (GLENBROOK HOMES)
PART OF LOT 22, RANGE 3, B.F.C.
(LANDS ON THE EAST SIDE OF LIVERPOOL ROAD,
AND SOUTH OF WHARF STREET)
1.
Ron Taylor, Planner II, provided an explanation of the application, as outlined in
Information Report # 19-0 1.
2.
Gary Peck, representing the applicant, stated that this plan has been revised
several times over the past 12 months based on information fÌ'om a previous
Statutory Public Information Meeting and fÌ'om the staff.
3.
Paul Hunt, 723 Hewson Drive, stated that he is opposed to this application. He
inquired into the parking at the rear of the subject lands and stated that he is
concerned about increased traffic on LiverPool Road and the impact of increased
traffic at Liverpool Road and Krosno Boulevard.
4.
Sylvain Trepanier, 1218 Monica Cook Place, stated that he is concerned that this
meeting is being held in July when most people are on vacation. He asked what is
meant by "approval in principle" and stated that comments made by the residents
will not be taken seriously. He was not notified of this meeting and indicated that
many other residents were not notified. Notification of this issue must be made to
a broader area as it impacts a greater area. He stated that he does not see a great
deal of the nautical theme in the proposed development and asked if previous
concepts have been shelved. Mr. Trepanier stated that the density should be
calculated on the three residential blocks only and noted that much work is
needed to comply with the design study.
5.
Dave Steele, representing the WaterfÌ'ont Task Force and PACT, stated that in
preparing the WaterfÌ'ont Task Force 2001 Report, it was contemplated that there
would be very little development south of Wharf Street. He stated that he objects
to this application and noted that the density calculation includes the block
designated for parking. His report recommended that the subject lands be
developed for tourism-type businesses. and that the proposed development does
not comply with the Liverpool Road South Study. He recommended that
,III'<-
7.
-
9.
-
12.
--2--
properties fÌ'onting Liverpool Road be zoned to encourage tourist-type
commercial and other uses that support the local area. He noted that residents are
confused about the difference between "retail" and "commercial" uses. He
further recommended that parking in fÌ'ont of the subject development, along
Liverpool Road, be angled parking and that the development comply with the
Liverpool Road Design Study. No boat storage should be allowed on the subject
lands and no maintenance on the boats should be allowed. There must be control
over storm water runoff and there should be a provision for retention ponds. The
City should determine if there is to be public parking on the subject lands and
ensure that there is an agreement to provide for this. He recommended that there
be an entrance and exit at the north and south ends of the subject lands to safely
move motorists through the property and onto Liverpool Road.
6.
John Garley, 810 Helen Crescent, stated that he is concerned about how the
subject lands will be assessed for the purpose of taxation. He noted that the
parking block will be used by the public for parking and that the owners of the
lands will charge for parking.
Jacqueline Smart, 829 Fairview Avenue, stated that she was not notified of this
meeting and noted that PESCA tried to notifY interested residents. She stated that
the proposed developments will provide for townhouses that are similar to those
in Canoe Landing which are very small and narrow and the proposed townhouses
will not be in character with the Millennium Square and Trail. She is concerned
that this development will set a precedent for greater density in future applications
in the area. She asked how cars and boats can use the proposed parking lot
without conflict and wanted assurance that there will be sufficient parking for cars
year round. She asked if the parking lot is not successful, could the lot be rezoned
to permit more housing. Ms. Smart noted that this application is being approved
before the overall Liverpool Study is approved. She further asked what is meant
by the term "part lot control" and what levels of commercial or retail uses would
be required. She asked to what level of the Building Code would the proposed
townhouses be built. She stated that the residents were told by the representative
for the applicant that the zoning has been approved in principle and there is
nothing that will change as a result of tonight's meeting.
8.
Paul Kelland, 921 Grenoble Boulevard, stated that he understands that the zoning
of the subject lands has been approved in principle and asked that the conditions
of approval of the zoning be implemented.
Paul White, 507 Cliffview Road, stated that he wanted to address this application
in the context of access to the Lake. Development should be of the highest
standard because of the high use of Liverpool Road by the public. The
development of the subject lands can be a showcase for the area. He noted that
the parking area will be used up very quickly if it is to be used for boat storage
and parking for the commercial uses on the subject lands.
10.
Jacqueline Smart, 829 Fairview Avenue, stated that seventeen townhouses have
been allowed because the density calculation includes the parking lot. This will
set a precedent for other developments in the area to have a high density.
11.
Sylvain Trepanier, 1218 Monica Cook Place, asked why the City is looking at the
cost of building the proposed townhouses and felt that this should be left to the
builder. The builder should be required to build the proposed townhouses at the
highest level under the Ontario Building Code for which the units can be used.
The watemont has been well developed and future owners must be made aware
of public activity in the area. This application should be looked at in conjunction
with other applications that will be submitted in the future.
Gary Peck, representing the applicant, stated that the number of sites in the
parking lot is actually over 100. If the cooperative owners of this parking lot
attract sufficient business to keep the parking lot full then there will be no boat
storage. However, until the businesses in the proposed townhouses reach their
~
-
-
--3--
optimum, he anticipates that about 40% of the parking lot will be used for boat
parking in the winter. There has been an intensive storm water management study
of the parking lot and noted that the lot will have a gravel surface. The proposed
development should emulate a Great Lakes Coastal Village and the proposed
townhouses will have some features that are found in century houses in the area.
The design of the townhouses is set up to accommodate a business on the main
floor and will be constructed in such a way to accommodate a business. If a
buyer wishes to intensify the use of a unit, they will be required to pay for any
upgrades.
(II)
DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION SP-2001-01
ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 11/01
DANLU HOLDINGS LIMITED
BLOCK 14 AND PART OF BLOCK 19, PLAN 40M-1981
(LANDS EAST OF AL TONA ROAD, AND
SOUTH AND WEST OF SPARROW CIRCLE)
1.
Ron Taylor, Planner II, provided an explanation of the application, as outlined in
Information Report # 18-01.
2.
Grant Morris, representing the applicant noted that when Phase 2 of this
development was approved, the zoning included a provision to accommodate this
application.
3.
Bruno D' Amato, 338 Sparrow Circle, stated that the height of the proposed units
will be up to 12 metres and he is concerned about the effect this will have on
property values, privacy and the institutional look this will have to abutting
residents. The proposed setback of six metres will block sunlight to abutting
properties after 3:30 p.m. He noted that he has not seen any drawings of what is
proposed for the three single detached homes and Block 4. The owner of 438
Sparrow Circle asked him to note that he is concerned about the proposed house
being constructed very close to his house. The area residents want the proposed
townhouses reduced fÌ'om three stories to two stories, the rear yard setbacks to be
increased fÌ'om six metres to seven metres, remove the single detached lots and
provide plans for the proposed units. He is concerned that the chain link fence
may not be installed. The existing residents bought their homes based on Phases
2 and 3 and he noted that Phase 3 is very different fÌ'om what was proposed
originally.
4.
Jeff Bowers, 345 Sparrow Circle, stated that he bought his unit in a quadraplex
based on the proposal for Phase 3 which has now changed. He feels his unit will
loose value with what is now proposed.
5.
Russ Piper, 355 Sparrow Circle, stated that he also bought his townhouse based
on a proposal for Phase 3 and noted that Phase 2 was developed very differently
fÌ'om what was proposed.
6.
Cindy Hubert, 366 Sparrow Circle, stated that this application will not enhance
the character of the neighbourhood and noted that the proposed units will cut
down on the amount of sunlight reaching her property.
7.
Grant Morris, representing the applicant, stated that the applicant went to great
lengths to ensure that the zoning was in place for Phase 3 so that prospective
buyers in earlier Phases would be aware of what was proposed for the subject
lands. He noted that the municipality does not require a fence between these
types of development and although a fence was shown on an engineering plan, he
noted that that was when a condominium development was proposed. A four-foot
fence will be built between the existing development and the subject lands. The
Zoning By-law addresses the height of twelve metres and felt that there would be
",..
8.
9.
11.
-
15.
-
(III)
Dated
--4--
no loss of property value because a three-story unit backs onto a two-story unit.
He noted that the density of the application has gone fÌ'om a 54 unit townhouse
condominium to 43 fÌ'eehold townhouses plus three single detached houses. He
agreed to address the concerns about the three lots zoned for single detached
dwellings. The architect will be asked to provide detailed sketches of the
proposed houses before Council approves this application. A great deal of time
was spent with the architect to ensure that the proposed development is in
character with the existing development. He noted that none of the proposed units
would have balconies that overlook the existing lots.
Martin Frarn, 362 Sparrow Circle, asked when and where the four-foot fence will
be constructed. He asked that the style of homes should be what was originally
proposed, namely two story houses.
Bruno D' Amato, 338 Sparrow Circle, stated that he would like the applicant to
give a timefÌ'ame on when the fence will be constructed. He stated that the three
story unit is not in character with the existing neighbourhood and that a parkette
was planned in this Phase but has now been removed. He asked the applicant
what he based his statement on that the property value of a two story unit abutting
a three story unit would not be affected.
10.
Grant Morris, representing the applicant, stated that the parkette was removed
because the original plan was for a condominium development and the parkette
was for the use ofthe condominium owners only.
An unidentified man stated that when he purchased his property in 1999, the sales
personnel implied that there would be a parkette for public use. He asked what
will happen if the builder faces delays in constructing the proposed units. He
noted that the houses are being built in pockets and the residents don't know what
is being constructed and that property values will be affected by the three story
units.
12.
Russ Piper, 355 Sparrow Circle, stated that he has been in his house for two years
and it has not yet been sodded and therefore other timelines set by the builder
cannot be expected to be met. He has a signed contract with the builder that
certain development would take place.
13.
Roma Wohlfeiler, 356 Sparrow Circle, asked that the developer erect a safety
fence when this phase is under construction so that children cannot enter the
construction area.
14.
Bruno D' Amato, 338 Sparrow Circle, stated that the two trailers currently on the
subject lands be relocated closer to Altona Road and asked if the fence in question
will be installed after the completion of Phase 2 or Phase 3. A definite deadline
should be established for the construction of the fence.
Terri Hume, 438 Sparrow Circle, stated that she wanted to meet with the
applicant's representative.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:51 p.m.
J UhY
æc
£) 2o-¡;j
\
Clerk