Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 28, 2009 - 1 City 00 Minutes/Meeting Summary AAQ. Site Plan Committee (SPC) Meeting i i October 28, 2009 PI CK RI 4:45 pm Tower Meeting Room Attendees: Mayor Ryan Doug Dickerson - City Councillor - Ward 2 David Pickles - City Councillor - Ward 3 Jennifer O'Connell - City Councillor - Ward 1 Neil Carroll, Director, Planning & Development Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review Tyler Barnett, Senior Planner - Site Planning Absent: 1./'w~. ` . - .fir. ; - ij .Item % Details Drscuss~on B~Conclus~on , Action Items / Statu-s 'Ref # (nmary of desuss~on)~ _ ~`,~Y s~ (include deadline as~ . 2 a ro `afe r 1. N/A - Claremont General Store Preliminary Proposal 1703-1707 Central Street Attendee(s) John Owen (Owen Design) Mr. Daniel Park owner The preliminary plans are to rebuild the general store and associated uses that were destroyed by fire. Minor variances are required to implement the proposed redevelopment. • Neil - Owner is attempting to provide commercial space back into community with a similar character to the initial development - P&D have worked with the applicant to identify required variances and consider this a special situation that can appropriately be considered by the Committee of Adjustment - providing opportunity for SPC to see the proposal prior to variance application being brought forward to the Committee of Adjustment (C of A). SPC will still see the site plan application through the formal review process - providing heritage architectural elements in replacement building even though initial building was not a designated heritage structure • Fred Parsons pre-consulted with City staff at outset of project • Councillor Dickerson - noted his understanding that an owner could rebuild a structure destroyed by fire, without regard for zoning compliance Page 1 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items''I Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) • Tyler - zoning by-law special provision only. permits restoration to safe condition; however if more than 60% destroyed by fire, requires compliance to by-law • Councillor Dickerson - no major concern at this time, will comment further when formal site plan brought to Committee for review • Tyler - any C of A conditions will be tied to the presented proposal with a time limit to complete • Neil - some accessibility parking concerns to -be reviewed further • Councillor Dickerson - consider discussing accessible parking space on Regional road allowance (Central Street) with the Region of Durham • Councillor Pickles - are the previous residential dwelling units proposed to be reintroduced and do they require C of A approval. Two apartment units are proposed on the second floor to replace the two residential units that previously existed. They are to be included in the C of A application as current zoning does not permit residential use • Tyler - outlined current proposal and Neil explained southerly abutting neighbours' concern respecting demolition work and site redevelopment • Tyler - outlined variances required • Councillor Pickles - requested P&D staff touch base with Councillor Johnson to outline preliminary proposal Applicants joined meeting • Councillor Dickerson - understand intent of redevelopment and need for C of A and in general support of variances • John Owen - explained matters to be addressed through C of A trying to generally match floor area of what existed prior to fire - respecting side yard as best as possible - building to have mix of materials to be sympathetic to the Hamlet character - pervious ground treatment materials are being proposed to assist with stormwater (turf block) - access to refuse pick-up area was discussed, including conflict with parking spaces (J. Owen noted that refuse pick-up schedule would be arranged to as to avoid conflict with residential parking use) • Councillors discussed refuse pick up (mid day) to avoid conflict.with tenant parking and impact on easterly abutting Page 2 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items /Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) neighbour • Neil - questioned size of refuse bin • John Owen - one for refuse, one for recycle, perhaps roll out to curb for pickup • Councillor Dickerson - questioned area of sewage holding tank and opportunity for additional parking in south yard • Neil - noted that south yard is also providing landscaped area for residential tenants, including the land over the holding tank area Tyler to discuss with • Councillor Dickerson - requested that staff consult with Regional staff Regional Works Department to discuss consideration of providing parallel parking on Central street • Mr. Park - may be opportunity for improved on-street parking due to greater setback from road provided by replacement building • Councillor Pickles - where were tenants parking previously? • Mr. Park - north portion of site • Neil - neighbours to east and south will have increased building separation from what existed prior to fire • Councillor Dickerson - questioned what other sustainable elements have been incorporated into the project (other than permeable turf block) • John Owen . Neil Carroll will - no leaching bed in this proposal (holding tank now) speak to Councillor - insulation efficiency Johnson and advise - boilers/radiant heat - reclaimed brick of Committee Councillor Dickerson - need to consider other sustainable position building elements and provide list of these elements with the application when formally submitted for SPA • John Owen - need to be conscious.of impacts of solar panels/sky light locations to ensure they do not detract from historical elements - anticipate April start for project, with 3-4 month construction time period. • Committee consensus -proposal is in right direction and no concern with variance applications to the C of A Page 3 ems / Status r item / 'Details 8 Discussion & Conch ton .4- Action I t _ t d i, Ref # summar of discussio) n }~i s r Y (include'-, 2 S02/09 Pickering Town Centre office Building 1355 Kingston Road Attendee(s): George Shilletto (IBI/YW) James Byck (Urban Bruno Bartel (20 VIC) Ron Taylor joined meeting Applicant attended to provide an update on the proposed office tower on the Pickering Town Centre lands and the pedestrian bridge and GO parking garage (staging, construction, conditional permits and/or conditional site plan approval). • Neil Carroll - IBI/YW/Urban Con and 20 VIC here to address certain concerns expressed at SPC of July 22, 2009 and provide update to SPC on the project status and timing. • It was clarified to SPC that the design and construction of the bridge was now under the control of GO/Metrolinx, and that while the City's input would continue to be sought, the project was not subject to site plan approval • George - provided overview of how project fits into the bigger picture of the City's downtown discussed (using display boards) overall development study it has been involved in with City for downtown core/land uses of Civic Precinct, downtown south core, Pickering Town Centre (PTC) site & MTO site - proposed MPAC office building provides immediate opportunity to realize a first step in the transition of PTC and the emerging downtown master plan. Even greater opportunity now presented with pedestrian bridge and GO parking structure - mobility hub possibility now with pedestrian bridge, GO parking, regional bus service; City bus passenger pick up and drop off - proposal part of larger strategy for PTC expansion(s) for street grid environment - good opportunity for improved pedestrian movement/connections (PTC building itself serves as pedestrian-internal connections) Page 4 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items /Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) • Bruno - outlined office proposal history and discussed MPAC desire to move onto PTC site, and the amount of floor space to be developed on `spec' by 20 VIC - aware of build to zone and opportunity for retail/commercial space at grade - leasing opportunities may increase with bridge connection - 20 VIC has a meeting with GO on Friday, October 30, 2009 to discuss connection to office building - The pedestrian bridge will connect to the office building, just not sure whether the connection will be formal landing location for the bridge or a appendage to the main bridge structure. A preference to have the bridge terminate into the office building has been expressed by 20 VIC however that decision rests with GO transit - even if bridge lands on road allowance, the office tower and bridge will be linked as per the terms of 20 VIC's lease agreement - a central landing of bridge on the road allowance will allow for future connections to future buildings along Pickering Parkway and internal to PTC. • Ron advised Y&1MIB1 has been retained by the City to review opportunities for the redesign of Pickering Parkway to accommodate objectives of mobility hub as designated by Metrolinx and the City's Downtown Core Guidelines (on-street parking, kiss and ride, transit stops and lay-by etc.) • Neil - advised the office building has recently been registered for LEED Silver • Councillor Dickerson - concept coming together, main concern for ultimate future development of City downtown • Councillor O'Connell - remember to circulate site plan to Accessibility Committee • Councillor Pickles - questioned elevator needs/function of bridge landing and office tower • George - Yes elevator to be provided for main bridge landing in either scenario. - Committee members expressed concern that employees cannot enter the MPAC building directly from the bridge, but must go outside at grade to enter the building. - Bruno explained that the physical separation of commuters from the MPAC office building (no direct access is a security requirement of MPAC. Page 5 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items /Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) I The Committee expressed concern that if the main landing (with elevator) for bridge is freestanding in the Pickering Parkway boulevard and not fully integrated with the office building, but is connected to the office by an appendage to the bridge, then physically challenged persons on-route to the office building/commercial/retail will not be able to get to grade at the end of the bridge as there will only be stairs and not another elevator. This was considered to be unfair, if not contrary to accessibility requirements. This design would require disabled persons to use the elevator in the more distant main bridge landing to access grade, and to travel outdoors to the office building/commercial floor space. • George - prefers main bridge landing to be fully integrated with office building which would address this concern, however design decision for bridge landing is with GO • Committee members requested that this matter receive more consideration and were not supportive of design that discriminated against mobility challenged persons. • Bruno provided a breakdown of the 10 storey office building - The 1St floor will accommodate MPAC space and retail/commercial space - The 2nd and 3rd floors will be for parking (as a layer of the office building) . - The 4t" and 5t floors are vacant office space being built `on spec' by 20 VIC - The remaining floors will be occupied by Municipal Property and Assessment Corporation (a portion of the 10 floor will house mechanical equipment). - 20 VIC is to provide MPAC occupancy in 2011 Neil - in order to accommodate the tight building completion time frames for MPAC, construction will have to proceed in an incremental manner, with some site plan details being resolved as the project advances • Councillor. Pickles -project has improved since previous discussion--- looking forward to formal submission and discussion at Committee • Neil - incremental approvals as development proceeds - hope to finalize site plan within 1 month and to receive final determination on bridge landing location from GO in the very near future - need to begin `core' of building to meet MPAC occupancy time frame Page 6 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include' deadline as appropriate) • George - GO acknowledges need to move quickly with bridge • Ron - bridge needs to be substantially completed by March 2011 - also will meet with ACOM to discuss City comments respecting the bridge design now that ACOM is working with GO • James - site plan is still evolving and will continue to involve Site Plan Committee Ron - reviewing urban treatment of Pickering Parkway from Glenanna to Liverpool Road-we will inform Committee on this project as it evolves. Meeting Adjourned: 6:50 pm JAMINUTES\Site Plan\2009\04 - October 28-09.doc Page 7