<A>

25TH REPORT OF THE

 

Planning and Environment Committee

 

meeting held on October 15 and 16, 2012, commencing at 4:06 PM, in the Council Chambers, Second Floor, London City Hall. 

 

PRESENT:  Councillor B. Polhill (Chair), Councillors J.P. Bryant, D.G. Henderson, J.B. Swan and S. White and H. Lysynski (Secretary). 

 

ALSO PRESENT:  Mayor J.F. Fontana, Councillors J.L. Baechler, D. Brown, M. Brown, P. Hubert and H.L. Usher, G. Barrett, J. Braam, P. Christiaans, T. Copeland, A. Dunbar, M. Elmadhoon, J.M. Fleming, S. Galloway, T. Grawey, T. Karidas, G. Kotsifas, B. Krichker, I. Listar, S. Mathers, H. McNeely, D. Menard, N. Musicco, J. Page, C. Parker, J. Ramsay, M. Ribera, A. Riley, E. Saldo, C. Saunders, J. Shaughnessy, C. Smith, B. Warner, S. Wise, J. Yanchula, P. Yeoman and A. Zuidema.

 

 

I.

DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

 

1.

That Councillor J.B. Swan disclosed a pecuniary interest in clause 8 of this Report having to do with the application of S. Farhi, Farhi Holdings Corporation, relating to the property located at 199 Queens Avenue, by indicating that his employer leases property owned by Farhi Holdings Corporation.

 

II.

CONSENT ITEMS

 

2.

1st Report of the Agricultural Advisory Committee

 

Recommendation:  That the 1st Report of the Agricultural Advisory Committee from its meeting held on September 19, 2012, BE RECEIVED.

 

3.

Property located at 1030 Oakcrossing Gate (H-8081)

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Senior Planner, Development and Compliance Division, based on the application of The Ironside Building Company Inc., relating to the property located at 1030 Oakcrossing Gate, the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on October 30, 2012, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of 1030 Oakcrossing Gate FROM a Holding Residential R4/R5/R6 (h.-65 R4-6(3)/R5-6(3)/R6-5(20)) Zone TO a Residential R4/R5/R6 (R4-6(3)/R5-6(3)/R6-5(20)) Zone, to remove the h-65 holding provision. (2012-D11-04)

 

4.

Property located at 280 Callaway Road (P-8093)

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Manager of Development Services and Planning Liaison, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by Donald A. Riley to exempt the following lands from Part Lot Control:

 

a)         pursuant to subsection 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at a future Municipal Council meeting, to exempt Block 98 in Plan 33M-633 from the Part Lot Control provisions of subsection 50(5) of the Planning Act, for a period not to exceed three (3) years; it being noted that these lands are subject to a registered Development Agreement and are zoned Residential R4/R6 (R4-3/R6-5(23)); it being further noted that the Residential R4(R4-3) Zone permits street townhouses with a lot frontage minimum of 5.5m and a lot area of 200m²; and the Residential R6 Special Provision (R6-5(23)) Zone permits triplexes, fourplexes, townhouses, stacked townhouses and apartment building dwellings with a minimum lot frontage of 10m and a minimum lot area of 850m2;

 

 

 

b)            the following conditions of approval BE REQUIRED to be completed prior to the passage of a Part Lot Control By-law for Block 98 in Plan 33M-633 as noted in part a), above:

 

i)              the applicant submit a draft reference plan to the Building Division for review and approval to ensure the proposed part lots and development plans comply with the regulations of the Zoning By-law, prior to the reference plan being deposited in the Land Registry Office;

 

ii)         the applicant submits, to the Development Services Division, a digital copy, together with a hard copy, of each reference plan, as noted in part i), above, to be deposited; it being noted that the digital file shall be assembled in accordance with the City of London's Digital Submission / Drafting Standards and be referenced to the City’s NAD83 UTM Control Reference;

 

iii)            the applicant shall obtain confirmation from the Development Services Division that the assignment of municipal numbering has been completed, in accordance with the reference plan(s) to be deposited, should there be further division of property contemplated as a result of the approval of the reference plan prior to the reference plan being deposited in the Land Registry Office;

 

iv)           the applicant shall submit to the Managing Director, Engineering & City Engineer and the Manager of Development Services, confirmation that an approved reference plan for final lot development has been deposited in the Land Registry Office; and,

 

v)            the subdivider be required to enter into any amending subdivision agreement with the City, if necessary;

 

c)         the Municipal Council BE REQUESTED to approve this by-law; and,

 

d)         the applicant BE ADVISED that the cost of registration of this by-law is to be borne by the applicant in accordance with City policy.   (2012-D25-00)

 

5.

Property located at 2280 Wickerson Road (39T-00519)

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Manager, Development Services and Planning Liaison, the following actions be taken with respect to the request from Kape Developments Limited, relating to the property located at 2280 Wickerson Road:

 

a)         the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council supports granting a three (3) year extension of the draft approval for plan 39T-00519, prepared by AGM Surveying and certified by Bruce Baker, (dated April 1, 2001, Drawing No. 1058 dwg Wickerson-3.dwg), which shows 86 single detached dwelling lots and a park block, served by 3 local public streets, the extension of a secondary collector road and Wickerson Road, SUBJECT TO the Municipal Council endorsement of proposed changes to the Growth Management Implementation Strategy (GMIS) and Development Charges Background Study for stormwater management facilities SWMF SA-2 & SWMF-SB, and the revised conditions contained in attached Appendix “39T-00519-1”; and,

 

b)         the financing for the project BE APPROVED in accordance with the “Estimated Claims and  Revenues Report” provided as Appendix “A” to the associated staff report, dated October 15, 2012.  (2012-D26-03)

 

6.

Property located at 2332 Wickerson Road (39T-08507)

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Manager, Development Services and Planning Liaison, the following actions be taken with respect to the request from Mike Meddaoui, on behalf of 911578 Ontario Limited, relating to the property located at 2332 Wickerson Road:

 

 

a)         the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council supports granting a three (3) year extension of the draft approval for plan 39T-08507, submitted by Mike Meddaoui, prepared by Archibald, Gray and McKay Ltd., and certified by Bruce S. Baker (Drawing No. 06.174, dated November 18, 2008), which shows 173 single detached lots, 3 future residential development blocks, 1 walkway block and 1 park block, served by 3 local roads, 2 secondary collector roads and Wickerson Road, SUBJECT TO the Municipal Council endorsement of proposed changes to the Growth Management Implementation Strategy (GMIS) and Development Charges Background Study for stormwater management facilities SWMF SA-2 & SWMF-SB, and the revised conditions contained in attached Appendix “39T-08507-1”; and,

 

b)         the financing for the project BE APPROVED in accordance with the “Estimated Claims and  Revenues Report” provided as Appendix “A” to the associated staff report, dated October 15, 2012.   (2012-D26-04)

 

7.

Development Charges Background Study Amendments: SWMF SA-2 and SWMF SB

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Finance, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2009 Development Charges Background Study:

 

a)         the source of financing for SWMF SB, which is currently funded by the Urban Works Reserve Fund, BE EXCHANGED for the financing for SWMF SA-2, which is currently funded by the City Service Reserve Fund;

 

b)         SWMF SB BE ADDED to the Growth Management Implementation Strategy in 2014, at an estimated cost of $2,201,100;

 

c)         SWMF SA-2 BE REMOVED from the Growth Management Implementation Strategy in 2014, with an estimated cost of $3,226,700 and BE OMITTED from the upcoming 2014 Development Charges Background Study; and,

 

d)         SWMF SB BE CONSTRUCTED by the City due to its hydrologically sensitive location;

 

it being noted that SWMF SA-2 is not required to service any development within the current Urban Growth Boundary.   (2012-F06-00)

 

8.

Property located at 199 Queens Avenue

 

Recommendation:   That, the following actions be taken with respect to the property located at 199 Queens Avenue:

 

a)            pursuant to section 13.8 of the Council Procedure By-law, the actions of the Municipal Council taken at its meeting held on October 9, 2012, with respect to clause 23 of the 23rd Report of the Planning and Environment Committee, related to the request of Mr. S. Farhi, Farhi Holdings Corporation, relating to the proposed demolition of the priority 2 listed property located at 199 Queens Avenue, BE RECONSIDERED;

 

b)            the said Clause 23 of the 23rd Report of the Planning and Environment Committee from its meeting held on September 24, 2012 BE RESCINDED; and,

 

c)            the Chief Building Official BE DIRECTED to grant S. Farhi, Farhi Holdings Corporation, a demolition permit for the building located at 199 Queens Avenue;

 

it being noted that Mr. S. Farhi offered to provide $25,000 to assist in the costs of the possible relocation of the heritage structure;

 

it being further noted that the Municipal Council has a policy that does not support the demolition of heritage properties for the installation of temporary surface parking lots;

 

it being further noted that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received a communication, dated October 12, 2012, from A.R. Patton, Patton Cormier & Associates, with respect to this matter;

 

it being pointed out that the Planning and Environment Committee heard verbal presentations from  E. Cormier, on behalf of A.R. Patton, Patton Cormier & Associates and M. Manuel and B. Mortimer, London Music Hall, with respect to this matter.  (2012-D10-00)

 

III.

SCHEDULED ITEMS

 

9.

1st Report of the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee

 

Recommendation:  That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 1st Report of the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee (EEPAC), from its meeting held on September 20, 2012:

 

a)         the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to inform and engage the EEPAC with respect to the compensation design plan at the Hyde Park SWM Facility 5; 

 

b)         the new compensation design plan, noted in a), above, BE DESIGNED to replicate the habitat being lost in Hyde Park SWM Facility 4;

 

it being noted that the EEPAC reviewed and received the following with respect to this matter:

 

·                    a communication dated October 24, 2011, from B. Haklander, Environmental Services Engineer;

·                    a communication dated October 19, 2011 from the EEPAC Working Group; and,

·                    a communication dated August 24, 2012, from S. Rans, Chair, Wildlife Sub-committee, Animal Welfare Advisory Committee;

 

c)         the Civic Administration BE ASKED to provide an update to the EEPAC related to the restoration plans for the Kains Woods area;

 

d)            the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to provide a copy of the completed application related to this matter to the EEPAC for its October meeting; and,

 

e)            that clauses 3 through 23, inclusive, of the 1st Report of the EEPAC, BE RECEIVED AND NOTED;

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee heard a verbal presentation from D. Sheppard, Chair, EEPAC, with respect to these matters.

 

10.

1st Report of the Trees and Forests Advisory Committee

 

Recommendation:  That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 1st Report of the Trees and Forests Advisory Committee (TFAC), from its meeting held on September 26, 2012:

 

a)            the TFAC Terms of Reference BE AMENDED to add a representative from the London Development lnstitute/London Home Builders Association (jointly) as a voting member of the TFAC;

 

b)            subject to the approval of a), above, C. Linton, who is currently a Member-at-Large with the TFAC, BE APPOINTED as the representative of the London Development lnstitute/London Home Builders Association, resulting in a vacancy for the Member-at-Large position; and,

 

it being noted that the TFAC reviewed and received a Municipal Council resolution adopted at its meeting held on June 12, 2012 with respect to the TFAC appointments for the term ending February 28, 2015;

 

c)            that clauses 2 through 10, inclusive, of the 1st Report of the TFAC, BE RECEIVED AND NOTED;

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee heard a verbal presentation from B. Shiell, Chair, TFAC, with respect to these matters.

 

11.

Beaufort/Irwin/Gunn/Saunby/Essex ("BIGS") Street Neighbourhood Plan

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the Beaufort/Irwin/Gunn/Saunby/Essex (“BIGS”) Streets Neighbourhood Draft Plan BE CIRCULATED for public, agency and City review in advance of the formal public participation meeting required under the Planning Act, to be held on November 26, 2012;

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received the attached presentation from P. Carabott and A. Harrington, Peter J. Smith & Company, Inc., with respect to this matter. (2012-D11-00)

 

12.

Property located at 699 Village Green Avenue (Z-8072)

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with respect to the application of 1079591 Ontario Limited, relating to the property located at 699 Village Green Avenue, the proposed attached by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on October 30, 2012, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Convenience Commercial (CC) Zone, which permits convenience service establishments without a drive-through facility, convenience stores without a drive-through facility, financial institutions without a drive-through facility and personal service establishments without a drive-through facility TO a Convenience Commercial Special Provision (CC(  )) Zone, to add florist shops, restaurants, day cares, professional and service offices as additional permitted uses all within the existing building without a drive-through, and to maintain existing parking;

 

it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public participation meeting associated with this matter.  (2012-D11-03)

 

13.

Property located at 3278 Colonel Talbot Road (39CD-12511)

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Manager, Development Services and Planning Liaison, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of Middlesex Vacant Land Condominium Corporation No. 698, relating to the property located at 3278 Colonel Talbot Road:

 

a)         the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that there were no issues raised at the public participation meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee with respect to the application for draft plan of condominium;

 

b)         the Approval Authority BE REQUESTED to exempt the amendment to the Vacant Land Condominium from draft approval, under Section 51 of the Planning Act, pursuant to Section 9(3) of the Condominium Act, for the residential plan of condominium, submitted by Middlesex Vacant Land Condominium Corporation No. 698;

 

c)         the Manager, Development Services and Engineering Liaison, BE REQUESTED to reassign municipal addressing for the lots fronting on Colonel Talbot Road to recognize the adjusted number of units; and,

 

d)            the Condominium Corporation BE REQUESTED to ensure owner approval of the proposed amendment to the Vacant Land Condominium Plan and declaration, in accordance with the Condominium Act, 1998;

 

it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public participation meeting associated with this matter.   (2012-D11-05)

 

 

14.

Property located at 205 Commissioners Road West

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Manager, Development Services and Planning Liaison, the following actions be taken with respect to the site plan approval application of Four Feathers Housing Co-op, for the addition of 8 units to the 25 unit apartment building under construction at the property located at 205 Commissioners Road West:

 

a)         the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that there were no issues raised at the public participation meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee with respect to the application for Site Plan approval; and,

 

b)         the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that the Municipal supports the Site Plan application for an addition of 8 units, to the 4 storey apartment building, with 25 units currently under construction;

 

it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public participation meeting associated with this matter. (2012-D25-00)

 

15.

Property located at 2332 Main Street

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Director, Land Use Planning and City Planner, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the property located at 2332 Main Street:

 

a)            the Chief Building Official BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council does not object to the request for demolition for the Priority 1 listed property located at 2332 Main Street; and,

 

b)            the Chief Building Official BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council does not wish to issue a notice of Intent to Designate this property under Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act;

 

it being noted that the London Advisory Committee on Heritage has been consulted on this request for demolition;

 

it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public participation meeting associated with this matter.    (2012-D10-00)

 

16.

Property located at 1476 Aldersbrook Road (OZ-8069)

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of 2138836 Ontario Limited, relating to the property located at 1476 Aldersbrook Road:

 

a)         the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on October 30, 2012, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Residential R5 (R5-4) Zone, which permits cluster townhouse dwellings and cluster stacked townhouse dwellings TO a Convenience Commercial Special Provision (CC6(  )) Zone, to permit medical/dental offices, clinics, offices, laboratories, pharmacies, financial institutions, personal service establishment, restaurants – take-out and restaurants – eat-in; and,

 

b)         the Site Plan Approval Authority BE REQUESTED to consider the following design issues through the site plan process:

 

i)          address this street-corner site, through measures such as siting the building close to the corner, varying the building massing/height at the corner, adding a corner entrance and/or providing overhead extensions off the building;

ii)         ensure building street frontages adequately offer a face to the street through the ample use of windows and doors, and a balanced proportion of transparent and non-transparent facade materials;

iii)         optimize pedestrian and transit access to the site by ensuring direct pedestrian connections between building entrances and the public sidewalks along Gainsborough Road and Aldersbrook Road;

iv)        balance the commercial expression of the building to separately define and distinguish the various tenants within the building, and its compatibility with the adjacent residential properties, using measures such as architectural proportioning and incorporating materials such as brick or stone;

v)         use landscaping features and paving materials to reinforce the vehicular entrance to the site and mitigate the environmental performance of the parking lot; and,

vi)        ensure the positioning of exterior lighting and illumination levels and site landscaping minimize impacts on adjacent residential properties;

 

it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public participation meeting associated with this matter.   (2012-D11-05)

 

17.

City of London Growth Projections 2011-2041

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the baseline growth projections, outlined in the final report prepared by Altus Group Economic Consulting, entitled “Employment, Population, Housing and Non-Residential Construction Projections, City of London, Ontario, 2011 Update”, BE ENDORSED for use in the 2011 Official Plan Review and the 2014 Development Charges Study;

 

it being noted that the Municipal Council, through the Investment and Economic Prosperity Committee, is aggressively working to accelerate London’s economy to reach a growth target of 2% per year; it being further noted that an average of more than 6,100 net new jobs per year will be required to achieve this growth rate target;

 

it being pointed out that the Planning and Environment Committee received the attached presentation from P. Norman, Altus Group Economic Consulting, with respect to this matter.   (2012-D18-00)

 

18.

Highland Ridge Subdivision - Phase 2 (39T-07503)

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Manager of Development Services and Planning Liaison, the following actions be taken with respect to entering into a subdivision agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and Highland Ridge Land Corp., for the subdivision of land over Part of Lot 42, Concession 1, (Geographic Township of Westminster), City of London, County of Middlesex:

 

a)         the attached Special Provisions, to be contained in a Subdivision Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and Highland Ridge Land Corp., for the  Highland Ridge Subdivision (39T-07503), BE APPROVED;

 

b)         the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute this Agreement, any amending agreements and all documents required to fulfill its conditions

 

c)         the financing for the project BE APPROVED in accordance with the “Sources of Financing Report” and the “Estimated Claims and Revenues Report” provided as Appendices “A” and “B”, respectively, to the associated staff report, dated October 15, 2012;

 

it being noted that the Civic Administration will meet with the applicant to continue to try to resolve the outstanding issues;

 

it being further noted that the Planning and Environment Committee heard a verbal presentation from C. Linton, Norquay Developments, with respect to this matter.   (2012-D26-03)

 

19.

Properties located at 8 Fairview Court and 770 Whetter Avenue (OZ-8055)

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of 1841577 Ontario Inc., relating to the properties located at 8 Fairview Court and 770 Whetter Avenue:

 

a)         the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on October 30, 2012, to amend the Official Plan to change the designation of the subject lands FROM a Low Density Residential designation TO a Multi Family Medium Density Residential designation, to permit apartment buildings with a maximum density of 75 units per hectare;

 

b)         the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on October 30, 2012, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan, as amended in part a), above), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM Residential R2 (R2-2) Zone and a Residential R1 Special Provision /Residential R2 Special Provision (R1-1 (4)/R2-1 (7)) Zone, which permits single, semi, duplex and converted dwelling maximum two units with a 15m setback from the CN railway right-of-way TO a Holding Residential R9 Special Provision (h*h-5*h-18*h-65*R9-1 (_)*H15) Zone, which permits apartment buildings with a maximum height of 15m, density of 75 units/ha, a minimum setback of 15m from the CN railway right-of-way, a 0.0m sight triangle setback from the point of intersection of the centre line of both the railway and the road, subject to holding provisions to ensure adequate provision of municipal servicing, noise and vibration mitigation measures, archaeological evaluation be completed and a development agreement, be entered into with the City, to the satisfaction of the Municipal Council and to ensure that urban design matters are addressed following public site plan review;

 

c)            a public participation meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee BE HELD             for consideration of the site plan required for this development prior to the removal of the "h-5" symbol;

 

d)            the site plan approval authority BE REQUESTED to consider the following items through the site plan approval process:

 

·         provide landscaping which:

 

·         provides for the preservation of the existing mature vegetation along westerly and northerly property line for the purpose of providing a privacy buffer to abutting properties;

·         enhances street based landscaping along existing easterly berming;

·         defines the pedestrian realm, highlights the street edge and provides a prominent pedestrian entrance off of Westminster Avenue;

·         includes plant/tree species and landscaping techniques tolerant of minimal watering; and,

·         preserves the heritage tree currently existing on the property;

 

·         provide a building which:

 

·         clearly expresses a base, middle, and top (roof) on all elevations, predominantly using masonry materials;

·         uses variations in massing, materials, scaling and architectural features to identify the east façade and entrance as the front of the building and the south façade and entrance as a service egress;

·         location of 47 underground parking spaces;

·         location of the garbage storage be located within the building;

·         all lighting be oriented and its intensity controlled so as to prevent glare on adjacent residential properties and roadways;

·         addresses drainage issues on the property;

 

e)            a development agreement BE ENTERED into with the City of London prior to the removal of the "h" symbol;

 

f)             the proponent BE DIRECTED to carry out an archaeological resource assessment of the subject site and mitigate, through avoidance or documentation, adverse impacts to any significant archaeological resources found, to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, and the City of London, to ensure that lands are assessed for the presence of archaeological resources prior to development, prior to the removal of the h-18 symbol; it being noted that no grading or other soil disturbance shall take place on the subject property prior to the issuance of a letter of clearance by the City of London Planning Division; and,

 

g)                        the owner BE DIRECTED to implement all noise and vibration attenuation measures, recommended in noise and vibration assessment reports, acceptable to the City of London, to ensure there are no land use conflicts between the adjacent arterial roads and/or rail line and the proposed residential uses, prior to the removal of the "h-65" symbol;

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received a communication, dated October 14, 2012, from J. Csoborko, by e-mail, with respect to this matter;

 

it being pointed out that at the public participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals made oral submissions in connection therewith:

 

·                     Mike Pease, IBI Group and Jerry Knoester, proponent, on behalf of the applicant – see attached presentation.

·                     Brian Smith, 20 Fairview Court – advising that he has lived in his house for five years; advising that every year, the land fills with water; advising that, when he purchased his property, he was informed that Labatt owned the subject property and that it was to remain a green area; indicating that every year, there is a pair of deers who have fawns on the property; advising that the building will start being constructed at 6 or 7 a.m. and work will continue until 8:00 p.m.; advising that he has young children; and enquiring as to how many people would like this in their backyard when they were expecting it to remain green space.

·                     Heather Picton, 16 Fairview Court – advising that there is a 15 meter buffer zone between the subject property and the properties on Fairview Avenue, while the residents on Fairview Court are stuck with a 6 meter buffer; and indicating that they get stuck with the parking garage and the lights for the parking garage.

·                     Alex Pieterson, 793 Fleet Street – advising that the pictures of the streetscape are great, but there is no context to the size of the buildings; advising that the proposed 2½ storey apartment building is twice the building height of the other residences in the neighbourhood; advising that this is going to be a 5 storey building and will dominate the area; expressing concern with the size of the proposed building; requesting that something more in context with the neighbourhood be built instead; indicating that, at the backyard of the building, the houses are 1½ storeys in height; advising that this will create a big impact; advising that the land slopes northward; advising that the largest structure in the area is the church spire; advising that traffic is gridlocked at 4:30 p.m.; noting that he can sit at the stop sign for 5 to 15 minutes; advising that the developer mentioned that people would walk to the hospital; however, people will be using their cars; indicating that this project might be better to be built in SoHo; and enquiring if there can be a land swap.

·                     Gary House, 107 Alexandra Street – enquiring as to what guarantees they have that there will not be an increase in water in their basements; and advising that, with the volume of traffic, there is the need for a crossing guard in order to cross Adelaide Street.

·                     Jessica Csoborko, 130 Fairview Avenue – advising that she works at the hospital and walks to work; advising that it is very busy at the crosswalk; indicating that no one stops at the stop signs; indicating that her driveway is at the side of her property and she can’t get out of her driveway now; and indicating that, with the extra units, no one will be able to get out of their driveways.

·                     Jeff Briggs, 124 Fairview Avenue – advising that he is almost 90 years old; indicating that the project will never be what the developers say it will be; indicating that people are not going to pay $1,000/ month rent when there are heavy trains running beside their property; indicating that Westminster Avenue is not Wellington Road, but it is getting close to it; indicating that the developer mentioned renting to hospital interns; noting that interns are only at the hospital for a few months; advising that people of high intelligence don’t pay other people for a roof over their head; asking if the City will provide guarantees that everything the developer says he will do will be done; and advising that the developer did not speak to him or any of his neighbours about the proposed development.

·                     James, 116 Fairview Avenue – expressing concerns relating to lighting and noise pollution, the volume of traffic and the loss of trees and wildlife on the property; and asking for guarantees that the developer will build what they say they will build.

·                     24 Fairview Court – advising that Labatt gave the City the property for $1.00 to remain as parkland; advising that there is a tree on the property as old as Confederation; advising that his mother has lived on her property for 60 years; and advising that the proposal will decrease her property values.

·                     Carol Anne Séguin, 4 Fairview Court – expressing concern with the property line between the subject property and her property; advising that she has maintained the property with the assistance of a neighbor; indicating that the potential easement could be a threat to the 250-300 year old oak tree on the subject property; noting that she has applied to have the 250-300 year old oak tree designated a “heritage” tree; advising that she circulated approximately 250 flyers to inform her neighbours of the proposal; enquiring as to why they were not informed of the development proposals; indicating that, from the delivery of the flyers, she has had people call her from as far away as Bond Street; indicating that her phone is ringing off the hook; indicating that people should know what the elected officials are doing; and, she would like to know that the Councillors and the Mayor stand for the people and the environment.  (Secretary’s Note:  A petition signed by approximately 78 individuals is on file in the City Clerk’s Office).

·                     Robert Séguin, 4 Fairview Court – indicating that he measured the old growth trees in the area; noting that there is a tree over 150 years old; hoping for a positive outcome on an easement for his property or he will lose his driveway; advising that there is a historic creek on the property that runs almost beside the former Angelo’s property; indicating that no one has dealt with the water table issues; advising that with the inclusion of an underground parking garage, people are going to have more water in their basements; indicating that sand has been dumped on the lands for about 30 to 60 days and the sand is wet from the creek running through the property; and advising that the shadow mapping is insufficient and that 10 properties won’t have sun until 8:30 a.m.

·                     Joyce Zimmer, 118 Fairview Avenue - enquiring where the children are going to play.     (2012-D11-06)

 

20.

Southwest Area Secondary Plan (O-7609)

 



Recommendation:  That, the Civic Administration BE ASKED to prepare a report addressing questions presented at the public participation meeting, at a special meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee to be held on Wednesday, October 24, 2012 at 1:00 p.m.;

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received the following communications:

 

·                     a communication, dated October 9, 2012, from J. MacDonald, Executive Director, Downtown London, R.T. Usher, Board Chair, London Downtown Business Association and J. Adams, Board Chair, MainStreet London;

·                     a communication, dated October 12, 2012, from D. Young, Senior Planner and J. Paul, Managing Principal, Stantec Consulting Ltd.;

·                     a communication from E. Saulesleja, GSP Group Inc.;

·                     a communication, dated October 11, 2012, from E. Bustard, 6654 Beattie Street;

·                     a communication from A. Soufan, President, York Developments;

·                     communications, dated October 12, 2012, from C. Wiebe, MHBC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture;

·                     a communication, dated October 14, 2012, from S. Stapleton, Vice-President, Auburn Developments;

·                     a communication from T. Boyes, 6931 James Street;

·                     a communication, dated October 12, from R.-L. Gillis, Shaver-Brockley Coalition;

·                     a communication, dated October 15, 2012, from J. Kennedy, London Development Institute;

·                     a communication, dated October 12, 2012, from K. Patpatia, Flexion Properties Inc., 1787996 Ontario Inc. and J. Manocha;

·                     a communication, dated October 15, 2012, from J. Chisholm, President, New Urban Retail Inc.; and,

·                     a communication from T. Brown, West Talbot Landowners Association;

 

it being pointed out that at the public participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals made oral submissions in connection therewith:

 

·                     Jeanette MacDonald, Downtown London – advising that the City’s investment in the Downtown area is paying off; advising that there are now 43,000 residents living in the Downtown; noting that this represents 9% of property taxes; indicating that they are not opposing the SWAP; requesting that the office space be protected; noting that this Plan allows 200,000 square feet; and advising that any more office space availability will impact the Downtown.

·                     C. Friar, Lambeth – requesting that natural heritage areas be protected; indicating that they have had requests to increase their density and have been asked to remove their woodlot; and indicating that the volume of traffic will increase.

·                     Jeff, 1787996 Ontario Inc., 3405 Dingman Drive, 3226 and 3356 Westminster Drive – indicating that he likes the SWAP; expressing appreciation to the Civic Administration for their efforts with respect to this Plan; indicating that, historically, everything has been built along the Highway 401 corridor; advising that their properties have been downsized from M-1 and M-2 Zones; advising that he has some Open Space zoning on his properties and enquiring why the Open Space zone is being applied as he has never seen anyone on his properties; and advising that the land is vital to future growth.

·                     Gina Brummit, on behalf of Farhi Holdings Corporation – advising that the 200,000 square feet of office space being permitted in the Plan is a huge concern to the Downtown; asking that the Plan be postponed until revitalization is realized; advising that Mr. S. Farhi, Farhi Holdings Corporation, owns land in the SWAP and he would like to develop the land in the shorter term, not wait for 20 years; and advising that when Mr. Farhi approached staff about his plans, he was advised to wait until next year when ReThink London is completed.

·                     Tim Brown, on behalf of the West Talbot Landowners – reiterating his comments from his submission on the Added Agenda.

·                     David Gillis, 2753 Dingman Drive, on behalf of the Shaver-Brockley Coalition – advising that the residents in the Shaver-Brockley area have strong feelings on the use of the Light Industrial Zone; advising that Roma-Lynn Gillis submitted a communication to the Planning and Environment Committee Added Agenda, item 20 i); requesting that a South Central Area Study be conducted before any other Light Industrial Zoning be undertaken; and indicating that they are looking for compassion.

·                     Allan Tipping, 2809 Dingman Drive – advising that he owns three acres of land; indicating that an Industrial Zone is recommended beside his property; advising that this will landlock his property; indicating that no one is going to want to live there; advising that his property was originally located in the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), but with the stroke of a pen, his property is outside the UGB; indicating that the SWAP area is too large; advising that Brockley-Shaver has been in an urban stalemate for years; enquiring as to where the hotels and casinos are going to be built; requesting that the Industrial Zone be moved outside of the City; indicating that there will be odour issues all over the City; indicating that the Area Plan is too premature; noting that the proposed new overpass may change the City; advising that their hamlet has a public school and high school; advising that there is a creek in the area that needs to be protected; and advising that the people living near Lambeth are going to get the run-off.

·                     Gary Brown, 35A – 59 Ridout Street – requesting that nature be left for everyone to enjoy; advising that water and wastewater must be pumped further; suggesting that the land be used more efficiently; advising that the zero percent tax increase puts the burden onto the next Municipal Council; indicating that he has been to several ReThink London events;  indicating that London should be a city of people for people; indicating that spreading out London is unnecessary; and advising that Peter Mansbridge indicated that you should not ask for people’s comments and then ignore them.

·                     Geoffrey Faul, on behalf of the Lambeth Community Association – see attached communication.

·                     James Street – advising that “vision” and “imagination” are great words; advising that there is disconnect between the Plan and the execution of the Plan; and requesting a balanced approach for the area.

·                     151 Pine Valley Boulevard – advising that the cloverleaf at Wonderland and Highway 402 is an improvement; encouraging the Planning Division to straighten the boundary line to include the cloverleaf; and noting that all other boundaries are straight.

·                     Jim Kennedy, President, London Development Institute, on behalf of the London Chamber of Commerce, the London Development Institute and the Urban League of London – indicating that they did not receive the information until late last week; and asking for more time to review the Plan.

·                     Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning – advising that she has several communications on the Added Agenda; advising that the property located on the southeast corner of Southdale Road and Bostwick Road is 50 acres, zoned medium density residential; requesting that the property be zoned higher density residential; indicating that on the other side of Wonderland Road corridor, no new high density sites are proposed; indicating that there is a shortfall of high density zoning; recommending a combination of medium and high density; and requesting this property be rezoned to high density; advising that the second parcel consists of 13 acres adjacent to the hydro corridor; noting that it is the former Wally World site; advising that this property has been purchased by the Muslim Association of Canada and advising that they would like to build a mosque and residences on the property; advising that they are asking the property be zoned high density residential; and indicating that this is a narrow strip of land.

·                     Jim Harbell, Lawyer, York Developments – advising that York Developments owns property west of Wonderland Road, north of Wharncliffe Road; commending the Civic Administration for this complicated enterprise; advising that he has four specific points he would like to raise; indicating that his client has filed a complete application that he hopes will be before the Committee shortly; expressing concern on the numerical limit on the retail; requesting that there not be a number at all; advising that using twenty-five percent of building form and 75 percent of lands for parking creates debate; advising that, with the Wonderland Road reconstruction, there is a 57 metre wide approach to the arterial gateway; requesting that the numbers be taken out and the vision put in; advising that the number of lanes required is acceptable; advising that numbers belong in the implementation plan; advising that, with respect to the shadow road network, it is appropriate 20 to 30 years from now; advising that it looks like it is required; advising that lenders will have financial difficulties; recommending that the vision be put in place; advising that, with respect to the 30 metre development buffers on either side of natural features, the scientific approach be used; and advising that York Developments and MHBC Planning have submitted letters with respect to this matter; and advising that he is not suggesting a delay of the Plan.

 

·                     Dan Young, Stantec Consulting, on behalf of Z Group and the Aarts family – advising that the Z Group owns 80 acres in the proposed Plan; indicating that they are satisfied, for the most part; expressing concern with the medium density designation on Wharncliffe Road; advising that the Aarts family owns property located at 17 and 31 Exeter Road; noting that there are a mix of uses on this site; expressing disappointment with the low density designation; advising that his clients were hoping for a  mixed use; advising that his clients wanted to create a small business park, with a 24 hour population basis and an auto oriented commercial zone in the south end of the property; and requesting that the property be rezoned high density residential.

·                     Sergio Pompilii, Sergio E. Pompilii & Associates - see attached presentation.

·                     Steven Zakem, on behalf of Sifton Properties Limited – advising that Elizabeth Housen-McCauly was the principal author of the Wellington Road corridor study when she worked for the City; advising that the Planners today are doing what the previous Planners did; expressing concern that the implementation has not gone far enough; and enquiring as to what plan will result in what you see on Wellington Road.

·                     Bob Stratford, on behalf of Sifton Properties Limited – advising that it will cost $90 million to service the Wonderland Road corridor; indicating that the full build out is intended to recover the costs; indicating that he looked at the revenue generation; noting that in one zone, the revenues are $19 million; advising that the commercial uptake is part of the 15 year plan; noting that the City will be carrying large debt burdens for a long time; indicating that he cannot see where the development revenue comes from to pay for the costs; enquiring as to whether or not this could stifle growth elsewhere; advising that there are no soft costs; noting that he is not sure whether or not the costs will offset the balance; advising that there will be $1.2 million in sanitary costs; requesting that further analysis of the costs be done; requesting that the Plan be sent back; advising that this new version is a fundamental departure from earlier versions; indicating that the Plan was only released six days ago; advising that this will not result in a stunning approach to the City; advising that there is additional pressure for commercial lands; advising that this is a new approach, not a refinement of the previous approach; indicating that the Official Plan is a legal document; and requesting that the Plan be referred to the Civic Administration for full costs and a proposed phasing plan.

·                     Michael Hughes, New Urban Retail – see attached presentation.

·                     David Wood, on behalf of Green Hills and Smart!Centres – see attached presentation.

·                     Jeff Thomas, Development Engineering – advising that he has prepared detailed drawings and prepared estimated servicing costs; noting that the stormwater management facility is on their lands; and requesting that the City install the ultimate servicing from Dingman Drive to Wonderland Road.

·                     Laverne Kirkness, Kirkness Consulting on behalf of the Johnstone family – see attached communication.

·                     Richard Zelinka, Zelinka Priamo Ltd. – advising that he was unable to receive solid direction from his clients as the Plan was released a few days before this meeting; reiterating comments from the Auburn Developments communication on the Added Agenda relating to this matter; requesting that the validity of the SWAP be tested during a five year process; advising that the policies created for the southwest area should be tested city-wide; advising that the urban design policies are very prescriptive, and are far from allowing for distinctive character; advising that the policies should be placed into guidelines and not be as prescriptive; advising that their previous comments have not been incorporated into this version of the SWAP; indicating that there will be a further submission on behalf of his clients.    (2012-D11-09/2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21.

Stanton Drain

 

Recommendation:  That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to undertake the appropriate actions to engage a licensed trapper to relocate the beavers in the Stanton Drain to Munsee-Delaware First Nation’s lands, remove the beaver dam as it is creating flooding conditions, impacting the safety of people and property within the Stanton Drain servicing area, compromising the operation of water resources/SWM infrastructure and is interfering with the construction of the Stanton Drain remediation works and Hyde Park SWM Facility #4:

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received the following communications:

 

·                     a communication, dated October 4, 2012, from F. Morrison and A.M. Valastro, by e-mail;

·                     a communication, dated October 14, 2012, from A. Papmehl, by e-mail;

·                     a communication, dated October 14, 2012, from W. Lyons, 36 – 1511 Aldersbrook Road; and,

·                     a communication from V. Van Linden, 431 Ridgewood Crescent;

 

it being pointed out that the Planning and Environment Committee heard verbal presentations from the following:

 

·                     A.M. Valastro;

·                     F. Morrison;

·                     P. Harris, on behalf of D. Harris;

·                     J. Larivee;

·                     S. Rans, Vice-Chair, Animal Welfare Advisory Committee;

·                     V. Van Linden; and,

·                     L. White and B. MacKay – see attached presentation.   (2012-W05-00)

 

IV.

ITEMS FOR DIRECTION

 

None.

 

V.

DEFERRED MATTERS/ADDITIONAL BUSINESS

 

None.

 

VI.

ADJOURNMENT

 

The meeting adjourned at 2:09 a.m.

 

No Item Selected