Planning and Environment Committee

<A>

8TH REPORT OF THE

Planning and Environment Committee

meeting held on March 26, 2012, commencing at 4:08 PM, in the Council Chambers, Second Floor, London City Hall.

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

ABSENT: Councillor J.B. Swan.

ALSO PRESENT: Mayor J. F. Fontana, Councillors J.L. Baechler and M. Brown, G. Barrett, S. Bellaire, J. Braam, A. Dunbar, M. Elmadhoon, J. M. Fleming, S. Galloway, B. Henry, G. Kotsifas, B. Krichker, J. Leunissen, I. Listar, A. MacLean, L. McDougall, D. Menard, C. Parker, J. Ramsay, A. Riley, C. Saunders, J. Shaughnessy, C. Smith, J. Smout, M. Tomazincic and J. Yanchula.

I.	DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

1.	No pecuniary interests are disclosed

II.

CONSENT ITEMS

2.	3rd and 4th Reports of the Advisory Committee on the Environment

Recommendation: That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 3rd and 4th Reports of the Advisory Committee on the Environment from their meetings held on February 1 and March 7, 2012:

a) the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to provide the Advisory Committee on the Environment (ACE) with continued updates with respect to the Highbury Planning Initiative; it being noted the ACE reviewed and received the status report and an updated report will be presented at its March meeting;

b) that clauses 2 through 5, inclusive, of the 3rd Report of the ACE, BE RECEIVED; and,

d) that clauses 1 through 8, inclusive, of the 4th Report of the ACE, BE RECEIVED.

3.	3rd and 4th Reports of the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee

Recommendation: The following actions be taken with respect to the 3rd and 4th Reports of the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee (EEPAC) from their meetings held on February 16 and March 15, 2012:

a) that clauses 1 through 8, inclusive, of the 3rd Report of the EEPAC, BE RECEIVED; and,

b) that clauses 1 through 9, inclusive, of the 4th Report of the EEPAC, BE RECEIVED.

4.	Hyde Park Road Commercial Review Official Plan and Zoning Review - 1331-1369 and 1364-1420 Hyde Park Road

Recommendation: That, notwithstanding the recommendation of the Director of Land Use Planning and City Planner, the request to amend the Official Plan land use designation and Zoning By-law for lands located at 1331-1369 and 1364-1420 Hyde Park Road BE REFERRED to the April 16, 2012 Planning and Environment Committee (PEC) meeting to permit an opportunity for the Hyde Park Community Association, the Civic Administration and the applicant to further discuss the proposal and to report back to the PEC with the results of the discussion. (2012-D11-04/D26-03)

Properties located at 1235, 1237, 1245, 1247 and 1253 Richmond Street (Z-7856)

Recommendation: That, the decision of the Ontario Municipal Board relating to the appeals submitted by David Langill (on behalf of W.B.H. Somerset, London Inc.), Brad Bain (on behalf of Linda Brand), and John McNair (on behalf of Timbercreek Asset Management Inc and Homestead Land Holdings Ltd), relating to an application for an amendment to the Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, which was passed by the Municipal Council, respecting properties located at 1235, 1237, 1245, 1247, and 1253 Richmond Street, BE RECEIVED. (2012-D11-08)

6.	London Psychiatric Hospital Secondary Plan - Notice of Appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (O-7668)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director, Land Use Planning and City Planner, the appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board, submitted by Robert Malpass, President of the Fairmont Lawn Bowling Club, on behalf of the Fairmont Lawn Bowling Club, relating to Official Plan Application No. O-7668 respecting the London Psychiatric Hospital Secondary Plan described as 840 and 850 Highbury Avenue North and 1414 and 1340 Dundas Street and lands without municipal address east of 850 Highbury Avenue North and bounded by the Canadian Pacific and Canadian National Railways, BE RECEIVED. (2012-D11-05)

7.	Candidate Approval for the Urban Design Peer Review Panel

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director of Land Use Planning and City Planner, the following candidates BE APPROVED for the positions listed below on the Urban Design Peer Review Panel:

a) Mike Barker – Landscape Architect;

b) Gerald Gallacher – Architect; and,

c) Michael McLean – Architect. (2012-G03-00)

8.	Property located at 280 Callaway Drive (H-7977)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Senior Planner, Development Services Planning, based on the application of Domus Developments (London) Inc. relating to the property located at 280 Callaway Drive, the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the 280 Callaway Drive FROM a Holding Residential R4/R6 Special Provision (h-5 h-99 h-100 R4-3/R6-5(23)) Zone TO a Residential R4/R6 Special Provision (R4-3/R6-5(23)) Zone, to remove the h-5, h-99 and h-100 holding provisions from these lands. (2012-D11-07)

9.	Annual Report on Building Permit Fees

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director of Building Controls, the report dated March 26, 2012, relating to 2011 building permit fees collected and the costs of the administration and enforcement of the Building Code Act and regulations, BE RECEIVED; it being noted that the Civic Administration will report to the Planning and Environment Committee in the Spring of 2012 regarding building permit fees and any adjustments that may be warranted. (2012-D06-00)

10.	Hickory Heights Subdivision (39T-06510)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Senior Planner, Development Services Planning, the following actions be taken with respect to entering into a subdivision agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and Drewlo Holdings Inc., for the subdivisions of land, over Part of Lot 21, Registrar’s Compiled Plan No. 1028, (Geographic Township of London), City of London, County of Middlesex, situated on the east side of Wonderland Road North, north of Fanshawe Park Road West, municipally referred to as 1812 Wonderland Road North:

a) the attached, revised, Special Provisions to be contained in a Subdivision Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and Drewlo Holdings Inc. for the Hickory Heights Subdivision (39T-06510) BE APPROVED;

b) the financing for this project BE APPROVED in accordance with the “Sources of Financing Report” provided as Appendix ‘A’ to the associated staff report, dated March 26, 2012;

c) the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute the subject Subdivision Agreement, any amending agreements and all documents required to fulfill its conditions; and,

d) the financing for the project BE APPROVED in accordance with the “Estimated Claims and Revenues Report” provided as Appendix ‘B’ to the associated staff report, dated March 26, 2012. (2012-D26-02)

11.	Portion of 530 Sunningdale Road East - Phase Two of Uplands North Subdivision (H-8025)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Senior Planner, Development Services Planning, based on the application of 2047790 Ontario Ltd (Z Group) relating to a portion of the property located at 530 Sunningdale Road East, the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject lands FROM a Holding Residential R1 (h.R1-2) Zone; a holding Residential R1 (h.R1-3) Zone; and a holding R1 Special Provision (h.R1-3(7)) Zone TO a Residential R1 (R1-2) Zone; a Residential R1 (R1-3) Zone; and Residential R1 Special Provision (R1-3(7)) Zone to remove the “h” holding provision. (2012-D26-06)

III.

SCHEDULED ITEMS

12.	4th Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage

Recommendation: That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 4th Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage from its meeting held on March 14, 2012:

a) Stewardship Sub-Committee meeting on February 29, 2012:

i) the Heritage Planner BE ASKED to forward the attached Statement of Significance, for the property located at 498 Dufferin Avenue, to the owner for signature;

ii) a London Built Heritage Resources Evaluation BE COMPLETED for the application submitted by Romlex International Inc. for the property located at 203 Sherwood Avenue; and,

iii) the listed property located at 1451 Wharncliffe Road South BE EXAMINED as it is in a state of significant deterioration;

b) the Heritage Alteration Permit application of D. Russell, requesting permission for alterations to the exterior doors and windows to the designated heritage property located at 531 Colborne Street BE APPROVED; it being noted that the Heritage Planner has reviewed the proposed changes and has advised that the impact of such alteration on the heritage features of the property, identified in the Reasons for Designation is negligible;

c) the Heritage Alteration Permit application of A. Mitchell & A. Schneider, requesting permission for a roof alteration to the designated heritage property located at 845 Dufferin Avenue BE APPROVED; it being noted that the Heritage Planner has reviewed the proposed changes and has advised that the impact of such alteration on the heritage features of the property identified in the Reasons for Designation is negligible; it being also noted that the London Advisory Committee on Heritage heard verbal presentations from A. Mitchell and A. Schneider, with respect to this matter;

d) the Civic Administration BE ADVISED that the London Advisory Committee on Heritage (LACH) supports the Downtown Heritage Conservation District Plan; it being noted that the LACH received the Downtown London Heritage Conservation District Plan, March 2012, and heard a verbal presentation from C. Parker, Senior Planner, with respect to this matter;

e) 1576 Richmond Street North:

i) the residence located at 1576 Richmond Street North BE ADDED to the Inventory of Heritage Resources, as a Priority 1 listing;

ii) the Heritage Planner BE ASKED to advise the property owner of the addition of the property on the Inventory of Heritage Resources; and,

iii) the communication, dated March 23, 2012 from M. Doornsbosch, Zelinka Priamo Ltd. BE RECEIVED; and,

f) that clauses 6 through 18, inclusive, BE RECEIVED;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee heard a verbal presentation from Joe O’Neil, Acting Chair, LACH, with respect to these matters.

13.	2nd Report of the Trees and Forests Advisory Committee

Recommendation: The following actions be taken with respect to the 2nd Report of the Trees and Forests Advisory Committee (TFAC) from its meeting held on February 22, 2012:

a) Forestry Services Strategic Review Recommendations Timetable – January, 2012:

i) the Division Manager of Transportation and Roadside Operations BE INVITED to a future meeting of the Trees and Forests Advisory Committee (TFAC) to provide an update related to the current process and information system related to the recommendations of the Forestry Services Strategic Review; and,

ii) the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to review the priority of item 63 of the Forestry Services Strategic Review recommendations timetable, which states, “Management should conduct a financial analysis to determine the adequacy of the annual budget amount received from London Hydro”, to be accomplished as soon as possible, recognizing there is a potential income source for the tree programs;

it being noted that the TFAC reviewed and received a communication, dated January 2012, and heard a verbal delegation from I. Listar, Manager, Urban Forestry, with respect to this matter;

b) Heritage Trees:

i) the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to consider the development of a Heritage Tree Program in its 2013 Work Plan, and submit a business case, if necessary, to the 2013 Budget to support the Work Plan;

ii) in addition to part i) above, the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to consider the start of a Heritage Tree Program using simple and low cost methods with assistance from the Trees and Forests Advisory Committee (TFAC);

iii) the protection of heritage trees BE CONSIDERED in the current Official Plan Review process; and,

iv) the above-noted report BE REFERRED to the London Advisory Committee on Heritage, for additional consideration;

it being noted that the TFAC heard a verbal report from S. Rowland, Urban Forestry Planner, with respect to this matter; and,

c) that clauses 3 through 6, inclusive, BE RECEIVED;

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

IV.

ITEMS FOR DIRECTION

14.	Property located at 940 Springbank Drive

Recommendation: That, the following actions be taken with respect to the site plan approval application of Ayerswood Development Corp. relating to the property located at 940 Springbank Drive:

a) a special public participation meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee BE HELD on Tuesday, April 24, 2012 at 7:00 p.m.; and,

b) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to provide the following:

· standard site plan approval clauses;

· any exceptions that have been made; and,

· at which stage of the process the exemptions were made;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received communications, dated February 21 and March 26, 2102, from A.R. Patton, Patton Cormier and Associates, with respect to this matter. (2012-D25-00)

15.	Wickerson Heights Subdivision – Assumption Status (33M-514)

Recommendation: That, the communication dated February 29, 2012 from J. Sennema, Z Group, with respect to the Wickerson Heights subdivision (33M-514) assumption status being held in abeyance BE REFERRED to the Civic Administration for consideration. (2012-D26-06)

16.	Property located at 806 Victoria Street

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Manager, Development Planning, the following actions be taken with respect to the site plan approval application of the Diocese of London relating to the property located at 806 Victoria Street:

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 site plan approval application for the construction of 274 crypts, including one storage room;

b) the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council supports the approval of the attached Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Elevations; and,

c) the financing for the project BE APPROVED in accordance with the “Claims and Revenues Report” provided as Schedule “A” to the associated staff report, dated March 26, 2012. (2012-D25-00)

17.	Property located at 844 Wonderland Road South (Z-8012)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director of Land Use Planning and City Planner, based on the application of Khawar Hanif relating to the property located at 844 Wonderland Road South, the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April, 10, 2012 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject lands FROM a Restricted Office/Convenience Commercial (RO1/CC) Zone, which permits medical/dental offices, offices, 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 Restricted Office/Convenience Commercial Special Provision (RO1/CC(__)) Zone, which allows for the above uses and a pharmacy use without a drive through, and which prohibits a methadone clinic and methadone dispensary use; it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public participation meeting held in connection with this matter. (2012-D11-04)

18.	Property located at 681 Highbury Avenue North (Z-8001)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director of Land Use Planning and City Planner, based on the application of Angela and Dino Ciccone relating to the property located at 681 Highbury Avenue North, the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject lands FROM a Highway Service Commercial (HS) Zone, which permits animal hospitals; automotive uses, restricted; convenience stores; duplicating shops; financial institutions; personal service establishments; restaurants; video rental establishments; and brewing on premises establishments TO a Highway Service Commercial Special Provision (HS( )) Zone, to permit a retail fishing supply and service store as an additional permitted use; it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public participation meeting held in connection with this matter. (2012-D11-02)

19.	Property located at 1671 Fanshawe Park Road West (TZ-8010)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director of Land Use Planning and City Planner, based on the application of Organic Choice Bagging Company relating to the property located at 1671 Fanshawe Park Road West, the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to extend the existing temporary use zone for the rear portion of the subject site, for a period of not more than three years from the date of the passing of the by-law, for an outdoor self storage area in conjunction with a self-storage establishment; it being noted that the proposed outdoor self-storage area for the rear of the lands is to be permitted in conjunction with the proposed self-storage establishment for the front of the lands, and is all subject to site plan approval;

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

· Kristina White, 828 Commissioners Road West – expressing support for the recommendation. (2012-D11-06)

20.	Property located at 580 Fanshawe Park Road East

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Manager, Development Planning, the following actions be taken with respect to the site plan approval application of 1830150 Ontario Limited relating to the property located at 580 Fanshawe Park Road East:

a) the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that at the public participation meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee with respect to the site plan approval application to permit the construction of a one-storey, 566.15 m², multi-unit commercial building with a drive-through, issues were raised with respect to the safety of pedestrians walking on the sidewalk on Fanshawe Park Road East and the potential intersection of traffic entering or exiting the two adjacent drive-throughs;

b) the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council supports the approval of the attached, revised, Site Plan for a one-storey, 566.15m², multi-unit commercial building with a drive-through; and,

c) the financing for the project BE APPROVED in accordance with the “Claims and Revenues Report” provided as Schedule “A” to the associated staff report, dated March 26, 2012.

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

· Ali Soufan, York Developments, applicant – advising that he submitted a revised plan to the Civic Administration earlier today; advising that four of the five items that were raised have been addressed; indicating that the building envelope reduction cannot be done; advising that a pedestrian walkway has been added due north from the main spine; indicating that the bike rack has been moved from the rear of the building to the front of the building; advising that the proposed tenants have a standard template that fits their equipment and seating; advising that he has closed the direct access onto Fanshawe Park Road so that the current access that exists today is the only access; and advising that there is sufficient site distance between the two drive-throughs.

· Charles Scollard, #32–567 Fanshawe Park Road East, President, Condominium Corporation – advising that he expressed the concerns of the Condominium Corporation to the Built and Natural Environment Committee in September, 2011; advising that they have serious safety concerns; advising that not all issues have been addressed; advising that there are two properties adjacent to each other with drive-throughs and both have the same peak times; advising that one line of cars exiting one drive-through will be intersecting the line of cars from the other drive-through; advising that in one short section, there are seven entrances and/or exits onto Fanshawe Park Road East; advising that, even without the proposed development, people have to go around cars that block the sidewalk; advising that it is not unusual to be blocked several times; enquiring as to whether or not a traffic study was ever completed for the area; indicating that traffic is an issue; and advising that safety is the main concern. (2012-D25-00)

21.	Property located at 1461 Huron Street (Z-8005)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director, Land Use Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of United Church Council of Middlesex Presbytery, relating to the property located at 1461 Huron Street:

a) the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 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 Holding Neighbourhood Facility Special Provision (h*NF (2)) Zone, which permits a church or elementary school TO a Holding Neighbourhood Facility Special Provision/Residential R8 Bonus (h*h-5*NF (2)/R8-4*B-( )) Zone, to permit the above listed uses and an apartment building, with a density of 81 units/ha (25 units) and maximum height of 13 metres (3 storeys); and,

b) a public site plan meeting be held; it being noted that the bonusing provision would permit a density on the site of 81 units per hectare, in return for the provision of affordable housing units, in accordance with Section 12.2.2 of the Official Plan, and to ensure the following urban design features:

i) site the building in general alignment with property lines and prevailing setbacks of adjacent buildings;

ii) provide landscaping which:

• incorporates a hard surface forecourt with fixed seating that defines the building’s main entrance and corner lot location;

• integrates stone salvaged from the demolished church;

• defines private outdoor amenity areas with hard surfaced terraces and fence-wall privacy screens for all at-grade residential units; and,

• minimizes the need for extensive watering;

iii) 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 north façade and entrance as the front of the building and the south façade and entrance as a service egress; and,

• employs ample glazing to distinguish stairwell forms from the residential units and maximize visibility for security purposes;

it being noted that site plan approval is required and the bonus provisions of the by-law will be implemented through a development agreement between the City and the applicant;

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

· Reverend Doug McKenzie – expressing support for the application. (2012-D11-07)

22.	Property located at 1285 Western Road (Southwest Portion) (OZ-7955)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director, Land Use Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of Brescia University College relating to the southwest portion of the property municipally known as 1285 Western Road, on the lands immediately to the west of Brescia Lane, south of Ramsay Road:

a) the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012, to amend the Official Plan to change the designation of the subject lands FROM a Low Density Residential designation TO a Regional Facility designation to permit a limited range of institutional type uses that are directly or indirectly related to the operations of Brescia University College;

b) the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 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 northern portion of the subject lands FROM a Residential R1 (R1-10) Zone which permits single detached dwellings TO a Holding Regional Facility Special Provision (h-( )•RF( )) Zone, to permit adult secondary schools; ancillary residential and/or hostels and accommodations, together with permitted uses in this zone; churches; commercial parking structures and/or lots; commercial schools; community colleges; day care centres; elementary schools; emergency care establishments; hospitals; institutional uses; libraries; nursing homes; private schools; recreational buildings; secondary schools; and, universities with a minimum west interior side yard depth of 6.0 metres, subject to a holding provision to ensure the orderly development of the lands and that development takes a form compatible with the adjacent land uses; it being noted that an agreement shall be entered into with the City of London specifying the necessary works required for the development of the subject lands, based on the submission of the following studies: lot grading plan, storm water servicing plan, landscape plan, and a site plan, as well as the requirement for sufficient securities to cover the works identified in these plans, to be provided to the satisfaction of The City of London; and,

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

• vehicular ingress and egress access limited to Brescia Lane;

• tree preservation;

• retention of the existing row of mature cedars on the west side of the subject lands and enhancement by the planting of an additional row of cedars, within the 6.0 metre west interior side yard;

• appropriate drainage patterns; and,

• full cut-off lighting, to reduce glare to the adjacent residential properties;

it being also noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received the following communications with respect to this matter:

· a communication, dated March 20, 2012, from Professor Emeritus Arthur Jutan; and,

· a communication, dated March 22, 2012, from Mardelle and Paul Bishop, 282 Ramsay Road, et. al.;

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

· Sandy Levin, 59 Longbow Road – expressing support for the application. (2012-D11-01)

23.	Properties located at 73, 77, 81 and 91 Southdale Road East (OZ-7943)

Recommendation: That, notwithstanding the recommendation of the Director Land Use Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of Sean Eden relating to the property located at 73, 77, 81, and 91 Southdale Road East and 3021 and 3033 White Oak Road:

a) the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012 to amend the Official Plan FROM Auto Oriented Commercial Corridor and Multi Family Medium Density Residential TO Neighbourhood Commercial Node and a Neighbourhood Commercial Node Special Policy;

b) the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 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 a Residential R1 (R1-10) Zone which, permits single detached dwellings, a Neighbourhood Facility (NF) Zone, which permits churches and an Urban Reserve (UR4) Zone which permits existing uses TO a Holding Neighbourhood Shopping Area Special Provision (h*h-11*h-63*h-103*NSA4 (_)) Zone, which permits retail commercial uses such as grocery stores, personal service establishments, restaurants, financial institutions to a maximum total gross floor area of 6000 m² with a special provision to allow for automobile sales and service uses along the Southdale Road East frontage to a maximum depth of 50m and subject to holding provisions to ensure that a development agreement be entered into with the City, appropriate access arrangements are provided to the satisfaction of Council, implementation of all noise attenuation and design mitigating measures as recommended in a noise assessment report acceptable to the City, and to ensure that urban design matters are addressed at site plan review;

c) the following design objectives be addressed through a site plan and development agreement before the h-103 holding provision is lifted:

· higher design standard through the site plan approval process and through the application of the Commercial Urban Design Guidelines;

· discouragement of large, front yard surface parking areas, and drive through locations;

· encourage street-oriented development;

· introduce a higher standard of landscaping;

· incorporate accessible pedestrian connections to transit facilities and to adjacent neighbouring residential areas;

· massing and architecture within the node should provide for:

§ articulated facades and rooflines;

§ accented main entry points;

§ use of glazing and other façade treatments along sidewalk areas;

§ weather protection features; and,

· street setbacks be minimized by placing smaller, single or multi-tenant buildings near the sidewalk and along arterial roads and increasing, as much as possible, the street frontage of this nodal development to assist in framing the prominent corner of Southdale Road East and White Oak Road;

d) pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act, as determined by the Municipal Council, no further notice BE GIVEN in respect of the proposed by-law as the proposed amendment was included in the description of the previous legal notice for this application;

it being also noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received a communication, dated March 24, 2012, from A. Soufan, York Developments, with respect to this matter;

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

· Ali Soufan, York Developments, applicant – commending staff for their work on this matter, as he and staff have been back and forth on this application for quite a few months; advising that the gap has been narrowed to a specific use, rather than commercial use; advising that the property is located on the southwest corner of Southdale Road and White Oaks Road; indicating that west of the site is a used car dealership; indicating that the property located at 35 Southdale Road has been approved for a new Mercedes dealership; advising that he doesn’t have a prospective client for this site and he would like to leave some flexibility for the ultimate user; maybe a combination of auto use and retail; expressing agreement with Mr. C. Smith on staff’s position; indicating that he disagrees with staff trying to restrict the auto use special provision; indicating that it makes sense to keep the auto use relating to sales and service, but not a car wash; advising that the site plan stage will drill down the level of detail required. (2012-D11-02)

24.	Urban Design Guidelines

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director, Land Use Planning and City Planner, the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to refer the Draft Urban Design Guidelines to the following review processes:

a) Official Plan Review;

b) Transportation Master Plan;

c) Culture Plan; and,

d) Urban Forestry Plan;

it being also noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received a communication, dated March 2, 2012, from S. Cornwell, London Area Planning Consultants, with respect to this matter;

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

· Don McKinnon, 71 Acorn Place – expressing concern about a fatal flaw in the urban design plan, that the people in the affected area(s) are not consulted; indicating that people talk about wonderful ideas, such as the storage facility on Fanshawe Park Road East; indicating that it looks lovely on paper; advising that when you build close to the road, light from the building becomes a problem; advising that he has talked about light pollution before; suggesting that the person who is designing the building hasn’t seen what they are building at night; advising that now 10 homes in the area have been devalued; advising that no one talked to the affected property owners for input into what the applicant was proposing; indicating that some things look great on paper and sometimes it falls down when you see what is there; advising that anyone that has been there and seen the results, shake their head; advising that the last time they did this, it had media coverage; suggesting that the flaw has to be identified; requesting that the people who are directly involved are talked to; enquiring as to what is a consultant; indicating that someone from 20 miles away with a laptop can be a consultant; indicating that a consultant can be an expert, build a dam and that doesn’t mean that it will work; requesting that a plan be put in place before anything is done; advising that the taxpayers are the meat of the city; suggesting that in this case, the matter has been to the Committee, the standards set have not been met and let’s use some teeth; suggesting that this be put in place before any consulting is commenced; and advising that if you build a 30 foot building and fill it with light, people are going to be affected. (2012-D07-00)

25.	Property located at 215 Fanshawe Park Road West

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director of Development Planning, the following actions be taken with respect to the site plan approval application by Grand River Contracting Inc. relating to the property located at 215 Fanshawe Park Road West:

a) the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that at the public participation meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee with respect to the site plan approval application for the construction of a commercial medical building, issues were raised with respect to isotopes, radiation, flooding and traffic volume;

b) the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council supports the approval of the attached Site Plan for a commercial medical building; and,

c) the financing for the project BE APPROVED in accordance with the “Claims and Revenues Report” provided as Schedule “A” to the associated staff report, dated March 26, 2012;

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

· D. Conley, applicant – expressing appreciation to L. McDougall for the thorough presentation; advising that he has been working with staff on this application for some months; and advising that the request for the security gate is impractical as the doctor(s) may need to see patients after hours.

· Chris Callahan, 2145 Quarrier Road, on behalf of the Richmond Street-Sunningdale Road Community Association – expressing concerns about the volume of traffic.

· David Grice, 24-475 McGarrell Drive – advising that his property is immediately behind the development; indicating that he has worked at Ontario Hydro for 30 years; expressing concern with the new information being provided about isotopes; advising that he will be meeting with the Fire Department to determine whether or not they have the necessary instruments to deal with radiation fuels; advising that with all the things that are happening around the world with radiation and nuclear sites, companies are getting more controls from their governments; advising that his main concern is that his house is directly behind the building; advising that the ground is clay and there are flooding issues (see attached photographs); enquiring as to whether or not there will be increased flooding by putting up a wall; advising that he is not asking to stop the development, just asking the builder to be careful; advising that this is a vacant land condominium; advising that his neighbours sump pump runs constantly; asking that when the builder comes in that he finds the drain before he starts digging; expressing appreciation to the staff at City Hall who have been nice to him; and asking if the trees can be changed to a different species, possibly red maples.

· Stephanie Loomer, 26 Derwent Road – advising that she has met with representatives of the Transportation Division to discuss the traffic concerns on the street and received assistance; advising that this is still going to be a very busy corner; indicating that the driveway of the medical building is right across the street; expressing concern with people entering and exiting the parking lot; advising that this will only exacerbate the situation; advising that this is a dangerous corner and that this will only make it more complicated.

· Councillor M. Brown on behalf of B. Davis, Masonville Ratepayers Association – advising that Mr. Davis provided the staff with a communication dated February 24, 2012 and that the Association’s position has not changed; enquiring about the potential for a speed hump, changing the radius of the turn at Fanshawe Park Road and Derwent Road or a pork chop traffic measure. (2012-D25-00)

26.	Downtown Master Plan - Downtown Heritage Conservation District Plan (O-8024/08)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Director of Land Use Planning and City Planner, based on the direction given by Municipal Council at its meeting held on November 21, 2007 and the subsequent Official Plan review by the City of London relating to the creation of a Downtown Heritage Conservation District, the following actions be taken:

a) the attached, revised, proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012 to designate the Downtown Heritage Conservation District under Part V (Section 41.(1)) of the Ontario Heritage Act; (Secretary’s Note: the Downtown Heritage Conservation District Plan is available for viewing in the City Clerk’s Office);

b) the attached, revised, proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012 to amend Section 13.3.5 (Implementation- Heritage Conservation District Plans), amend Section 13.3.8 (Specific Heritage Conservation Districts) of the Official Plan to identify, add a character statement and add policies to include the Downtown Heritage Conservation District, amend Section 19.2.2 (Guideline Documents) of the Official Plan, to include the Downtown Heritage Conservation Plan as a guideline document and amend Chapter 13 (Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest Policies) to add a new Figure 13-5 to guide property owners and development activity within the boundaries of the District;

c) the Planning staff BE DIRECTED to review the Official Plan policies and zoning by-law regulations which apply to the Downtown to ensure they do not conflict with the provisions of the Downtown Heritage Conservation District Plan;

d) that Planning staff BE DIRECTED to review the possible implementation of a Development Permit System, form based code or other approach, to address the enhancement or retention of heritage resources;

e) the Planning staff BE DIRECTED to continue to pursue the identification and designation of significant heritage structures under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and apply the Heritage (HER) Zone to these structures where appropriate;

f) the Heritage Planner BE DIRECTED to be an active review participant in the Official Plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, site plan approval, minor variance and/or building permit processes within the boundaries of the Downtown HCD;

g) the Urban Design Review Panel BE DIRECTED to use the heritage conservation guidelines contained in the HCD Plan and/or Downtown Urban Design Guidelines to review proposals within the District;

h) the consultant’s recommendations on specific heritage features (eg. Facades, roofs, landscaping etc.) BE REVIEWED AND BE INCORPORATED into the proposed Downtown Design Guidelines;

i) the Heritage Conservation District Plan BE USED during the consideration of incentive program application review; and,

j) that the Municipal Council is satisfied that the notice of public participation meeting, dated March 7, 2012, conforms with the requirements of Section 41.1.(7) of the Ontario Heritage Act and that no further notice BE GIVEN with respect to the proposed Downtown Heritage Conservation District;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received a communication, dated March 23, 2012, from J. Kennedy, President, London Development Institute, with respect to this matter;

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

· Dan Young, Stantec – introducing the other members of the team, being Mike Baker, Sylvia Baird and Ed Vandermaarl; advising that there were two phases to the project, with the first phase being the background study and phase two being the preparation of the plan; advising that the original study area removed the existing West Woodfield Heritage Conservation District, and moved the west boundary further west to include Harris Park and Eldon House; advising that, in the Plan, there are three heritage character statements, a number of conservation principles, such as the intent of preserving the historic context of downtown, the preservation of the traditional setting, and preservation of original decoration and fittings; advising that the Plan includes the Heritage Conservation District guidelines, including what it means to the average person who owns land downtown.

· Mike Baker, Historian – advising that the District contains buildings and sites that contribute to the significance of the downtown; indicating that, in the past, the role of the downtown was as the cities and regions economic service centre; advising that the downtown was developed by labourers, immigrants and their descendants’; advising that most of owners who worked downtown lived in what is now the West Woodfield Heritage Conservation District; advising that it is remarkable for a city to have three districts that represent so much history; advising that, on the maps, each colour represents a different ranking; for example, red/blue are the most important from a heritage assessment; significant landscape forms and elements developed within the district marked in black; the most interesting features of landscapes are marked in grey (which are the alleyways); noting that, in some cases, due to demolition, some alleyways are out in the open; yellow reflects commercial buildings; orange reflects residential buildings; industrial section in light red and civic institutional in dark red; traffic patterns, sidewalks, setbacks all have implications for street furniture and plantings; advising that a large part of the Plan is made up of a matrix, with each one assigned with designation such as heritage, non-heritage, infill; identifying that it is mainly structures built after the development period; noting that within the assessment there is a ranking system with definitions for each assignment; indicating that the chart at the top is significant as it indicates how each of the buildings in the Heritage Conservation District work in terms of requirements for retention or replacement; noting that A’s and B’s are buildings that have highest heritage significance, C’s and D’s are of less concern and replacement is expected in some cases, following the Urban Design Guidelines; advising that there are four classifications of landscape categories, including setbacks between buildings, boulevards and buildings; providing an example of an ‘A’ level on the screen; noting that you can see the address, assignment, description (name of building – if one has been found), approximate date of construction, and the character defining elements; showing a picture of 199 Queens Avenue, which is located beside a large church at the corner of Clarence Street; noting that none of the buildings in picture exist today; also noting that 199 Queens Avenue is one of the few residences still standing; advising that few features are still retained and that Mr. Hiscox had to demolish two houses to build this house; providing an example of a ‘B’ ranking; noting that it is one of the few industrial structures that still exist downtown; also noting that the third floor has been lost; however, all window shapes and all windows still exist; and providing an example of a ‘C’ ranking where more of details have been lost. (2012-D07-00)

27.	Property located at 1602 Sunningdale Road West (39T-11503/OZ-7985)

Recommendation: That, on the recommendation of the Senior Planner, Development Planning, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of Foxwood Developments (London) Inc., relating to the property located at 1602 Sunningdale Road West:

a) an amendment to the Fox Hollow Community Plan BE APPROVED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012 to change the designation of certain portions of lands within this plan FROM Low Density Residential TO Multi-Family, Medium Density Residential; and FROM Multi-Family Medium Density Residential TO Multi-Family High Density Residential; FROM Low Density Residential TO Community Facility and TO ADD a new secondary collector road connection to Sunningdale Road, as shown on the attached Appendix “A”;

b) the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 2012 to amend certain portions of the Official Plan as follows:

• FROM Low Density Residential TO Multi-Family, Medium Density Residential, to allow for multiple-attached dwellings such as row houses or cluster houses; low-rise apartment buildings; rooming and boarding houses; emergency care facilities; converted dwellings; and small-scale nursing homes, rest homes and homes for the aged;

• FROM Multi-Family Medium Density Residential TO Multi-Family High Density Residential to permit low-rise and high-rise apartment buildings; apartment hotels; multiple-attached dwellings; emergency care facilities; nursing home; rest homes; homes for the aged; and rooming and boarding houses; and,

• TO amend Schedule C of the Official Plan TO ADD a secondary collector road;

c) 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 the application for draft plan of subdivision of Foxwood Developments (London) Inc. relating to the property located at 1602 Sunningdale Road West;

d) the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council supports the Approval Authority issuing draft approval of the proposed plan of residential subdivision, as submitted by Foxwood Developments (London) Inc. (File No. 39T-11503 prepared by AECOM Engineering Inc., certified by David Bianchi, OLS, as redline revised, which shows 18 low density residential blocks; six (6) medium density residential blocks; one (1) high density residential block; two (2) school blocks; two (2) park blocks; road widening blocks and various reserve blocks served by 14 new streets and the extension of Dyer Drive, SUBJECT TO the conditions contained in the attached, revised, Appendix "39T-11503";

e) the attached proposed by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 10, 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 a Urban Reserve (UR3) Zone, which permits uses such as existing dwellings; agricultural uses except for mushroom farms, commercial greenhouses livestock facilities and manure storage facilities; kennels; private outdoor recreation clubs; and riding stables as follows:

· TO a Holding Residential R1 (h. h-100 R1-3) Zone, to permit single detached dwellings on lots with a minimum frontage of 10.0 metres (32.81 feet) and a minimum lot area of 300 square metres (3,229.28 square feet), subject to holding provisions requiring the developer to enter into a subdivision agreement with the City and to ensure that there is water looping and a second public access prior to the 81st building permit being issued;

· TO a Holding Residential R1 (h. h-100 R1-13) Zone, to permit single detached dwellings on lots with a minimum frontage of 9.0 metres (29.53 feet) and a minimum lot area of 270 square metres (2,906.35 square feet);

· TO a Holding Residential R1 Special Provision (h. h-100 R1-4( )) Zone, to permit single detached dwellings on lots with a minimum frontage of 12.0 metres (39.37 feet) and a minimum lot area of 360 square metres (3,875.13 square feet), with a special provision to include a minimum main building setback of 3.0 metres and a maximum main building setback of 4.5 metres ;

· TO a Holding Residential R1 (h. h-100 R1-4) Zone, to permit single detached dwellings on lots with a minimum frontage of 12.0 metres (39.37 feet) and a minimum lot area of 360 square metres (3,875.13 square feet);

· TO a Holding Residential R5/Residential R6 (h. h-71 h-100 R5-6/R6-5) Zone, to permit cluster townhouse and cluster stacked townhouse dwellings and other forms of cluster housing (cluster townhouse and cluster stacked townhouse dwellings at a maximum density of 50 units per hectare (20.24 units per acre)) and a maximum height of 12.0 metres (39.37 feet); and cluster housing which includes single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, duplex dwellings, triplex dwellings, townhouse dwellings, stacked townhouse dwellings, apartment buildings at a maximum density of 35 units per hectare (14.17 units per acre) and a maximum height of 12.0 metres (39.37 feet);

· TO a Holding Residential R5/Residential R6 (h. h-54 h-71 h-100 R5-6/R6-5) Zone, to permit cluster townhouse and cluster stacked townhouse dwellings and other forms of cluster housing (cluster townhouse and cluster stacked townhouse dwellings at a maximum density of 50 units per hectare (20.24 units per acre) and a maximum height of 12.0 metres (39.37 feet)); and cluster housing, which includes single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, duplex dwellings, triplex dwellings, townhouse dwellings, stacked townhouse dwellings, apartment buildings at a maximum density of 35 units per hectare (14.17 units per acre) and a maximum height of 12.0 metres (39.37 feet);

· TO a Holding Residential R5/Residential R6 (h. h-53 h-54 h-100 R5-6/R6-5) Zone, to permit the uses as listed above in the R5-6/R6-5 Zones, subject to a holding provision to address street oriented development of the multi-family blocks;

· TO a Holding Residential R5/Residential R6 (h. h-53 h-54 h-100 h-_ R5-6/R6-5) Zone, to permit the uses as listed above in the R5-6/R6-5 Zones, subject to a holding provision to address street oriented development of the multi-family blocks, with a new holding provision to address the requirements for additional lands for a roundabout at the intersection of Sunningdale Rd and Hyde Park Road;

· TO a Holding Neighbourhood Facility/Residential R1 (h. h-100 NF1/R1-13) Zone, to permit schools and other institutional uses on lots with a minimum frontage of 30 metres (98.43 feet) and a minimum lot area of 700 square metres (7,534.98 square feet) and single detached dwellings (see R1-13 regulations above);

· TO a Holding Residential R6 (h. h-71 h-100 R6-1) Zone, to permit cluster single detached housing at a maximum density of 15 units per hectare (6 units per acre) and a maximum height of 10.5 metres (34.45 feet);

· TO a Holding Neighbourhood Facility/Residential R6 (h. h-71 h-100 h-108 NF1/R6-1) Zone, to permit schools and other institutional uses (see NF1 regulations above) and cluster single detached housing (see R6-1 regulations above);

· TO a Holding Residential R9 (h. h-100 h-123 R9-7 H45 D150) Zone, to permit apartment buildings, lodging house class 2, senior citizens apartment buildings, handicapped persons apartment buildings, continuum-of-care facilities, at a maximum density of 150 units per hectare (60.72 units per acre) and a maximum height of 45 metres (147.6 feet); and,

· TO a Open Space (OS1) Zone, to permit a limited range of uses, such as conservation lands and works, golf courses and parks;

f) the request to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1 to change the zoning of a portion of the subject property FROM an Urban Reserve (UR3) Zone TO a Residential R1 (h. h-100 R1-13) Zone, to permit single detached dwellings on lots, with a minimum frontage of 9.0 metres (29.53 feet) and a minimum lot area of 270 square metres (2,906.35 square feet); TO a Compound Holding Residential R1/Residential R5/ Residential R6 (R1-13/R5-6/R6-5) Zone, to permit single detached dwellings(see regulations above); cluster townhouse and cluster stacked townhouse dwellings at a maximum density of 50 units per hectare (20.24 units per acre) and a maximum height of 12.0 metres (39.37 feet); and cluster housing which includes single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, duplex dwellings, triplex dwellings, townhouse dwellings, stacked townhouse dwellings, apartment buildings at a maximum density of 35 units per hectare (14.17 units per acre) and a maximum height of 12.0 metres (39.37 feet); TO a Compound Holding Residential R4/Residential R5/ Residential R6 (R4-3/R5-6/R6-5) Zone, to permit street townhouses on lots with a minimum frontage of 5.5 metres (18 feet) and a minimum lot area of 200 square metres (2,152.85 square feet); cluster townhouse and cluster stacked townhouse dwellings and other forms of cluster housing (see R5-6 and R6-5 regulations above); it being noted that in order to provide for a more appropriate lot mix, all or portions of Blocks 3-9 should be zoned R1-3; it being also noted that it is inappropriate to mix zones which permit conventional single detached dwellings on freehold lots with cluster house zones as it can permit incompatible forms of residential development; street townhouse development on this proposed gateway collector road (Street “A” ) would not be appropriate as it would create numerous access points to the collector street which would impact any gateway feature proposed for this development; and, the requested zone changes would not represent good land use planning BE REFUSED;

g) Section 4.21 of Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, entitled “Road Allowance Requirements – Specific Roads” to add a portion of Street “A”, Street “B”, Street “G” and Dyer Street as Secondary Collector Roads BE APPROVED; and,

h) the attached communication, dated March 26, 2012, from G. Priamo, Zelinka Priamo Ltd, BE REFERRED to the Civic Administration for consideration;

it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public participation meeting held in connection with this matter. (2012-D26-02)

28.	Property located at 160 Sunningdale Road West (39T-11504/OZ-7991)

Recommendation: That, notwithstanding the recommendation of the Senior Planner, Development Planning, a special meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee BE HELD on Tuesday, April 10, 2012 at 3:00 p.m., with respect to the application of Tricar Developments Inc. relating to the property located at 160 Sunningdale Road West, to determine the height of the proposed buildings; it being noted that the public site plan study BE COMPLETED prior to the commencement on construction;

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

· Dan Young, Stantec – expressing support for the staff recommendations; indicating that the buildings were taller than anticipated as they are following the Urban Design Guidelines; advising that the two towers are connected with a two storey podium; indicating that there will be two levels of underground parking, which eliminates some surface parking; advising that there is 60% open space; indicating that there will be a green roof on the roof of the two-storey podium; advising that the newer tower sits at a lower grade and will be almost the same height as the current 12 storey building; and advising that the two storey podium will be used as an amenity space.

· Chris Callahan, 2145 Quarrier Road – expressing appreciation for what the Committee does; advising that he talked to the residents in the neighbourhood and everyone is concerned with the height of the proposed buildings; advising that that the community is working with the developer to develop something different; advising that the community is asking for a small reduction in the size of the building; indicating that the community is committed to working together to resolve issues; indicating that the community is asking for a four-storey reduction; indicating that they wish to maintain the quality of the development; and requesting the addition of an h-5 Zone to require the public site plan review process; and reiterating that the area residents are committed to working with the developer.

· Jason Enright, 2139 Quarrier Road – expressing support of Mr. Callahan’s comments; advising that he likes the concept of the development; expressing appreciation that Tricar is working with the community; indicating that he likes that the bonusing guidelines were agreed to; asking that the proposed buildings be reduced by four storeys; and expressing a willingness to work with Tricar.

· Chris Maciejowski, 1944 Callingham Court – advising that his residence faces the twelve-storey Tricar building; advising that he didn’t anticipate the construction of an 18-storey building; and requesting the proposed buildings be reduced in size.

· Kelly Mancari, 1982 Richmond Street – enquiring as to whether or not the building is 18-storeys or 21 storeys; enquiring as to whether or not there are trees planned for the development; and advising that the last time that trees were part of a development, the trees planted were 6 inches tall until the City stepped in and the trees were replaced with 18 inch tall trees. (2012-D26-06)

29.	Properties located at 255 South Carriage Road and 1331 Hyde Park Road (39T-08502/Z-7489/OZ-7510)

Recommendation: That, notwithstanding the recommendation of the Senior Planner, Development Planning, the application of Kenmore Homes (London) Inc. relating to the properties located at 255 South Carriage Road and 1331 Hyde Park Road BE REFERRED back to the Civic Administration for further consultation with the neighbourhood;

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

· R. Knutson, on behalf of the applicant – advising that he is requesting that the application be referred back to allow the issues to be resolved; advising that two-thirds of the area will be undisturbed; indicating that there will be sideyards; indicating that Lots 141-149 would have the minimum rear yard of six metres; and advising that a public school will be built.

· Wanda Oatman, 21-1144 Coronation Drive – advising that there are homes that back onto five units of the proposed development; indicating that the current residents live on their decks; advising that, with this development, they will be looking at a two-storey wall; indicating that they don’t have sideyards; advising that most of the residents are in their 50’s and 60’s; advising that they pay their taxes, are good citizens and support the local economy; indicating that the original plan had four homes on an angle; requesting that the applicant go back to the original plan; and advising that they would lose all their sun with this revised application.

· Earl Towell, 1169 Coronation Drive – advising that he is speaking for the residents who face onto proposed Street “A”; requesting that the lot size on Street “A”, as its meets Coronation Drive, be increased from the proposed 12 to 15 metres wide; advising that the lot sizes on Coronation Drive are 15 to 16 metres wide; advising that they paid in the $300,000’s for their lots; indicating that the new homes going in are selling in the $400,000’s, the 9 metre lots are selling in the $200,000’s; advising that lot size does matter in cost; and requesting a buffer zone.

· Stefan Starzynski, 1555 Healy Road – advising that there are lots of children in this subdivision; advising that they have lived in their house for six years; indicating that there is no playground in the subdivision; advising that one area is designated for a play area at the corner of Coronation Drive and Healy Road; indicating that he was advised that a playground would be built; advising that trees were removed and there is still no playground; enquiring as to where the children are to play; advising that there are 25 more homes being built; indicating that there were mentions of bonuses in the previous applications; and advising that the biggest bonus for this area would be a playground.

· Normal Spearing, 1144 Coronation Drive – enquiring as to how far from the fence line the new properties would be built; advising that if the neighbours are as close as she thinks, she could BBQ one night and her neighbor could BBQ the next night and the could pass the food over the fence.

· Kim, 419 Brunswick Avenue – advising that she received the letter from the City with less than one day’s notice of the meeting; advising that Block 203 could be for commercial uses; expressing concern as she has young children; and advising that she has been waiting for a long time for a park. (2012-D26-03)

30.	Commercial Development - Boler Mountain Ski Club

Recommendation: That the communication, dated February 20, 2012, from B. Schneider and A. Mooser, 717 Griffith Street, with respect to the Boler Mountain Ski Club parking lot BE REFERRED to the Civic Administration for consideration. (2012-D25-00)

V.	DEFERRED MATTERS/ADDITIONAL BUSINESS

31. That the Planning and Environment Committee (PEC) received an enquiry from Councillor W.J. Polhill with respect to Don de Jong’s proposal for the financing of Old Victoria SWM Facility #1 and the request of Sifton Properties Limited to move forward with the construction of the Old Victoria SWM #2 from 2015 to 2012, in exchange for the River Bend SWMF G construction being deferred to 2016. The Civic Administration advised that the proposed pond would be located on an easement and that the Legal Division is determining if the pond can be constructed on the easement; it being noted that this matter will be discussed at the April 16, 2012 PEC meeting.

VI.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 12:20 AM

No Item Selected

Details

History

Vote Result