|
Recommendation:
a)
on
the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with
respect to the application of City of London, relating to the property
located at 1900 Gore Road, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff
report dated March 4, 2014, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to
be held on March 18, 2014, to amend Schedule ‘B-1’ of the Official Plan to
DELETE Unevaluated Vegetation Patch 04007;
b)
on
the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with
respect to the application of City of London, relating to the property
located at 1473 Dundas Street, 632 Hale Street, 646 Hale Street and 652 Hale
Street, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated March 4,
2014, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on March 18,
2014, to amend Schedule ‘B-1’ of the Official Plan to DELETE a portion of Unevaluated
Vegetation Patch 04017;
c)
on
the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with
respect to the application of City of London, relating to the property
located at 2072 Dundas Street and 2080 Dundas Street, the proposed by-law, as
appended to the staff report dated March 4, 2014, BE INTRODUCED at the
Municipal Council meeting to be held on March 18, 2014, to amend Schedule
‘B-1’ of the Official Plan to DELETE Unevaluated Vegetation Patch 04022;
d)
on
the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with
respect to the application of City of London, relating to the property
located at 2079 Huron Street, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff
report dated March 4, 2014, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to
be held on March 18, 2014, to amend Schedule ‘B-1’ of the Official Plan to
DELETE Unevaluated Vegetation Patch 08023;
e)
on
the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with
respect to the application of City of London, relating to the property located
at 1010 Wilton Grove Road and 1030 Wilton Grove Road, the proposed by-law, as
appended to the staff report dated March 4, 2014, BE INTRODUCED at the
Municipal Council meeting to be held on March 18, 2014, to amend Schedule
‘B-1’ of the Official Plan to DELETE Unevaluated Vegetation Patch 10131;
f)
on
the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with
respect to the application of City of London, relating to the property
located at 15790 Robins Hill Road and 15890 Robins Hill Road, the proposed
by-law, as appended to the staff report dated March 4, 2014, BE INTRODUCED at
the Municipal Council meeting to be held on March 18, 2014, to amend Schedule
‘B-1’ of the Official Plan to DELETE the Unevaluated Vegetation Patch on the
subject site;
g)
on
the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with
respect to the application of City of London, relating to the properties
located at 108 Exeter Road, 146 Exeter Road, 3680 Wonderland Road South, 234
Exeter Road, 2448
Dundas Street, 1750 Crumlin Side Road, 2835 Sunningdale
Road East and 2326 Fanshawe Park Road East, 3696 Scotland Drive, 3703
Westminster Drive, 3777 Westminster Drive, 7236 Colonel Talbot Road, 7292
Colonel Talbot Road, 7340 Colonel Talbot Road and 7356 Colonel Talbot Rd,
6473 Orr Drive, 6526 Southminster Bourne, 2574 Colonel Talbot and 952 Southdale Road
West, no further action BE TAKEN given that the vegetation patches
contained on these lands are either under appeal before the Ontario Municipal
Board as part of the South West Area Plan Secondary Plan or protected under
the Tree Conservation By-law by virtue of their Official Plan designation;
h)
on
the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with
respect to the application of City of London, relating to the properties
located at 5110
White Oak Road, 955 Green Valley Road, 1001 Green Valley Road, 1015 Green
Valley Road, 1025 Green Valley Road, 3959 Commerce Road, 1400 Global Drive,
1484 Wilton Grove Road, 1510 Wilton Grove Road and 1520 Wilton Grove Road,
2496 Dundas Street and 2550 Dundas Street BE REFERRED to Staff for additional
public circulation and report back to the Planning and Environment Committee
with a recommendation to introduce a by-law that will identify and protect
significant natural heritage features where they exist and remove the natural
heritage designation where no significant features have been identified; and,
i)
on
the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with
respect to the application of City of London, relating to the properties
located at 533
Industrial Road, 2021 Oxford Street, 1985 Gore Road, 1994 River Road, 2150
River Road, 2220 River Road, 2234 Scanlan Street, 1100 Green Valley Road,
1160 Green Valley Road, 1180 Green Valley Road, 1205 Green Valley Road; 1010
Clarke Road, 1020 Clarke Road, 1030 Clarke Road and 1975 Cheapside Street, no
further action BE TAKEN given the complexity of these lands which
facilitate industrial expansion opportunities that had been previously
permitted by Council by way of land use designation and zoning permission;
it being pointed out that at the public
participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals
made oral submissions in connection therewith:
·
Sandy
Levin, 59 Longbow Road – speaking to staff recommendations 6,7 and 9; noting
that clauses 1 to 5, inclusive, and clause 8 make good sense; indicating that
he has had some discussion with staff relating to the patch located at 15890
Robins Hill Road (recommendation 6); advising that, according to the map that
he has, there is a patch number on the property; indicating that when this
was circulated, the former City Ecologist, during her desktop exercise, had
suggested that this part of the site should be designated as Environmental
Review; indicating that he is not clear as to why the staff recommendation is
to delete it; understanding that staff might have an answer to this enquiry;
noting that the recommendation for clause 6 is on page 181 of the Agenda and the
recommendation for clause 7 is on page 179 of the Agenda; indicating that, in
clause 7 there are a couple of patches, that, in the documentation and
circulation, suggested that not all of the patches are already protected
through being in either Open Space or Environmental Review; indicating that
he is specifically referencing Patch 08001 in the Sunningdale Road/Fanshawe
Park Road area; advising that part of the land was still designated
Agricultural, including a locally significant wetland, which was also marked
in the circulation; advising that it is not clear that if you pass what is in
clause 7 now, whether that wetland is going to be properly protected;
expressing similar concerns with Patch 11038, on parts of the properties
located at 7236 and 7292 Colonel Talbot Road; noting that it is outside of
the Urban Growth Boundary, but not all of it is zoned Environmental Review;
suggesting that you may want to refer those pieces back as part of the
Category 3 review that staff is going to undertake; reiterating that he alerted
staff to his concerns yesterday, but he does not know if they have had a
chance to look at them yet; indicating that the real dilemma that the
Municipal Council has is with staff recommendation 9, the complex patches;
noting that these are Category 4 on Planning and Environment Committee Agenda
Page 185; indicating that these are really interesting situations where you
have had, over a number of years, even with changes in ownership, really good
stewards of the land; advising that the owners have protected these areas,
two of which have significant woodlands as well as significant stream
corridors; reiterating that the concern is, and this has happened with three
of the patches, are being recommended for deletion because they have been
clear cut; noting that they have been clear cut legally because they do not
have protection, similar to what recently happened on Teeple Terrace; indicating
that the challenge is, how do you protect them in the interim because, in
most cases, their designated as Light Industrial or General Industrial;
advising that there is nothing in the Tree Conservation By-law or the Site
Alteration By-law to protect them in the interim; noting that staff is
working on these By-laws; advising that it would be nice to get some undertaking
that these good stewards will continue to be good stewards until such time as
something happens on the land; indicating that the concern is that there is
no requirement for any environmental impact studies to be done on these sites,
if they were to be developed, because there designation is already there;
indicating that the Municipal Council needs to consider that there is now
going to be an expectation that people are going to be surprised if a
woodland gets taken down; commenting that nobody likes surprises over the age
of about three or four; advising that he is unsure how the Municipal Council
is going to resolve this dilemma, other than taking no action today; and,
expressing that it is really important to London’s reputation as the Forest City.
·
Alan
R. Patton, Patton Cormier & Associates, on behalf of Great Lakes Copper,
formerly known as Wolverine Tube (1975 Cheapside Street, 1010, 1020, 1030
Clarke Road), Clean Harbors (2234 Scanlon Street) and Mike Ansari In Trust
(1985 Gore Road) – addressing paragraph 9 on page 174 of the Agenda; advising
that there is no dilemma for his clients, there is nothing wrong; however,
there is an aberration; indicating that the property located at 1985 Gore
Road is designated Industrial, is zoned Industrial and has a draft plan of
subdivision for industrial users; advising that what is proposed by staff
will remove significant portions of the industrial subdivision; pointing out
Scanlon Street on the map provided at the meeting; indicating that the
subdivision is intended to go through the property and come out onto Gore
Road; advising that everything in a large area would be lost to designated,
zoned, boundary serviced industrial land with a draft plan of subdivision on
it that is inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement; indicating that
the next property is located at 2334 Scanlon Street which is designated
Industrial, zoned Industrial and awaiting the continuation of Industrial
development in this area; directly south of Kaiser Aluminum, directly abutting
the Ansari industrial subdivision and immediately adjacent to Kaiper;
indicating that, at the site plan stage, if it is appropriate to have that as
a landscaped area as part of the industrial site plan, that would be fair,
but it is not fair to have that put into the designation with increased
setbacks into the industrial land; indicating that the property located at
1975 Cheapside Street is the subject of three or four different municipal
numbers; (showing the location of Clarke Road and the extension of Cheapside
Street on the map provided at the meeting); advising that his client had a
conditional agreement of purchase and sale on this property to sell it to and
industrial user, there was notification of this pending proposal and the
potential purchaser of the industrial land walked away; indicating that Great
Lakes Copper still has a desire to either sell this for industrial purposes
or expand upon it; indicating that the green area outlined on the map
provided at the meeting would, for all intents and purposes, gut that
industrial land that is designated, zoned and fully serviced; advising that
he wrote the attached communication on December 9, 2013, that sites
the Provincial Policy Statement and the Official Plan; indicating that the
removal of these lands from industrial designation and the removal of
Industrial zoning on serviced or serviceable land is totally inconsistent
with the Provincial Policy Statement; advising that these are employment
lands and they are totally inconsistent with many policies of your Official
Plan; understanding Mr. Levin to request that recommendation #9 be referred
back and requesting that #9 not be referred back and that it proceed to be
deleted by the action of the Municipal Council; and, reiterating that his
position, on behalf of all of his clients, could not be more equivocal, that
they want that to remain and no action be taken to down designate or down
zone the lands.
·
Arnon
Kaplansky, 599 Maitland Street – enquiring as to public participation meeting
seating.
·
Anna
Maria Valastro, 1-133 John Street – advising that what was not presented
today but is in the online report is that the Ministry of Natural Resources
and the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority have both raised serious
concerns regarding the deregulation of these patches; noting that these
concerns were not addressed by city staff and not presented here tonight; indicating
that she is not sure how these decisions can be made if they are just desktop
evaluations; advising that a proper evaluation is a three season evaluation; noting
that there is a good reason for this; advising that nothing should go forward
until a proper evaluation is done in a professional manner; indicating that
you cannot ignore your partner agencies; advising that, if the partner agencies
have raised concerns, none of their concerns are addressed in the report that
she has read and she would like more information on this; indicating that the
other item not spoken about is that all of the patches that you want to
de-regulate or have no identity, are all attached to greener spaces; noting
that one is a playground, one is farmland and some are not far from the
River; advising that this is the opportunity, in the planning process, to decide
on wildlife corridors because they enrich our city; indicating that they may
not be hiring 50 to 100 people to work in an assembly plant but they generate
other types of wealth, including employment wealth because these casual
recreational areas do employ other types of employment; noting that it may not
be Industrial but other types that cater to these leisurely individuals; advising
that she feels very resentful that people are told that we have to live in
boxes in the sky, that residential areas have to go up into the clouds so
that people are denied backyards and gardens; indicating that people in the industrial
community can afford to bring lawyers to a meeting and build sprawling empty
boxes, yet they cannot build upwards; indicating that it is her
understanding, from a comment the lawyer made earlier in the meeting, is that
they want to sell their property and make some money from it; noting that
that is not necessarily employable; advising that there should be a criteria
where industry is held to the same standards as people, where they may have to
build up to accommodate their facilities just like people have to build up;
reiterating that people have to give up backyards and trees where residential
high rises are built right to the perimeter of sidewalks, they don’t have
green rooftops; noting that people are being devoid of everything that is
soothing; advising that she believes that the evaluation has to be done here
to relate to the proximity of other green spaces to allow every neighborhood to
have a green space of its own so there is no need to get on the bus or take
their car and drive 5 kms to get to a dog park; reiterating that, during the planning
stage, you need to determine wildlife corridors; and, reiterating that the
city staff need to address the concerns raised by the Ministry of Natural
Resources and the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority, in a public
manner so that everyone can understand what is happening.
·
Mark
Snowsell, Land Use Regulations Officer, Upper Thames River Conservation
Authority (UTRCA) – advising that this has been a very comprehensive exercise
and the UTRCA has taken a large amount of time to review the original
proposals; giving credit to City of London staff for the effort that they put
in to try to distill a rather large collection of properties and patches into
something that the Committee can work their way through; indicating that the
UTRCA Land Use Planner provided comments prior to Christmas; advising that
all of the addresses and patches have been put into various categories;
noting that this helps put them into situations where either the proposals
for removal can come forward or, in the case of the Category 4 properties and
patches, can be considered later given their complexity; advising that, for
Category 4 properties and patches, we certainly share the comments that have
been provided already; however, for those properties and patches that have
been identified by the Planner, in his presentation, the UTRCA had the
opportunity to review specifics with staff as recently as yesterday to ensure
that what was coming forward today was clarified, compared to what might have
been proposed originally; advising that the UTRCA does not have any specific
concerns with the properties and patches that have been highlighted through
the presentation; and, understanding that there will be a chance for the
UTRCA to review the ones that are being recommended for further discussion. (2014-D14)
|