Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 20, 1997 STATUTORY PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING MINUTES A Statutory Public Information Meeting was held on Thursday, March 20, 1997 at 7:18 p.m. in the Council Chambers. PRESENT: M. Brenner D. Dickerson - Chairman R. Johnson D. Ryan ALSO PRESENT: B. Taylor - Town Clerk L. Taylor - Manager, Current Operations Division V. Rodrigues - Senior Planner The Chairman and the Manager, Current Operations 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 APPLICATION 18T-87059(R) ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 27/96 704858 ONTARIO LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY FORBES) PART OF LOT 30, CONCESSION 2 (NORTH SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE,EAST OF ROSEBANK ROAD) 1. Valerie Rodrigues, Senior Planner,provided an explanation of the application, as outlined in Information Report#7/97. 2. Grant Morris, representing the applicant, stated that the subject lands and lands to the west were approved for single detached dwellings, however, Council would not consider a proposal to service the lands to the west from across Finch Avenue. With respect to the subject lands, his client looked at various forms of medium density development and submitted this application as a compromise. 3. Sylvia Spencer, 771 Sheppard Avenue, noted that the Town is currently considering a by- law to allow businesses in houses and asked if that by-law is approved, what impact it would have on parking and other matters in this development. She further asked if there will be addition vehicle access to this development and if the proposed park will have an access onto the hydro right-of-way. She stated that this application is not in character with the existing neighbourhood. - - 2 - - 4. Richard Ward, Box 5142, Claremont, stated that the subject lands are part of a problem he experienced several years ago and that he was denied the opportunity to appeal a previous development application on these lands. He stated that he is opposed to this application and asked that there be a judicial review of past applications. 5. Glenn Freeman, 2009 Whiskey Gate, stated that townhouses have been built on the south side of Finch Avenue and with townhouses being built on the subject lands, the existing subdivision of single detached dwellings will be boxed in by townhouses. He expressed concern about the amount of traffic being generated by the proposed development. 6. Councillor Maurice Brenner, stated that the Whites Grove community was designed as an enclave and existing homeowners were told that development on the subject lands would be single detached dwellings. Medium density development is not in character with the existing community and since this development should be considered as infill, the issue of character is important. A previous development application for single detached dwellings on the subject lands was approved based on character. 7. John Liska, 700 Amaretto Avenue, stated that he is opposed to the development of townhouses or semi-detached dwellings on the subject property. He is also concerned about traffic being generated from the subject lands because there are only two access points into this area. 8. Pat Sturch, 699 Amaretto Avenue, stated that she bought her house because the existing subdivision is much like an enclave and she stated that she is opposed to medium density development on the subject lands. • 9. Dino Furia, 1519 Seguin Square, stated that he researched the area before buying his house and was told that the subject lands would be developed for single detached dwellings. If anything different is built, the present residents will be frustrated. 10. Kathy Dehenne, 654 Amaretto Avenue, stated that she is opposed to medium density development on the subject lands and asked what she can do about the lands to the west of the subject lands that are before the Ontario Municipal Board. 11. Rick Rimar, 2004 Benedictine Court, stated that houses in the Whites Grove community are an investment and are well taken care of. He stated that medium density development on the subject lands may attract absentee landlords which will lead to a deterioration of care of the properties. 12. Glenn Freeman, 2009 Whiskey Gate, asked how the lands to the west of the subject lands got before the Ontario Municipal Board and noted that medium density development was not envisaged on that property nor on the subject lands. 13. Chris Simpson, 621 Cognac Crescent, stated that he purchased his house because of the enclave nature of the Whites Grove community and stated that the developer has not taken into consideration the character of the existing neighbourhood. - - 3 - - 14. Sheila Tracey, 686 Amaretto Avenue, stated that if the proposed application is approved, property values for the existing houses will fall and the aesthetics of the neighbourhood will be spoiled. She is concerned about excess traffic and is disappointed that a park has not yet been developed for this community. 15. Michel Guerin, 608 Cognac Crescent, stated that at present, it is difficult to drive out of Whiskey Gate onto Finch Avenue and many residents therefore drive out at Amaretto Avenue and Whites Road. He noted that people bought houses in the existing neighbourhood because of the nature of the community. 16. Richard Ward, Box 5142, Claremont, stated that this application was premature. 17. Grant Morris, representing the applicant, stated that with respect to the lands to the west of the subject lands, that application went to the Ontario Municipal Board in December of 1996 and no hearing date has yet been set. The application before the Ontario Municipal Board provides for townhouses but final development will be determined at the time notices go to the residents to advise of a hearing. 18. Lynda Taylor, Manager, Current Operations Division, noted that many of the comments were about the density of the application and she stated that there is no guarantee that the top of the range for density will be approved because the compatibility with the existing neighbourhood must be taken into consideration. (II) DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 18T-97001 ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 2/97 DANLU HOLDINGS LIMITED PART OF LOTS 32 AND 33, CONCESSION 1 (EAST SIDE OF ALTONA ROAD, SOUTH OF FINCH AVENUE) 1. Valerie Rodrigues, Senior Planner, provided an explanation of the application, as outlined in Information Report#6197. 2. Grant Morris, representing the applicant, stated that he has studied many different types of development for the subject lands. He noted that the Official Plan allows for up to 75 units per hectare, however, his proposal provides for only 45 units per hectare. With the exception_ of the proposed condominium unit, all units in this development will be freehold. 3. Sylvia Spencer, 771 Sheppard Avenue, asked if the proposed apartment building will have surface or underground parking. She asked for more detail about a report dealing with apartments and stated that she is concerned about the effect of offices in houses. She hoped the Altona Forest will be preserved as this area develops. 4. Walter Dawyd, 363 Chickadee Court, asked if the proposed apartment building will have surface or underground parking. He inquired into the Region's concern that access be blocked onto Altona Road from this development and if this is the case, he noted that traffic will be diverted down his street. The proposed apartment building will not be in character with the existing neighbourhood particularly if surface parking is allowed. - - 4 - - 5. Richard Ward, Box 5142, Claremont, stated that he objects to this application. He noted that he filed a complaint under the Property Standards By-law about the property to the north because he is concerned that there may be environmental problems on these lands. 6. Mark Nicholas, 329 Sparrow Circle, stated that the proposed apartment building is not compatible with the existing neighbourhood and that noise air conditioners on that building will disturb the residents. He felt that there must be a second access from this neighbourhood onto Altona Road. 7. Patrick Chessman, 332 Sparrow Circle, stated that he objects to the proposed apartment building because it is not in character with the existing neighbourhood. He noted that the existing quattroplexes in this neighbourhood are not selling well and suggested that if townhouses were allowed throughout the subject lands, it could make up for the density that is lost if the apartment building is removed. 8. Chris Over, 306 Sparrow Circle, stated that he objects to the proposed apartment building. 9. Damon DeSilva, 333 Sparrow Circle, stated that he is concerned that the proposed • apartment building will make it difficult to resell his house. 10. Jesus Briz, 324 Sparrow Circle, asked if there are any controls to stop speculators from buying units in the proposed apartment building and renting them out and thus degrading the neighbourhood. He was also concerned about the amount of traffic that will be generated by this development. 11. Winston Richards, 326 Sparrow Circle, stated that he agreed with the comments made by the previous speakers with respect to this application. 12. Patrick Chessman, 332 Sparrow Circle, stated that the proposed apartment building will cast a shadow on his property. 13. Paul Russell, 319 Sparrow Circle, stated that he is opposed to the proposed apartment building. He asked what is proposed for the block of land at the southeast corner of the present subdivision. 14. Karen Rose, 332 Sparrow Circle, stated that she is opposed to the proposed apartment building and asked if transit will be servicing this area. 15. Two residents who spoke earlier asked if a development proposal has already been approved for the apartment block in the existing subdivision and there was an inquiry into how residents are notified of development proposals. 16. Grant Morris, representing the applicant, stated that the apartment block in the existing subdivision is not owned by his client and he does not know how these lands will be developed. With respect to the apartment block in the proposed application, the issue of parking will be determined at the design stage. With respect to the lands to the north of the subject lands that is the subject of a property standards complaint, the owner has cleared the yard of debris and an environmental assessment was carried out on the property and the lands were found to be clean. - - 5 - - 17. Valerie Rodrigues, Senior Planner, stated that with respect to the development of the apartment block in the existing subdivision, possibly the residents could get involved at the site plan stage. (III) ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 26/96 TOWN INITIATED ZONING REVIEW: BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE DEFINITIONS 1. No persons having an interest in this application were in the audience. (IV) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Dated taAd J 7, /97 7 Clerk / • •