1
00:00:21,080 --> 00:00:24,080
think

2
00:00:40,960 --> 00:00:47,360
Works to confirm the finding of the
studies notice the public meeting that

3
00:00:44,960 --> 00:00:51,960
originally issued on February 4th this
year in did not include the requested

4
00:00:49,520 --> 00:01:00,160
relief for lot depth of 29 meters and L
of 30 met uh for this public park block

5
00:00:55,160 --> 00:01:00,160
as well as the lot

6
00:01:14,400 --> 00:01:17,400
B

7
00:01:40,600 --> 00:01:43,600
two minutes everyone two

8
00:01:58,840 --> 00:02:01,840
minutes

9
00:02:28,840 --> 00:02:32,879
e e

10
00:03:11,440 --> 00:03:14,440
Che

11
00:03:45,000 --> 00:03:50,640
good evening
everyone welcome and thank you for being

12
00:03:50,720 --> 00:03:56,599
here welcome to the woods city of
Woodstock Public planning meeting

13
00:03:54,599 --> 00:04:01,519
tonight's meeting is an open public
meeting as required by the planning act

14
00:03:59,200 --> 00:04:05,319
due to the change in meeting venue this
meeting will be live streamed to the

15
00:04:03,000 --> 00:04:09,000
county of Oxford YouTube channel and a
recording of the meeting will also be

16
00:04:07,159 --> 00:04:14,040
posted on the city's website following
the meeting an agenda of the meeting can

17
00:04:11,799 --> 00:04:17,239
be found on the agendas meetings and
minutes page of the city's

18
00:04:17,400 --> 00:04:24,840
website this meeting is for information
and discussion purposes only and no

19
00:04:22,520 --> 00:04:28,080
decisions will be made this evening
Council will make a decision on these

20
00:04:26,400 --> 00:04:32,520
matters at the regular council meeting
to be held this Thursday

21
00:04:30,560 --> 00:04:37,960
if you wish to address council at that
meeting you must submit a delegation

22
00:04:34,759 --> 00:04:43,320
form to the city of city clerk no later
than 12: p.m. tomorrow

23
00:04:40,520 --> 00:04:48,800
Wednesday a delegation form is available
on the city's website or sticking around

24
00:04:46,120 --> 00:04:54,360
tonight and we may have
some if an application is denied only

25
00:04:52,320 --> 00:04:59,759
the applicant or the minister May file
an appeal with the Ontario land tribunal

26
00:04:57,120 --> 00:05:04,400
within 20 days of issuance of the notice
of council's

27
00:05:01,000 --> 00:05:09,639
decision only specified persons public
bodies registered owners of land which

28
00:05:07,080 --> 00:05:13,479
the plan May apply the requestor to
amend the plan and the minister May

29
00:05:11,840 --> 00:05:18,840
appeal the decision of the city of
Woodstock to the Ontario land tribunal

30
00:05:16,479 --> 00:05:22,919
within 20 days of issuance of the notice
of council's

31
00:05:20,120 --> 00:05:27,240
decision excluding the minister any
party wishing to make an appeal must

32
00:05:25,039 --> 00:05:32,880
make written or oral submissions to
Council on a public meeting

33
00:05:30,280 --> 00:05:37,880
please note that third parties anyone
who is not specified persons or public

34
00:05:35,240 --> 00:05:42,520
body do not have the right to appeal a
decision for an official plan Amendment

35
00:05:39,800 --> 00:05:47,960
to the Ontario land
tribunal please keep your comments to

36
00:05:44,720 --> 00:05:51,319
planning matters only and I'd ask that
you avoid repeating comments that have

37
00:05:50,039 --> 00:05:56,280
already been
expressed if you have not provided oral

38
00:05:53,960 --> 00:06:01,240
or written comments but wish to receive
formal notice of council's decision on

39
00:05:58,639 --> 00:06:06,280
the matter please contact the clerk's
Department the notice will provide

40
00:06:03,440 --> 00:06:10,840
further information on appealing the
decision the planner will be asked to

41
00:06:08,599 --> 00:06:15,680
present the planning report for each
application the applicant will then be

42
00:06:13,080 --> 00:06:20,080
provided an opportunity to make comments
followed by those wishing to speak in

43
00:06:17,720 --> 00:06:24,080
favor of the application and Then
followed by those wishing to speak in

44
00:06:22,199 --> 00:06:26,199
opposition of the application I'll call
you

45
00:06:26,400 --> 00:06:33,840
forward prior to proceeding with the
first application does anyone wish to

46
00:06:31,479 --> 00:06:36,880
declare a pecuniary interest on any
items on tonight's

47
00:06:37,919 --> 00:06:45,400
agenda seeing
none let's jump into it we do have seven

48
00:06:42,319 --> 00:06:54,400
tonight so we'll uh get things
going first up item 2A B2 24-

49
00:06:49,919 --> 00:07:01,520
938 application for consent which is
27999 3 onario Inc Mr Gilbert thank you

50
00:07:01,840 --> 00:07:11,160
thank you uh this consent application uh
seeks to sever um lands that are zoned

51
00:07:08,759 --> 00:07:17,240
for commercial purposes from lands that
are zoned for residential purposes the

52
00:07:13,840 --> 00:07:24,879
lot to be severed has an area
of seven uh 2.33 hectares uh with

53
00:07:22,280 --> 00:07:30,720
Frontage on Devonshire and Cardinal a
Cardinal Drive the lot to be retained uh

54
00:07:28,240 --> 00:07:36,280
has Frontage on Dunkirk AV and contains
a semi- detached dwelling uh the lands

55
00:07:33,759 --> 00:07:41,120
have inadvertently merged uh when the
subdivision was drafted approved um

56
00:07:39,240 --> 00:07:44,759
these lands containing the semidetached
dwelling were subject to an exemption to

57
00:07:43,440 --> 00:07:50,000
part law control
application uh that bylaw exempts you

58
00:07:47,360 --> 00:07:54,639
from the seven process essentially but
has a time period associated with that

59
00:07:52,800 --> 00:07:59,639
in this case the applicants transferred
the lot after that bylaw expired so as

60
00:07:58,000 --> 00:08:04,319
such the lands are still considered to
be legally merged um the consent

61
00:08:02,400 --> 00:08:09,240
application as noted will just separate
the commercial lands from the

62
00:08:06,159 --> 00:08:14,080
residential lands uh staff have no
concerns with the app with the proposal

63
00:08:11,720 --> 00:08:20,800
and recommend approval and support
subject to the above the four noted

64
00:08:16,599 --> 00:08:20,800
conditions in the report thank

65
00:08:21,000 --> 00:08:26,759
you thank you any questions of the
planner from city

66
00:08:27,960 --> 00:08:34,719
council seeing none
thank

67
00:08:31,760 --> 00:08:37,680
you is the applicant here tonight and
wish to speak to

68
00:08:41,320 --> 00:08:47,920
this and when coming forward I'd ask
that you state your name and address for

69
00:08:45,399 --> 00:08:53,839
the record thank you
welcome thank you my name is Andrea

70
00:08:50,440 --> 00:08:59,640
Sinclair I'm with mhbc planning uh 540
bingaman Center Drive in kitner uh here

71
00:08:57,040 --> 00:09:03,640
as the applicant um nothing for further
to add I think the staff report was

72
00:09:01,480 --> 00:09:08,200
comprehensive as Mr Gilbert mentioned
this is more of a technical consent uh

73
00:09:06,360 --> 00:09:13,200
it was always intended that the
commercial block would be separately

74
00:09:09,839 --> 00:09:17,040
developed from the residential but uh
they've merged on title so this allows

75
00:09:15,440 --> 00:09:21,720
for the commercial lot to be separately
conveyed and developed in the future uh

76
00:09:20,079 --> 00:09:26,200
again just here in support of the staff
report and the conditions and here to

77
00:09:24,839 --> 00:09:31,200
respond to any questions that Council
may

78
00:09:27,360 --> 00:09:36,920
have thank you any questions of Miss
stclair the

79
00:09:34,120 --> 00:09:41,360
applicant seeing none thank
you so at this point I will ask if

80
00:09:39,440 --> 00:09:45,959
anybody would like to come forward and
speak in favor of this

81
00:09:48,440 --> 00:09:55,640
application seeing none I'd ask if
anybody would like to speak against this

82
00:09:56,760 --> 00:10:01,320
application okay seeing none moving
along

83
00:10:07,200 --> 00:10:15,000
next up we
have op2 23-5

84
00:10:12,600 --> 00:10:20,560
d8 uh s SP
23-38 ZN

85
00:10:17,079 --> 00:10:23,240
8-23 d07 application for official plan
Amendment draft plan of subdivision and

86
00:10:22,160 --> 00:10:30,720
zone
change Mr

87
00:10:26,480 --> 00:10:36,639
Gilbert thank you uh these applic ations
are for official plan Amendment zone

88
00:10:33,120 --> 00:10:41,040
change and trft plan subdivision uh the
official plan Amendment would

89
00:10:38,399 --> 00:10:44,880
redesignate the lands from uh the
current designation which is community

90
00:10:42,560 --> 00:10:51,120
facility to uh
residential uh block one would be uh low

91
00:10:48,360 --> 00:10:57,800
density residential block two would be
medium density and block uh three would

92
00:10:53,560 --> 00:11:03,440
be high density uh with uh block four
and block five to be uh open space

93
00:11:01,000 --> 00:11:08,720
reflecting the proposed Park use and the
storm water management block the

94
00:11:07,120 --> 00:11:15,480
proposed official plan Amendment for the
medium density block would allow for a a

95
00:11:11,839 --> 00:11:21,480
maximum density of 75 units per hectare
above the current uh 70 units per

96
00:11:17,920 --> 00:11:30,600
hectare maximum and the apartment block
block three would allow for a a density

97
00:11:26,079 --> 00:11:36,480
of 151 units per hectare 150 units per
hectare is the maximum density and high

98
00:11:33,200 --> 00:11:42,000
density residential areas as noted the
uh sou Vision itself has five blocks

99
00:11:39,360 --> 00:11:48,639
including uh one street street a which
connects from Lake View Drive uh to uh

100
00:11:45,600 --> 00:11:56,360
Oxford Road 59 or van CID Avenue uh with
a right in and right out uh access at

101
00:11:51,600 --> 00:12:02,120
Street a and Van CID Avenue uh the
proposal would have 26 single attached

102
00:11:58,519 --> 00:12:06,880
dwellings units uh in the block one AB
budding low density development uh to

103
00:12:04,519 --> 00:12:12,000
the north and to the east uh stack
townhouse development in Block two uh

104
00:12:09,680 --> 00:12:19,560
with two uh seven story apartment
buildings uh located in block three uh

105
00:12:15,199 --> 00:12:25,399
closer to Oxford Road 59 or van card
Avenue uh the lands themselves are 9.62

106
00:12:22,680 --> 00:12:29,920
acres in size and currently contain an a
one-story office building which is

107
00:12:27,720 --> 00:12:33,760
proposed to be demolished for the uh
proposed development in support of the

108
00:12:32,160 --> 00:12:37,959
applications the applicant submitted a
number of technical studies including a

109
00:12:35,959 --> 00:12:42,560
planning justification report functional
servicing report traffic impact study

110
00:12:40,440 --> 00:12:47,920
archaeological assessment a tree
preservation

111
00:12:43,760 --> 00:12:52,760
report um shadowing study for the uh two
apartment buildings a parking study a

112
00:12:51,279 --> 00:12:58,639
phase one and a phase two environmental
site assessment as well as a noise

113
00:12:55,199 --> 00:13:03,399
feasibility assessment to measure the um
compliance with noise guidelines

114
00:13:00,360 --> 00:13:08,839
resulting from uh Oxford Road
59 uh as well uh the traffic impact

115
00:13:06,639 --> 00:13:13,360
study in the parking study were peer
reviewed by Oxford County Public Works

116
00:13:11,320 --> 00:13:17,920
to confirm the findings of the
studies uh the notice of public meeting

117
00:13:15,600 --> 00:13:21,480
that was originally issued uh on
February 4th of this year uh

118
00:13:20,000 --> 00:13:28,079
inadvertently did not include the
requested relief for the lot depth of 29

119
00:13:24,360 --> 00:13:34,399
M and L of 30 m uh for this public uh
Park block as well

120
00:13:31,519 --> 00:13:41,600
as uh reduced exterior sidey yard width
of 3.5 meters uh for the townhouse

121
00:13:38,199 --> 00:13:47,800
blocks abing Street a and a rear yard
depth of 4.5 MERS which is measured to

122
00:13:44,000 --> 00:13:51,680
Street a uh for uh for the townhouse
blocks uh staff are satisfied that

123
00:13:50,399 --> 00:13:57,199
despite it not being included in the
notice uh proper notice was still given

124
00:13:54,560 --> 00:14:02,000
as the requested relief is it really
technical in in nature and all of the

125
00:13:59,839 --> 00:14:07,079
plates that were circulated and reports
circulated uh on the public notice and

126
00:14:04,560 --> 00:14:13,720
provided to the public uh did include
include that relief uh that relief will

127
00:14:10,160 --> 00:14:13,720
effectively facilitate what is

128
00:14:16,639 --> 00:14:24,240
proposed uh the applicant did host sorry
notice the complete application was

129
00:14:21,079 --> 00:14:30,560
originally provided uh to uh the public
in surrounding residents in October of

130
00:14:27,800 --> 00:14:35,320
2023 with a revised nor comput
application in October of 2024 uh

131
00:14:33,800 --> 00:14:40,759
following some changes the applicant
made uh following an open house that the

132
00:14:37,839 --> 00:14:46,120
applicant held in April of 2024 to
solicit public input uh the comments

133
00:14:44,480 --> 00:14:51,800
received are included as an attachment
to the report uh and there's many

134
00:14:49,279 --> 00:14:56,079
concerns expressed uh about the density
development concerns about compatible

135
00:14:53,800 --> 00:15:00,800
surrounding neighborhood and concerns
about parking and traffic impacts and

136
00:14:58,279 --> 00:15:04,560
safety
uh overall with respect to the uh

137
00:15:03,079 --> 00:15:08,639
provincial planning statement staff of
the opinion that the proposal is

138
00:15:06,320 --> 00:15:14,120
consistent with that with that document
particularly sections 2.14 and 2.21 to

139
00:15:12,199 --> 00:15:19,120
facilitate housing options and choice
required to meet current and future

140
00:15:16,639 --> 00:15:22,320
residents of the city as well as uh
speaking to the development and

141
00:15:20,440 --> 00:15:25,680
Redevelopment of underutilized
commercial institutional sites for

142
00:15:24,440 --> 00:15:31,600
residential
uses uh it's important to note that this

143
00:15:28,240 --> 00:15:35,800
site currently zoned commity facility uh
could be used for a public Hospital

144
00:15:33,519 --> 00:15:42,199
could be used for a long-term care
facility uh could be used for a number

145
00:15:37,880 --> 00:15:46,680
of other uh institutional uh uses uh
that could have a density and a far

146
00:15:44,000 --> 00:15:51,920
greater impact than what's proposed uh
so the uh these applications though seek

147
00:15:48,839 --> 00:15:57,560
to uh only permit residential uses on
the site the traffic impact study was uh

148
00:15:55,480 --> 00:16:03,040
prepared by the applicant uh the
findings were peer-reviewed

149
00:15:59,600 --> 00:16:05,600
uh by an external peer review consultant
who indicated that they were in

150
00:16:04,040 --> 00:16:11,440
agreement with the study and the
recommendations and the

151
00:16:07,639 --> 00:16:17,199
methodology um originally the lands have
two accesses from Lake View Drive uh

152
00:16:14,959 --> 00:16:23,519
located approximately me here if you can
see my cursor uh before the the

153
00:16:20,240 --> 00:16:28,680
landscaped median Island and after the
landscape media Island uh the applicant

154
00:16:26,639 --> 00:16:34,959
uh indicated that it was not preferable
to to use this most westerly entrance to

155
00:16:32,240 --> 00:16:39,720
facilitate the apartment block um a lot
of discussion occurred with Oxford

156
00:16:37,160 --> 00:16:47,240
County Public Works about permitting a
second access or a sole one access onto

157
00:16:44,480 --> 00:16:51,920
Oxford Road 59 uh the compromise that
was arrived at was a right in right out

158
00:16:49,639 --> 00:16:56,959
to ensure that there aren't cues uh for
turning left uh down Oxford Road 59 and

159
00:16:55,160 --> 00:17:02,440
that vehicle looking to enter the
subdivision from the north would not

160
00:16:59,720 --> 00:17:12,400
stop and wait to make a left-hand turn
uh and and stop traffic in that area uh

161
00:17:07,280 --> 00:17:20,480
the ti uh was revised to um reflect this
Arrangement and the the findings confirm

162
00:17:15,240 --> 00:17:26,199
that the impacts are minor and they're
acceptable uh with respect to other

163
00:17:23,439 --> 00:17:30,559
studies that were uh conducted the noise
feasibility study uh found that there

164
00:17:29,280 --> 00:17:35,919
there would be some dwellings that' be
impacted by noise from Ox Road 59 and

165
00:17:34,000 --> 00:17:40,880
recommended some standard conditions
such as requiring the buildings to have

166
00:17:37,880 --> 00:17:48,480
air conditioning and acoustical or noise
barrier uh for the dwellings uh located

167
00:17:44,960 --> 00:17:51,160
uh directly or near aux Road 59 the
these recommendations will be carried

168
00:17:49,840 --> 00:17:55,760
forward and implemented through
conditions of draft approval and in the

169
00:17:53,480 --> 00:17:59,840
approved site plans and the subdivision
agreement uh with respect to the the

170
00:17:57,840 --> 00:18:06,640
parking that's the uh parking that
sought uh the applicants proposing to uh

171
00:18:03,440 --> 00:18:12,600
not include or not wave the requirement
for visitor parking visitor parking is

172
00:18:09,159 --> 00:18:17,120
typically one per 10 space uh of the
required parking uh in support of the

173
00:18:15,159 --> 00:18:22,799
the parking uh requests they did submit
a parking demand study uh which was done

174
00:18:20,640 --> 00:18:27,400
for the townhouse and apartment dwelling
blocks uh the study concluded that the

175
00:18:25,400 --> 00:18:31,919
proposed parking being provided was
sufficient to meet the expected parking

176
00:18:29,880 --> 00:18:36,240
demand from the land from the proposed
units uh as predicted by The Institute

177
00:18:34,600 --> 00:18:40,520
of Transportation
Engineers it's also noted that the

178
00:18:38,440 --> 00:18:44,120
parking that sought is generally in line
with uh other approved parking

179
00:18:42,480 --> 00:18:49,640
reductions that the city's granted
recently for high density development uh

180
00:18:46,600 --> 00:18:53,400
in other locations throughout the
city uh staff for the proposals

181
00:18:52,039 --> 00:18:59,120
consistent with the official plan
criteria for infield subdivisions as the

182
00:18:56,000 --> 00:19:04,039
design will provide a buffering or miate
the impact of the higher density to

183
00:19:01,200 --> 00:19:09,600
existing neighborhood uses um there's 26
single or semi- detached dwelling units

184
00:19:07,200 --> 00:19:14,760
uh that will back onto the existing low
density development as well as the the

185
00:19:12,039 --> 00:19:19,559
storm Pond uh these units will provide a
buffer a transition to medium density

186
00:19:17,480 --> 00:19:24,640
and then the medium density or a
transition from the high density to

187
00:19:21,559 --> 00:19:29,919
these land uses uh no special zoning
reductions or Provisions are requested

188
00:19:27,320 --> 00:19:35,120
for the the semi P dwelling block the R2
block so the standard rear yard depths

189
00:19:32,640 --> 00:19:41,200
would all apply in that case as well the
storm Pond and the the park would uh

190
00:19:37,799 --> 00:19:47,880
buffer the uses uh to the South as well
as the presence of the uh landscaped

191
00:19:43,559 --> 00:19:53,679
Island uh which uh will be um it'll be
modified but required to be reinstated

192
00:19:51,280 --> 00:19:59,440
uh as a condition of the draft
approval as well it's important to note

193
00:19:56,000 --> 00:20:06,120
that this subject location also has
higher density in the area uh

194
00:20:02,520 --> 00:20:12,679
particularly uh to the West there's a a
five-story apartment building um at 325

195
00:20:09,720 --> 00:20:19,240
Lake View Drive as well as the existing
uh PUD 1 zoning uh in this location does

196
00:20:16,360 --> 00:20:25,240
provide approvals for up again up to a
five-story apartment building would just

197
00:20:21,480 --> 00:20:29,000
require uh site plan approval for that
uh there are neighborhood serving

198
00:20:26,640 --> 00:20:34,679
commercial uses in this uh commercial
small commercial development including

199
00:20:31,240 --> 00:20:39,640
uh dentist Tim Hortons and a pharmacy
that provides uh neighborhood serving

200
00:20:36,679 --> 00:20:46,559
commercial uses uh for these residents
and for the residents uh in the broader

201
00:20:42,400 --> 00:20:51,240
area as well uh uh respecting
compatibility Lake View Drive is

202
00:20:48,480 --> 00:20:56,720
designated as a minor collector road so
it is designated and designed to handle

203
00:20:54,120 --> 00:21:01,760
some additional traffic however uh
through the TI and and through the the

204
00:20:58,880 --> 00:21:08,080
design you know there wouldn't be much
um not expect to be much impact to uh

205
00:21:05,039 --> 00:21:13,640
properties East of uh the entrance to
Street a on Lakeview Drive as uh they'd

206
00:21:10,440 --> 00:21:17,520
have a quicker exit to the north uh on
the right in right out or they'd come to

207
00:21:15,440 --> 00:21:23,640
the light uh to go to the
South as well as there's uh plenty of

208
00:21:20,000 --> 00:21:30,840
amenity and and Leisure uh Trails Parks
um and the the Cowen fields to the

209
00:21:26,880 --> 00:21:36,320
north uh there's also a condition in the
uh subdivision approvals that speaks to

210
00:21:33,559 --> 00:21:40,679
the retention of trees and where trees
are to be removed uh compensation is

211
00:21:38,600 --> 00:21:44,320
required to PR provided to the city in
accordance with the city's tree

212
00:21:46,000 --> 00:21:53,600
bylaw with respect to the the zoning
that's requested uh staff are supportive

213
00:21:50,880 --> 00:21:58,080
of of the requested zoning uh the art
the stack tow houses in the medium

214
00:21:55,840 --> 00:22:02,679
density block would have a reduced front
yard depth the 5.5 m uh to the main

215
00:22:01,279 --> 00:22:09,000
building but there' still be the
required uh 6 M for the parking in front

216
00:22:06,279 --> 00:22:13,480
of the the garages as required they
reduced uh rear yard depths and exterior

217
00:22:11,200 --> 00:22:19,320
side yard wids to Street a and reduce
lot area and uh an increased height from

218
00:22:17,000 --> 00:22:23,440
three to four stories are considered
appropriate as they'll really only

219
00:22:20,640 --> 00:22:28,679
impact the internal uh development of
the site and they won't uh impact

220
00:22:26,159 --> 00:22:32,840
surrounding uh properties uh the
development of those blocks also be done

221
00:22:30,520 --> 00:22:38,120
through site plan approval or matters
such as grading Landscaping drain engine

222
00:22:36,000 --> 00:22:42,400
all those land all those other matters
will be addressed to the satisfaction of

223
00:22:40,159 --> 00:22:48,200
the of the city and
county uh the as noted the the current

224
00:22:45,480 --> 00:22:52,679
Community facility zoning uh would
permit up to eight stories for a

225
00:22:50,080 --> 00:22:56,480
building that's there today so planning
staff have looked at the additional

226
00:22:54,880 --> 00:23:01,840
height from 3 to four for the medium
density block which again is is n really

227
00:22:59,320 --> 00:23:05,279
isn't rate AB budding any surrounding
existing properties so staff for the

228
00:23:03,480 --> 00:23:11,039
opinion that it can be considered
appropriate as well as the uh request to

229
00:23:08,120 --> 00:23:16,000
relief to the high density block um
staff are supportive of of those

230
00:23:13,679 --> 00:23:22,200
requests as well uh most of them are
designed to site the building closer to

231
00:23:18,760 --> 00:23:28,000
um van Avenue to reduce the impacts on
on surrounding properties

232
00:23:25,320 --> 00:23:31,360
um overall staff are supportive of the
application

233
00:23:29,400 --> 00:23:36,559
uh we believe there an appropriate
balance of um requested relief while

234
00:23:34,480 --> 00:23:42,080
providing a variety of of housing types
and choice in this area uh this is one

235
00:23:40,080 --> 00:23:49,000
of the last this probably is the last
large Greenfield site or infield site in

236
00:23:45,200 --> 00:23:54,640
the city for uh Asen development as such
so staff uh consider this to be an

237
00:23:51,120 --> 00:23:59,520
appropriate infill opportunity uh we
recommend uh support of the official

238
00:23:57,000 --> 00:24:04,240
plan Amendment uh approval and principle
of the requesting zoning changes and

239
00:24:01,799 --> 00:24:12,279
support of the application uh for draft
approval subject to the

240
00:24:07,360 --> 00:24:12,279
noted 47 conditions thank

241
00:24:12,360 --> 00:24:19,919
you thank you before I uh ask Council
for any questions I see we have people

242
00:24:17,799 --> 00:24:25,159
outside if you'd like to come in and
kind of go off to the sides I'm not sure

243
00:24:22,440 --> 00:24:29,080
how well you can hear it all outside
you're more than welcome to come in just

244
00:24:27,200 --> 00:24:34,679
go off to the sides not standing in
front of anybody there might be a couple

245
00:24:30,840 --> 00:24:37,120
of seats available but please thank you
for being

246
00:24:39,840 --> 00:24:48,399
here okay all right thank
you uh and with that Council have any

247
00:24:45,840 --> 00:24:48,399
questions of the

248
00:24:51,679 --> 00:24:55,000
planner councelor

249
00:24:56,200 --> 00:25:03,080
shenberg one thing we often talk about
is uh parking so from the mayor through

250
00:25:00,240 --> 00:25:07,200
to Mr Gilbert U how many parking spots
are underground in the apartment

251
00:25:05,000 --> 00:25:11,399
building the two apartment buildings in
total so that's

252
00:25:08,360 --> 00:25:16,320
what 160 units for the
apartments uh I have to defer to the

253
00:25:14,480 --> 00:25:22,080
applicant I'm not exactly sure how many
are underground and and surface um but

254
00:25:19,480 --> 00:25:27,799
they are providing the 1.5 spaces per
unit just not the visitor parking which

255
00:25:24,399 --> 00:25:31,039
is one per 10 spaces and the four story
stack town houses will they actually

256
00:25:29,440 --> 00:25:34,320
have attached garages that you can be
able to I mean this photo here looks

257
00:25:32,880 --> 00:25:38,559
nice and pretty but it looks more like a
drone shot taken from a mile up as

258
00:25:36,200 --> 00:25:43,000
opposed to any kind of elevation shot to
give you an idea about uh garages or

259
00:25:40,799 --> 00:25:47,240
balconies or what the front doors might
look like etc

260
00:25:44,320 --> 00:25:51,760
etc uh to make I'll again defer to the
applicant about their design for

261
00:25:49,679 --> 00:25:56,440
attached garages but again I'll note
that they're providing the 1.5 spaces

262
00:25:53,799 --> 00:26:00,600
required they're just not providing that
one per 10 spaces addition of visitor

263
00:26:03,440 --> 00:26:07,159
parking okay anyone

264
00:26:08,159 --> 00:26:16,200
else so I just like to ask Mr Gilbert um
just want to be clear

265
00:26:13,679 --> 00:26:21,039
you there is an opportunity here we've
seen many different plans throughout

266
00:26:18,559 --> 00:26:28,559
this um but you did mention something
that caught my ear about eight

267
00:26:23,960 --> 00:26:31,440
stories um under the current zoning
there could have been allowed eight

268
00:26:29,600 --> 00:26:35,200
zoning or eight stories is that what I
heard you

269
00:26:32,520 --> 00:26:39,120
say so under the current Community
facility zoning the maximum height for a

270
00:26:37,480 --> 00:26:44,919
building that's permitted in that which
could be a long-term care facility a

271
00:26:41,760 --> 00:26:51,799
retirement home a public Hospital a
number of other uses the maximum height

272
00:26:47,240 --> 00:26:57,720
is eight stories currently today thank
you okay any other questions from

273
00:26:54,000 --> 00:26:57,720
Council to the planner

274
00:26:59,120 --> 00:27:07,520
okay seeing none thank
you at this point I'd ask the uh

275
00:27:04,880 --> 00:27:10,440
applicant or representative come forward
I think Monte

276
00:27:22,320 --> 00:27:27,679
Brown welcome and thank you for being
here

277
00:27:33,640 --> 00:27:38,600
here as well ready for it okay perfect
open the

278
00:27:42,840 --> 00:27:53,279
file can everyone hear me
okay testing testing hello

279
00:27:49,919 --> 00:27:57,840
hello I'll try to speak up um as loud as
I can um good evening your worship

280
00:27:55,600 --> 00:28:01,960
members of council City staff and
members of the public in attendance

281
00:27:59,440 --> 00:28:06,840
tonight my name is Patrick matkowski I'm
a planner with montith brown planning

282
00:28:04,279 --> 00:28:11,960
Consultants uh with me tonight is Jay
McGuffin president of Monty Brown Planet

283
00:28:09,279 --> 00:28:17,000
consultants and we also have Aaron blada
in attendance tonight he is the traffic

284
00:28:13,640 --> 00:28:22,080
engineer from RC Spencer and
Associates uh we're here on behalf of

285
00:28:19,159 --> 00:28:28,880
fari Holdings um to provide council with
a presentation uh regarding the proposed

286
00:28:24,440 --> 00:28:28,880
development at 401 Lake View Drive

287
00:28:30,799 --> 00:28:38,760
uh bear with
me uh so just who we are uh so far he

288
00:28:36,200 --> 00:28:42,399
Holdings is uh one of the largest real
estate holdings and development

289
00:28:40,120 --> 00:28:48,039
companies in Ontario uh focused on
providing homes and Commercial uh space

290
00:28:45,519 --> 00:28:51,279
in over 58 Ontario communities which
includes

291
00:28:49,000 --> 00:28:56,600
Woodstock um and they have a focus on
building and developing over, 1500 units

292
00:28:53,279 --> 00:29:01,360
across Ontario uh Monte Brown uh is a
London based planning firm with over 45

293
00:28:59,480 --> 00:29:05,360
years of providing professional land use
planning and Urban Design experience uh

294
00:29:04,039 --> 00:29:08,679
and we have extensive experience
throughout Southwestern Ontario

295
00:29:07,360 --> 00:29:14,919
including
Woodstock RC Spencer is a windsor based

296
00:29:12,159 --> 00:29:18,559
engineering firm with over 35 uh plus
years of providing professional

297
00:29:16,320 --> 00:29:21,679
engineering experience uh specifically
with Transportation Planning and

298
00:29:19,799 --> 00:29:27,200
Engineering experience across Ontario
which includes Woodstock and Oxford

299
00:29:24,960 --> 00:29:32,159
County uh so a bit about the project
site I'm sure many of you are um

300
00:29:29,600 --> 00:29:37,440
familiar with the site uh but just to
provide some background so the site is

301
00:29:34,320 --> 00:29:43,200
uh on the northeast corner of uh Lake
View Drive and County row 59 uh with

302
00:29:40,279 --> 00:29:47,960
Frontage on both roads and forms part of
the Alder Grange uh subdivision the site

303
00:29:45,919 --> 00:29:53,760
currently does have a one-story uh
building um which was uh most recently

304
00:29:51,320 --> 00:29:58,080
leased by infrastructure Ontario for
offices of the Ministry of Agriculture

305
00:29:55,760 --> 00:30:03,159
food and Rural Affairs uh first
three-year term uh but that just

306
00:29:59,880 --> 00:30:08,960
recently expired in January of
2025 and the property was purchased in

307
00:30:06,000 --> 00:30:14,120
uh January 2022 when the property was no
longer required to deliver provincial

308
00:30:11,600 --> 00:30:19,279
government services and no other levels
of government or non for-profit

309
00:30:15,919 --> 00:30:24,360
organizations colleges universities Etc
expressed interest in the property

310
00:30:21,200 --> 00:30:24,360
through the disposition

311
00:30:25,440 --> 00:30:33,399
process so this is a little difficult to
see uh but just to provide a bit of uh

312
00:30:30,640 --> 00:30:38,720
land use context within the 4 800 met
radius and for context that would be

313
00:30:35,600 --> 00:30:42,519
about a 5 to 10 minute walking distance
uh so the subject lands are directly

314
00:30:40,399 --> 00:30:47,640
adjacent to single and semi- detached
dwellings uh to the north uh which would

315
00:30:44,799 --> 00:30:53,399
be along Ridgewood Drive and Court uh
and as well as West uh View Court uh to

316
00:30:51,000 --> 00:30:58,399
the east uh on Crestwood Court uh we
have single detach dwellings uh to the

317
00:30:56,000 --> 00:31:05,240
South uh we have single detach dwellings
fronting um uh Lake View Drive and to

318
00:31:02,279 --> 00:31:10,919
the West uh we have County Road 59 as
well as uh the uh the commercial Plaza

319
00:31:08,799 --> 00:31:17,919
that Eric alluded to uh which includes
the Tim Hortons and the Petro Canada as

320
00:31:12,760 --> 00:31:22,559
well as um the pharmacy and the uh uh
the dental uh

321
00:31:20,039 --> 00:31:26,639
office as well uh to the West we have
the five-story apartment building which

322
00:31:24,399 --> 00:31:30,600
is known as the greens of Sally Creek
Apartments

323
00:31:28,279 --> 00:31:35,000
and there are uh a number of uh parks
and recreational amenities in the

324
00:31:31,960 --> 00:31:39,639
surrounding uh um context including
Cowen Sports Park which uh includes a

325
00:31:37,399 --> 00:31:45,600
number of soccer fields U multi-purpose
uh Fields uh gymnasiums pickleball

326
00:31:42,440 --> 00:31:50,200
courts a walking Track we also have a
Sally Creek ult Community Center to the

327
00:31:48,159 --> 00:31:55,480
Southwest which is a private uh
Community Center and then a number of

328
00:31:52,720 --> 00:31:59,840
parks and recre uh parks and open space
um in the surrounding Community

329
00:31:57,440 --> 00:32:02,639
including JJ Williams Park and David
Lowe's Memorial

330
00:32:03,240 --> 00:32:11,039
Park um so before uh everyone tonight we
have uh the proposed planning

331
00:32:09,519 --> 00:32:15,120
applications to support the proposed
development um as already discussed uh

332
00:32:13,559 --> 00:32:19,159
official plan Amendment and Zoning bylaw
Amendment are required to rezone and

333
00:32:17,600 --> 00:32:24,159
redesignate the subject lands from a
community facility uh designation Zone

334
00:32:21,880 --> 00:32:28,679
to a mix of residential uh designations
and zones uh as well a plan of

335
00:32:26,399 --> 00:32:34,559
subdivision application is uh has been
submitted as the formal mechanism to uh

336
00:32:31,200 --> 00:32:34,559
create the the new development

337
00:32:35,320 --> 00:32:42,840
blocks so a bit of project uh history
and timeline uh for Council and the

338
00:32:40,159 --> 00:32:48,080
members of the public um so the lands
were acquired by fari in January of

339
00:32:45,960 --> 00:32:52,760
2022 and shortly after a
pre-consultation meeting was held in

340
00:32:49,840 --> 00:32:56,760
March of the same year uh to uh discuss
the proposed development uh staff

341
00:32:54,960 --> 00:33:01,960
confirmed that new planning applications
would be filed with additional studies

342
00:32:59,639 --> 00:33:06,039
uh to address the proposed development
and uh between March and September uh

343
00:33:04,240 --> 00:33:10,720
fari and the project team have worked uh
diligently to uh uh work towards a

344
00:33:08,919 --> 00:33:15,080
complete planning application which was
submitted in September of

345
00:33:12,480 --> 00:33:19,279
2023 and ultimately deemed complete in
October of

346
00:33:16,880 --> 00:33:22,960
2023 uh following the original
submission a number of public comments

347
00:33:21,360 --> 00:33:27,519
were received concerning the proposed
development and accordingly uh the team

348
00:33:26,039 --> 00:33:30,760
uh held an in-person Community
Information

349
00:33:28,559 --> 00:33:35,880
meeting uh in April at the Reeves
Community complex to present the

350
00:33:32,840 --> 00:33:39,600
proposed development and uh to receive
feedback and input to gauge the level of

351
00:33:38,039 --> 00:33:42,639
support from the community and identify
concerns or anticipated challenges with

352
00:33:41,760 --> 00:33:48,200
the
applications uh based on their feedback

353
00:33:44,919 --> 00:33:54,760
received by the public uh between April
and O uh October of 2024 uh fari had

354
00:33:53,000 --> 00:33:59,399
worked extensively with its project team
to incorporate the input uh into the

355
00:33:57,480 --> 00:34:02,679
design Vision that is will be
Illustrated through the revised plan uh

356
00:34:01,399 --> 00:34:08,079
on the next
slides and so that revised application

357
00:34:05,760 --> 00:34:12,760
was submitted October 2024 to amend the
original submitted package uh to respond

358
00:34:10,639 --> 00:34:16,040
to the comments and concerns raised as
well as to address some of the comments

359
00:34:14,399 --> 00:34:20,399
that were received by the commenting
agencies through the circulation of the

360
00:34:18,040 --> 00:34:24,440
original
application so the next series of slides

361
00:34:23,119 --> 00:34:28,960
are going to outline the development
Vision uh for the site uh which will

362
00:34:26,839 --> 00:34:34,440
also illustrate uh the original plan and
changes that were made based on city and

363
00:34:31,720 --> 00:34:38,119
public input but before we go to that I
just wanted to outline some of the uh

364
00:34:36,599 --> 00:34:41,960
high level guiding principles that
influenced our development vision for

365
00:34:39,839 --> 00:34:45,679
the site uh starting off with the first
one is just identifying an opportunity

366
00:34:44,280 --> 00:34:50,200
for the reutilization and
intensification of an under uh developed

367
00:34:48,320 --> 00:34:54,760
Lance which were considered Surplus to
the provincial government second uh

368
00:34:52,919 --> 00:34:59,839
providing an opportunity for development
within the city's built area boundary

369
00:34:56,919 --> 00:35:04,960
which is not on a Greenfield site uh on
Municipal services in keeping with the

370
00:35:01,880 --> 00:35:09,119
provincial and County official plan
policies the F the third is responding

371
00:35:07,400 --> 00:35:13,359
to the provincial planning statement
direction to accommodate an appropriate

372
00:35:11,359 --> 00:35:16,280
attainable and market-based range and
mix of residential types to meet the

373
00:35:15,079 --> 00:35:20,400
long-term
needs fourth providing an opportunity

374
00:35:18,839 --> 00:35:24,760
for the extension of existing
residential uses and the introduction of

375
00:35:22,359 --> 00:35:28,280
new housing forms to contribute to a
complete Community the creation of sense

376
00:35:26,440 --> 00:35:32,440
of place and age in place
opportunities and lastly identifying an

377
00:35:30,880 --> 00:35:37,280
opportunity to provide public Parkland
and open space and complimentary

378
00:35:34,480 --> 00:35:40,800
pedestrian linkages uh to promote
interconnectivity outdoor media

379
00:35:39,040 --> 00:35:45,320
Recreation pedestrian friendly
environment and to have the public

380
00:35:42,960 --> 00:35:50,520
Parkland uh serve as a focal point which
will be Illustrated on the revised plan

381
00:35:47,720 --> 00:35:55,040
in the following slides so I'll turn it
over to Jay who's going to provide um uh

382
00:35:53,440 --> 00:36:00,440
what the original plan is what comments
we've heard and what the revised plan uh

383
00:35:57,880 --> 00:36:00,440
provides

384
00:36:00,560 --> 00:36:03,839
now thanks

385
00:36:06,960 --> 00:36:13,400
Patrick good evening worship uh members
of uh Council and members of the public

386
00:36:11,960 --> 00:36:20,240
it's a
pleasure it's a pleasure to be here this

387
00:36:16,720 --> 00:36:20,240
evening uh is this

388
00:36:21,160 --> 00:36:28,079
working so in response to um the
information tonight first I'd like to

389
00:36:26,119 --> 00:36:32,400
start off by thanking Mr Gil for his
presentation and uh the information that

390
00:36:30,480 --> 00:36:36,079
has been brought forward and like to
indicate that we've had the opportunity

391
00:36:33,960 --> 00:36:40,079
to review the staff report in detail and
all of its recommendations and are in

392
00:36:38,119 --> 00:36:45,040
general support of that uh report and
its

393
00:36:41,520 --> 00:36:49,400
recommendations um as Mr makosi has
identified uh this particular plan is

394
00:36:47,599 --> 00:36:54,319
coming back to council this is the first
time that council is seeing this uh full

395
00:36:51,800 --> 00:36:59,240
package um there were invitations sent
out to council for a public information

396
00:36:56,880 --> 00:37:03,520
center that was held last April of
2024 uh in which we heard from the

397
00:37:01,720 --> 00:37:08,680
public uh when we brought out the
original submission and we diarised all

398
00:37:06,440 --> 00:37:13,000
of the information that we had heard and
went back with our client to review the

399
00:37:10,440 --> 00:37:16,839
comments that we had heard um that
included traffic concerns relating to

400
00:37:15,000 --> 00:37:22,880
access onto County Road
59 uh reduction of parking and spillover

401
00:37:20,040 --> 00:37:26,720
and adjacent to public roads and a
request to increase the amount of

402
00:37:24,640 --> 00:37:30,240
parking being supplied there were
questions about the location of the

403
00:37:28,119 --> 00:37:35,680
storm water management pond and a desire
by the general neighborhood to move that

404
00:37:32,160 --> 00:37:40,920
Pond North as well as the location of
the public park and its size and the

405
00:37:38,440 --> 00:37:46,599
location of the apartment building that
was running along Lake View Drive it was

406
00:37:44,119 --> 00:37:53,160
desired to have that building by the
community moved so that it was along the

407
00:37:48,760 --> 00:37:53,160
higher order Road County Road 59

408
00:37:58,560 --> 00:38:06,040
so we took that plan and um updated all
of the various studies that are

409
00:38:03,680 --> 00:38:12,319
necessary to support changes in our
proposal and as a result went through a

410
00:38:09,240 --> 00:38:18,280
redesign process first and foremost
rotating the location of the apartment

411
00:38:14,920 --> 00:38:23,079
building um moving it off Lake Shore or
uh Lake View Drive and moving it onto

412
00:38:20,520 --> 00:38:23,079
County Road

413
00:38:25,119 --> 00:38:34,079
59 expanding and enlarg merging the
public park to the 5% uh that is

414
00:38:31,839 --> 00:38:38,480
required as a statutory requirement not
relying on any cash and L of Parkland

415
00:38:36,200 --> 00:38:45,760
but rather a full dedication of Parkland
to the city extending in a long uh Lake

416
00:38:41,560 --> 00:38:52,520
View Drive uh which um mimics the open
space that is provided on the older uh

417
00:38:49,040 --> 00:38:56,880
Grange open space uh that is identified
as a future Park in the city's official

418
00:38:54,359 --> 00:38:59,440
plan on the South Side uh of the road in
this General

419
00:39:00,000 --> 00:39:08,119
location the introduction of a right in
right out uh traffic control system at

420
00:39:05,560 --> 00:39:08,119
County Road

421
00:39:08,960 --> 00:39:19,800
59 the maintenance of the existing or of
the originally proposed uh low density

422
00:39:16,440 --> 00:39:24,319
uh semi- detached dwellings uh along the
perimeter of the site where it would a

423
00:39:22,160 --> 00:39:29,359
butt onto the existing low density
residential units uh Beyond this

424
00:39:26,599 --> 00:39:29,359
particular site

425
00:39:29,760 --> 00:39:39,119
the reorganization of the midrise Town
Homes uh the stack town houses in the

426
00:39:35,079 --> 00:39:46,520
sitter center of the uh development uh
these units uh do not have garages these

427
00:39:41,800 --> 00:39:46,520
units are designed for rear

428
00:39:49,480 --> 00:39:56,839
access a provision of the 1.5 parking
spaces as required by the zoning bylaw

429
00:39:55,079 --> 00:40:01,560
and the introduction of underground
parking under the two apartment

430
00:39:59,319 --> 00:40:06,160
buildings uh one of the councilors asked
how many parking spaces were underground

431
00:40:03,319 --> 00:40:09,560
that number is 67 and it is within the
footprints of both of the

432
00:40:10,480 --> 00:40:16,200
towers there were comments received from
the public in terms of relocating the

433
00:40:14,240 --> 00:40:20,640
storm water management Pond our
Engineers identify this is the low point

434
00:40:18,680 --> 00:40:27,720
of the area and where the water wants to
go to uh and that is the guiding

435
00:40:24,040 --> 00:40:32,599
decision on where the storm Pond is uh
and the site has to match its topography

436
00:40:30,119 --> 00:40:36,440
along the exterior so we have to match
grade with the existing lands that are

437
00:40:34,800 --> 00:40:42,480
already developed to the north and to
the East and that is where the storm

438
00:40:39,119 --> 00:40:46,680
Pond is um being directed or the storm
water is being

439
00:40:43,920 --> 00:40:51,680
directed uh as we move in this is a an
aerial view uh looking West towards the

440
00:40:50,000 --> 00:40:56,839
intersection of Lake View Drive in
Oxford County Road 59 so we're looking

441
00:40:54,880 --> 00:41:00,839
at is we're hovering over sort of the
corner of the existing residential

442
00:40:58,839 --> 00:41:06,400
development looking toward the proposed
development you can see the five-story

443
00:41:03,200 --> 00:41:10,640
apartment building uh at the very top of
the page which is in existence and the

444
00:41:08,920 --> 00:41:14,440
relationship of that building to the
buildings that are being proposed the

445
00:41:12,880 --> 00:41:20,760
open space that's being proposed
adjacent that building and the interior

446
00:41:17,560 --> 00:41:20,760
development that is being

447
00:41:20,839 --> 00:41:27,760
proposed as we walk through these uh
particular images have been developed by

448
00:41:26,440 --> 00:41:32,319
the Builder who is is going to be
building these homes uh that is

449
00:41:29,960 --> 00:41:38,160
Millstone homes uh at the time of our
original uh submission uh the Builder

450
00:41:35,920 --> 00:41:41,000
had not been selected uh so we do now
have the Builder and they have developed

451
00:41:39,760 --> 00:41:46,040
their floor plans and these are the
floor plans these are the semi detached

452
00:41:43,839 --> 00:41:50,440
homes that are going to be lining and ab
buding the existing low density

453
00:41:47,839 --> 00:41:50,440
residential

454
00:41:50,640 --> 00:41:57,640
units this is taking a look to the
interior of the site from the front of

455
00:41:55,400 --> 00:42:02,280
those semidetached units to the stack
town homes that are existing on the

456
00:41:59,319 --> 00:42:08,800
interior of the site and you can see the
effect that that has on blocking out a

457
00:42:04,520 --> 00:42:14,880
lot of the apartment building uh to the
rear this is at the intersection of Lake

458
00:42:11,800 --> 00:42:19,040
View Drive and uh vetar or County Road
59 looking to the

459
00:42:19,960 --> 00:42:28,800
Northeast this is looking from one of
the existing dwellings backyard as

460
00:42:25,359 --> 00:42:34,119
contemplated using uh Google street map
and Google aerial

461
00:42:31,079 --> 00:42:39,599
photography um from a point of elevation
in that property uh looking into the

462
00:42:37,040 --> 00:42:43,920
abing low density uh semi- detached
dwellings that are proposed so the the

463
00:42:41,440 --> 00:42:46,359
roof lines that you are seeing are the
proposed

464
00:42:46,480 --> 00:42:56,000
development this is an image viewing
into and across the storm Pond from the

465
00:42:52,640 --> 00:43:00,319
southeast corner of the development uh
looking out to the West toward where the

466
00:42:58,760 --> 00:43:06,280
fivestory apartment or seven story
apartment buildings are along

467
00:43:03,800 --> 00:43:11,200
vitart uh Mr Gilbert did an excellent
overview of the technical studies that

468
00:43:08,800 --> 00:43:14,800
have been undertaken uh just a reminder
phase one and two environmental site

469
00:43:12,920 --> 00:43:19,040
assessment servicing and storm water
management and feasibility traffic

470
00:43:17,040 --> 00:43:24,599
impact and assessment and sight line
analysis that was also undertaken peer

471
00:43:21,480 --> 00:43:28,760
review by I understand County staff and
Paradigm Transportation Solutions Inc

472
00:43:26,680 --> 00:43:32,839
which is a a third-party consultant
retained on behalf of the city of

473
00:43:30,240 --> 00:43:38,559
Woodstock a stage three archaeological
assessment noise feasibility study tree

474
00:43:35,640 --> 00:43:44,200
inventory and preservation plan a street
tree planting plan and a shadow study

475
00:43:42,200 --> 00:43:48,160
all of those uh materials were not only
completed the first time but any of the

476
00:43:46,400 --> 00:43:53,760
relevant documents that were necessary
to be updated were updated to respond to

477
00:43:50,960 --> 00:43:58,079
the changes that we brought back uh for
the complete application in October 2024

478
00:43:56,440 --> 00:44:04,079
that are in front of this
evening uh with that I'd like to uh turn

479
00:44:00,720 --> 00:44:08,839
the presentation over to Mr Aaron blat
with RC Spencers he's just going to give

480
00:44:06,040 --> 00:44:12,760
a quick overview of the uh methodology
and findings of his uh traffic

481
00:44:15,480 --> 00:44:22,079
study thank you
Jay through you your

482
00:44:19,720 --> 00:44:25,200
worship my name is Aaron blad and I'm an
owner of varcy Spencer Associates

483
00:44:23,559 --> 00:44:29,960
Incorporated which is a Southwestern
Ontario based company I'm a designated

484
00:44:27,920 --> 00:44:33,800
Consulting engineer a professional
traffic operations engineer and Road

485
00:44:31,599 --> 00:44:37,839
Safety Professional corporately most of
my time has spent uh preparing traffic

486
00:44:35,720 --> 00:44:41,839
impact studies like these but I also do
dabble in some other things like

487
00:44:38,960 --> 00:44:44,960
Corridor studies uh larger plans and
specifically traffic signal design

488
00:44:43,319 --> 00:44:48,400
amongst other things but occasionally I
do also offer technical presentations

489
00:44:46,640 --> 00:44:51,720
through the University of Windsor as
well as through the onario traffic

490
00:44:49,559 --> 00:44:55,640
Council and the Canadian Institute for
transportation Engineers I do thank you

491
00:44:53,960 --> 00:44:59,040
for the opportunity today to present our
traffic impact study overview

492
00:45:00,520 --> 00:45:07,480
for this project we specifically studied
the signalized intersection of Lake View

493
00:45:04,480 --> 00:45:12,000
Drive ADV vited Avenue commonly known as
Oxford Road 59 we also studied the

494
00:45:09,960 --> 00:45:19,040
proposed site accesses at Lake View
Drive and at uh vanard

495
00:45:16,319 --> 00:45:23,559
Avenue for the purpose of our modeling
we referred to the proposed sight plan

496
00:45:21,520 --> 00:45:27,079
that was provided to our office and it
IND indicated a right in right out

497
00:45:25,240 --> 00:45:31,160
control AV in sidart Avenue and you
heard some of the permeations of the

498
00:45:28,680 --> 00:45:35,440
plan that uh we ultimately arrived at as
well as an all directional access at

499
00:45:32,960 --> 00:45:35,440
Lake View

500
00:45:35,920 --> 00:45:43,119
Drive our trip generation estimates were
based on the site plan provided to our

501
00:45:40,760 --> 00:45:47,640
office and according to our most current
industry references the proposed site

502
00:45:45,200 --> 00:45:53,559
plan could generate 25 trips entering
and 78 trips exiting during the critical

503
00:45:50,119 --> 00:45:58,400
a peak hour and 69 trips entering and 43
trips exiting during the critical PM

504
00:45:55,920 --> 00:46:02,200
peak hour
at the adjacent signalized intersection

505
00:46:00,760 --> 00:46:05,880
the collected turnning movement counts
indicated that the westbound volumes

506
00:46:03,720 --> 00:46:10,720
totaled 59 during the critical a peak
hour this is approximately equivalent to

507
00:46:08,319 --> 00:46:14,880
one vehicle per minute and so just to
give you a sense I've got a graphic

508
00:46:12,000 --> 00:46:19,160
there that shows uh how those totals uh
come up

509
00:46:16,079 --> 00:46:22,480
together and I also want to point out
that during the critical PM PE hour

510
00:46:20,680 --> 00:46:26,000
westbound volumes total 39 which was
even lower this is approximately

511
00:46:24,359 --> 00:46:29,480
equivalent to one vehicle every 1 and a
half minutes

512
00:46:27,440 --> 00:46:33,440
so that is the current traffic demand
that we see on Lake View Drive therefore

513
00:46:31,920 --> 00:46:37,119
it is our professional opinion that the
subject signalized intersection has

514
00:46:35,040 --> 00:46:40,200
plenty of capacity to accept increased
peak hour traffic

515
00:46:41,240 --> 00:46:47,920
volumes to to be abundantly conservative
um traffic was projected to five and 10

516
00:46:46,280 --> 00:46:52,800
year Horizons which is standard for our
industry uh we applied a 2% growth rate

517
00:46:50,400 --> 00:46:58,160
compounded annually and that was applied
to the collected traffic volumes and for

518
00:46:55,160 --> 00:47:01,440
context a 1% annual growth rate is
typical for our tial roadways but to be

519
00:47:00,240 --> 00:47:06,359
abundantly conservative the road
authority requested that we apply a 2%

520
00:47:03,359 --> 00:47:10,400
growth rate to the modeling last year as
part of our sensitivity analysis on this

521
00:47:08,359 --> 00:47:14,079
site the collected peak hour traffic
volumes were increased by a factor of

522
00:47:11,920 --> 00:47:17,480
one and a half so took the volumes that
were out there multiplied by one and a

523
00:47:15,440 --> 00:47:21,800
half and then we further increased it
annually by 2% compounded annually to

524
00:47:20,240 --> 00:47:26,119
arrive at an overly conservative
estimate I would consider that the

525
00:47:23,359 --> 00:47:29,240
extreme growth scenario of area uh
traffic growth

526
00:47:27,640 --> 00:47:35,119
the results indicate the subject
signalized intersection has the capacity

527
00:47:31,000 --> 00:47:35,119
to accept even an extreme growth

528
00:47:35,160 --> 00:47:42,040
scenario so uh without getting too into
the specifics of uh of the industry I

529
00:47:40,200 --> 00:47:46,680
want to focus on the language a level of
service level of service effectively

530
00:47:44,280 --> 00:47:51,200
qualifies the metrics outputed by the
traffic model it's very similar to what

531
00:47:48,680 --> 00:47:55,359
you would see in school uh level service
a means that delay is very low while

532
00:47:53,359 --> 00:48:00,960
level service f means that delay has
reached a state of failure this slide

533
00:47:57,800 --> 00:48:04,240
that you see here uh indicates that even
in the extreme growth scenario total

534
00:48:02,960 --> 00:48:09,720
traffic
2034 uh at worst we're seeing a level

535
00:48:07,680 --> 00:48:14,599
service e on the westbound approach
nothing reaches critical mass um so

536
00:48:12,720 --> 00:48:18,000
clearly there's sufficient capacity
within the signalized intersection to

537
00:48:16,520 --> 00:48:21,119
accept the additional traffic that's
generated by this proposed

538
00:48:21,319 --> 00:48:27,599
development as an aside we also looked
at the posted speed limit along Lake uh

539
00:48:26,200 --> 00:48:30,599
Lake View Drive
current industry best practices do

540
00:48:29,400 --> 00:48:35,559
suggest the speed limit should be
reduced to 40 km an hour from the

541
00:48:32,680 --> 00:48:38,440
existing 50 km an hour limit however
since speed limit changes are

542
00:48:36,800 --> 00:48:41,960
implemented at the city's discretion not
at the developer's discretion we have

543
00:48:40,280 --> 00:48:46,040
notifi the road authority and await
their

544
00:48:43,680 --> 00:48:49,520
decision if the speed limit on Lake View
Drive is lowered to the recommended 40

545
00:48:47,760 --> 00:48:54,599
km an hour along with the proposed
median modifications that were discussed

546
00:48:52,240 --> 00:48:59,480
the proposed Street a site access poses
no undue Hazard to the safety Lake View

547
00:48:57,359 --> 00:49:03,720
Drive traffic
operations finally as part of our review

548
00:49:02,119 --> 00:49:08,079
We explore the technical references
available for evaluating Peak parking

549
00:49:05,799 --> 00:49:11,319
demand although the city of Woodstock
does require one and a half parking

550
00:49:09,480 --> 00:49:16,920
spaces per unit which is standard per
their zoning bylaw plus the visitor

551
00:49:14,200 --> 00:49:20,400
parking that was denoted of one per 10
The Institute of Transportation

552
00:49:18,440 --> 00:49:25,520
Engineers has conducted studies and has
reported that the average Peak demand

553
00:49:22,720 --> 00:49:30,440
rate is approximately 1.27 for lowrise
multif family housing and 1.23 for

554
00:49:28,160 --> 00:49:34,200
mid-rise multif family housing the
developer is proposing 1 and a half

555
00:49:32,119 --> 00:49:37,880
parking spaces per unit which is above
and beyond the thresholds that we just

556
00:49:35,680 --> 00:49:40,920
identified and accordingly we concluded
that the proposed parking Supply will

557
00:49:39,599 --> 00:49:45,559
sufficiently accommodate the Peak
parking

558
00:49:42,480 --> 00:49:49,160
demand in conclusion uh it's important
to note that all study intersections

559
00:49:47,119 --> 00:49:53,720
will operate at good levels of service
in all Horizon years post buildout based

560
00:49:52,119 --> 00:49:57,000
on the provincial warrants a dedicated
eastbound left turn lane is not

561
00:49:55,319 --> 00:50:01,000
justified at the intersection of Street
a at Lake View Drive the existing

562
00:49:59,040 --> 00:50:04,280
conditions are just fine and the sight
lines at the proposed Street a site axis

563
00:50:02,960 --> 00:50:08,440
appear to be clear of potential
obstructions save for the landscape

564
00:50:06,280 --> 00:50:13,400
median that is located Southwest of the
proposed Lake U Drive site access the

565
00:50:10,640 --> 00:50:17,000
developer is proposing that there be a
reduction to the East end of that median

566
00:50:15,359 --> 00:50:21,000
and will ensure that any vegetation
impacting the sight lines will be

567
00:50:18,640 --> 00:50:25,079
removed if the speed limit on Lake VI
Drive is reduced to 40 km an hour and if

568
00:50:23,440 --> 00:50:29,640
that median is modified as prescribed
the lake VI Drive site access will po no

569
00:50:27,000 --> 00:50:34,599
undue Hazard to Area traffic operations
the right in right out AIS at V Avenue

570
00:50:32,000 --> 00:50:39,319
exhibits unobstructed sight lines toward
the South if you're trying to make that

571
00:50:36,359 --> 00:50:45,599
right turn uh restricted access uh s
restricted egress from the SES um the

572
00:50:42,400 --> 00:50:49,119
proposed parking supply of 102 and 240
spaces should adequately accommodate the

573
00:50:47,200 --> 00:50:54,920
Peak parking demand generated by the 68
stack Town Homes and6 apartment units

574
00:50:51,839 --> 00:51:00,119
respectively so ultimately uh this is
this is a development proposal that

575
00:50:57,079 --> 00:51:04,559
matches the intent and uh does not have
a significant traffic impact on

576
00:51:02,079 --> 00:51:09,720
operations or on traffic
safety and uh as mentioned multiple

577
00:51:07,920 --> 00:51:14,400
times this evening uh one of our
competitors Paradigm Transportation

578
00:51:11,640 --> 00:51:18,200
Solutions peer-reviewed our report and
concluded that the methodology is

579
00:51:15,880 --> 00:51:23,880
consistent with industry best practices
and that the conclusions in the report

580
00:51:20,480 --> 00:51:28,559
um are understandable so I will uh leave
it with that and turn back over to Monte

581
00:51:25,720 --> 00:51:28,559
Brown thank you

582
00:51:34,000 --> 00:51:40,440
thank you
Erin so just in

583
00:51:37,160 --> 00:51:43,839
conclusion uh in our opinion the uh
application package that is before

584
00:51:42,119 --> 00:51:47,240
Council this evening is consistent with
the provincial planning statement

585
00:51:45,599 --> 00:51:54,359
maintains the general intent and purpose
of the Oxford County official plan um

586
00:51:49,920 --> 00:51:58,680
you heard U Mr Gilbert um opine on the
uses that are currently permitted on the

587
00:51:56,319 --> 00:52:01,839
site in terms of the intensity as well
as the heights that are currently

588
00:52:00,079 --> 00:52:06,680
permitted within the existing zoning on
the site um the development that is

589
00:52:04,280 --> 00:52:10,839
proposed is less than that height
maintains the general intent and purpose

590
00:52:08,440 --> 00:52:15,839
of the city of Woodstock zoning bylaw
and represents sound landice

591
00:52:13,200 --> 00:52:20,440
planning um that concludes our formal
presentation uh happy to answer any

592
00:52:17,640 --> 00:52:28,480
questions of council uh together with Mr
mat kosi and Mr blat thank

593
00:52:23,680 --> 00:52:32,160
you thank you very much questions of
council councelor Wismer

594
00:52:32,280 --> 00:52:40,760
vanir through your worship um just a
quick question about the um two

595
00:52:37,960 --> 00:52:46,240
apartment buildings that are proposed
has there been any consideration given

596
00:52:42,799 --> 00:52:50,000
to having commercial um implemented or
added into these developments uh

597
00:52:48,799 --> 00:52:54,839
commercial
is a concern that we hear time and time

598
00:52:52,520 --> 00:52:58,520
and time again in this part of the city
um I'm just curious that that's

599
00:52:56,559 --> 00:53:02,480
something that's been considered or
would be

600
00:53:00,000 --> 00:53:07,960
considered uh through your worship sorry
I was just looking for a photo of the

601
00:53:05,200 --> 00:53:12,240
uh of the apartment buildings um
commercial was discussed um there is a

602
00:53:10,359 --> 00:53:16,559
challenge with the integration of
commercial

603
00:53:13,400 --> 00:53:21,720
into um multi- rise
developments um it is something that I

604
00:53:19,200 --> 00:53:26,000
think is best answered by the proponent
themselves uh in terms of the market

605
00:53:23,839 --> 00:53:30,640
analysis that they had undertaken uh
they had under taken significant market

606
00:53:27,799 --> 00:53:35,000
analysis in terms of can they support
the underground parking can they support

607
00:53:33,200 --> 00:53:38,880
uh X number of stories and the
development uh the performer work that

608
00:53:37,079 --> 00:53:43,799
went into that did not include the
provision of commercial um I I wouldn't

609
00:53:41,640 --> 00:53:49,280
say that a long term that there couldn't
be a consideration for that but it was

610
00:53:46,319 --> 00:53:53,319
considered and it was not found to be um
contributory to uh the

611
00:53:55,240 --> 00:54:01,520
proposal thank thank you anyone
else councelor

612
00:54:01,960 --> 00:54:09,319
shenberg yeah from the mayor through to
uh I guess Mr McGuffin will there still

613
00:54:06,440 --> 00:54:14,480
be space to park on the street on Street
a will that be a regular street with uh

614
00:54:12,079 --> 00:54:18,720
street with sidewalks on on both
sides uh it's a reduced width right of

615
00:54:16,839 --> 00:54:23,160
way but there will still be space on
that street to

616
00:54:20,319 --> 00:54:27,160
park I guess a bit of a followup that
the traffic Island if you want to call

617
00:54:25,040 --> 00:54:31,680
it that on Lake View Drive how much of
that would have to be removed for the

618
00:54:29,599 --> 00:54:36,720
for this plan to work as far as uh
especially having cars coming in and out

619
00:54:34,119 --> 00:54:42,000
of Street a from from Lake View with
just the one if there was just the one

620
00:54:38,720 --> 00:54:42,000
access from Lake

621
00:54:42,640 --> 00:54:52,079
View so if you can see on this image uh
we have dashed that uh scale back to the

622
00:54:49,040 --> 00:54:57,960
central median uh that was a result of
the sightline analysis undertaken by Mr

623
00:54:54,079 --> 00:55:05,760
blad's firm uh for safe Ingress
d i I don't have the specific meter

624
00:55:00,920 --> 00:55:05,760
Dimension but it's uh it's not that

625
00:55:08,359 --> 00:55:11,680
far anyone

626
00:55:13,559 --> 00:55:21,079
else I do have a question myself and I'm
going to direct this to Mr blad if he

627
00:55:18,400 --> 00:55:29,880
doesn't mind uh the parking
study uh I noted was done in 2021

628
00:55:27,000 --> 00:55:34,400
of course in the height of covid and and
everything else in the world um I think

629
00:55:32,160 --> 00:55:39,839
you did a fantastic job and I just want
to make sure that the consideration of

630
00:55:38,000 --> 00:55:47,319
the time frame that that initially was
done and I'm ass may I assume that's why

631
00:55:43,520 --> 00:55:52,200
the additional 1.5% and the 2% was added
I just want to clarify that if I could

632
00:55:49,960 --> 00:55:56,799
through you your worship uh I believe
you're referring to the uh the traffic

633
00:55:54,000 --> 00:56:00,880
impact study and not the parking study
yes thank you uh so regarding the

634
00:55:58,720 --> 00:56:05,960
traffic impact study it was based on
traffic data that was collected in March

635
00:56:02,760 --> 00:56:10,839
2021 and so um when we started off the
process as Patrick had alluded to

636
00:56:08,559 --> 00:56:15,119
earlier on in the presentation uh the
client purchased the property in 2022

637
00:56:13,359 --> 00:56:19,280
and had with them a traffic impact study
that was submitted to them from a prior

638
00:56:16,599 --> 00:56:23,760
owner and so we identified that we we
asked the the city can we use this data

639
00:56:21,760 --> 00:56:27,200
or should we be looking to get our on
they identifi that we could use the data

640
00:56:25,319 --> 00:56:33,440
so we simply use that data and here we
are uh 3 years later in 2025 uh postco

641
00:56:31,359 --> 00:56:36,480
and um we have also identified that it
would be good uh and that was also

642
00:56:35,280 --> 00:56:39,960
identified in the perview it would be
good to update those counts to to

643
00:56:38,079 --> 00:56:43,240
validate however uh given the
sensitivity analysis that was conducted

644
00:56:41,680 --> 00:56:48,799
the one and a half times multiplier plus
the 2% compounded annually for an

645
00:56:44,960 --> 00:56:53,280
extreme growth scenario um that we would
simply identify that as being part of

646
00:56:50,799 --> 00:56:57,960
the site plan control uh application
process to affirm that yeah everything

647
00:56:55,680 --> 00:57:03,480
that was done prior to was not a problem
but all that to say um so my myself I

648
00:57:00,599 --> 00:57:09,280
live in uh lemington Ontario which is
also same type of uh blue collar type

649
00:57:06,520 --> 00:57:13,119
town uh people driving to and from work
and during covid we noticed a bit of a

650
00:57:11,640 --> 00:57:16,839
dip right when everything shut down but
as soon as things open back up traffic

651
00:57:15,119 --> 00:57:21,480
largely returned to normal the the
biggest significant uh I say was the the

652
00:57:19,280 --> 00:57:25,920
most significant uh difference that we
saw was actually in the GTA where people

653
00:57:23,039 --> 00:57:30,640
were more um typically working from home
and continue to do so and then we saw

654
00:57:28,039 --> 00:57:35,119
those uh volumes kind of dip back down
and stay there um but ultimately even

655
00:57:33,160 --> 00:57:38,480
those have started to rebound so in the
grand scheme of things we're fairly

656
00:57:36,880 --> 00:57:41,960
confident and so is the peer reviewer
that the traffic data that was collected

657
00:57:39,960 --> 00:57:46,480
at that time uh is sufficient for the
purpose of analysis however uh we do

658
00:57:44,599 --> 00:57:51,359
fully intend to update those counts but
we are waiting for construction uh to

659
00:57:49,280 --> 00:57:55,480
stop and for us to get in there to do
those counts while uh while construction

660
00:57:53,720 --> 00:57:59,760
is shut down for the the various Bridge
works that are happening

661
00:57:57,760 --> 00:58:04,559
around that was going to lead into my
next question how does that affect if

662
00:58:01,720 --> 00:58:09,480
that was a factor so thank you very much
anyone else councelor

663
00:58:07,119 --> 00:58:16,039
shenberg Yeah question again through to
the uh developers or the planners the 10

664
00:58:12,920 --> 00:58:21,920
units that are drawing backing on the
lake VI so I guess if it's a drawn as 10

665
00:58:18,760 --> 00:58:26,760
is that actually 40 units as far as
being four level stackable tow houses

666
00:58:24,920 --> 00:58:31,079
and if so with their elev ation be
extremely high compared to the say

667
00:58:29,559 --> 00:58:34,440
ranches that are mostly across the
street I know there's two story houses

668
00:58:32,640 --> 00:58:38,680
across the street as well but there's
also a lot of executive ranches across

669
00:58:36,960 --> 00:58:44,280
the street so those would be four
stories that' be significantly higher

670
00:58:40,920 --> 00:58:49,440
than uh some of the houses across the
street uh three your worship um they

671
00:58:47,359 --> 00:58:54,359
would be uh
twostory um pardon me they would be

672
00:58:52,480 --> 00:58:59,760
stacked and by that I mean there would
be one unit above another unit that's uh

673
00:58:56,839 --> 00:59:04,359
what I meant not story but stacked um it
actually comes out to three and a half

674
00:59:01,520 --> 00:59:10,440
stories and I'm just looking to go back
to the

675
00:59:06,319 --> 00:59:10,440
imagery that we have on the

676
00:59:11,000 --> 00:59:21,839
ground and we don't have a clear image
of that uh if I come in on this one you

677
00:59:18,400 --> 00:59:27,280
can see it uh so that is sort of the
relationship uh Patrick do you recall do

678
00:59:24,079 --> 00:59:27,280
we have

679
00:59:32,480 --> 00:59:39,599
okay so this is what it would be looking
across the street from the proposed

680
00:59:36,720 --> 00:59:45,079
semis uh and the relation of of that
this would be from a standing height uh

681
00:59:42,079 --> 00:59:49,319
average height for this would be 5' 6 in
uh in terms of what that view looks like

682
00:59:46,760 --> 00:59:54,079
so that is the uh proposed impact at the
street

683
00:59:51,599 --> 00:59:57,119
level just just to clarify then each
unit basically is is two stories you

684
00:59:55,839 --> 01:00:01,960
kind of have your living room kitchen on
one level then go up to the bedroom so

685
00:59:59,240 --> 01:00:09,559
the main floor could in theory have part
of the um unit be underground with

686
01:00:05,640 --> 01:00:09,559
bedrooms on the second floor yes that is

687
01:00:13,000 --> 01:00:17,000
correct any other questions of

688
01:00:17,920 --> 01:00:27,520
councel uh we do have a video uh your
worship um I'm not sure where it's at on

689
01:00:23,720 --> 01:00:27,520
the system though

690
01:00:28,720 --> 01:00:31,280
please

691
01:00:41,039 --> 01:00:54,559
yesing around thank
you uh and just for the benefit of

692
01:00:49,079 --> 01:00:54,559
the it's not streaming on the screen

693
01:00:56,520 --> 01:01:02,640
sorry for the benefit of of council this
is a video it's been updated with the

694
01:01:00,280 --> 01:01:06,559
new development proposal but it is a
video that was prepared for the public

695
01:01:04,760 --> 01:01:11,359
meeting back in April of
2024 um and to the counselor's questions

696
01:01:09,480 --> 01:01:16,480
a moment ago it should speak to that
relationship

697
01:01:14,079 --> 01:01:19,880
of I'm not really sure what we've got
going here

698
01:01:22,270 --> 01:01:25,659
[Music]

699
01:01:27,900 --> 01:01:59,300
[Music]

700
01:02:08,610 --> 01:02:12,229
[Music]

701
01:02:22,040 --> 01:02:30,989
[Music]

702
01:02:37,410 --> 01:02:40,750
[Music]

703
01:02:50,210 --> 01:02:56,980
[Music]

704
01:03:16,090 --> 01:03:24,749
[Music]

705
01:03:34,240 --> 01:03:42,039
that's the conclusion thank
you thank you for sharing that any

706
01:03:39,440 --> 01:03:42,039
questions of

707
01:03:45,760 --> 01:03:51,599
councel none thank you very much
gentlemen thank

708
01:03:54,720 --> 01:04:03,279
you so at this point I'd ask anybody
that does come up to speak there is a

709
01:04:00,680 --> 01:04:09,359
signin form I'll ask you to fill that
out after you speak but please before

710
01:04:06,599 --> 01:04:15,039
you sit down again please fill that out
that way uh you're insured to be on the

711
01:04:12,720 --> 01:04:19,319
list at this point I'll ask if anybody
would like to come in favor of the

712
01:04:22,400 --> 01:04:28,960
application that's what I expected it's
okay

713
01:04:27,000 --> 01:04:31,160
uh anybody would like to speak against
the

714
01:04:31,880 --> 01:04:39,359
application okay we'll start one at a
time okay thank

715
01:04:43,440 --> 01:04:51,720
you I just remind you to please state
your name Mr Bell for the record and

716
01:04:52,000 --> 01:04:57,640
address and like I said afterwards I'll
ask you to fill out the forms to respect

717
01:04:56,119 --> 01:05:03,279
everyone's
time okay and uh I'd ask that you speak

718
01:05:01,160 --> 01:05:06,920
into the microphone so everybody has the
best chance to hear you as best as

719
01:05:04,920 --> 01:05:13,599
possible good evening my name is John
Bell and I live at 444 Lake View

720
01:05:10,079 --> 01:05:20,240
Drive I'm one of a team of six who have
worked hard over the last 16 months to

721
01:05:16,520 --> 01:05:24,000
represent our community and keep you and
the community informed of their concerns

722
01:05:22,640 --> 01:05:31,279
with the
application joining me tonight are Dan

723
01:05:26,799 --> 01:05:36,000
major Dave King Bob axon and Ted Young
you might want to raise your hands

724
01:05:33,319 --> 01:05:39,240
fellows they represent various areas of
the

725
01:05:37,079 --> 01:05:42,000
community in preparation for this
meeting we met with a community in a

726
01:05:41,119 --> 01:05:46,599
town
hall and they

727
01:05:44,000 --> 01:05:51,520
ratified and requested that we present
the following as representing their

728
01:05:49,319 --> 01:05:57,960
concerns to you
tonight lucky me like last time I again

729
01:05:55,240 --> 01:05:57,960
drew the the Short

730
01:05:58,559 --> 01:06:02,440
Straw can I go forward

731
01:06:07,599 --> 01:06:11,680
here Jeff get me started

732
01:06:13,440 --> 01:06:20,079
here to go forward just click down oh
down okay and we're just going to make

733
01:06:18,680 --> 01:06:25,680
sure that they're actually share the
presentation just give me two seconds

734
01:06:22,079 --> 01:06:30,359
here okay so to go forward share what
click to go forward just button I have

735
01:06:27,960 --> 01:06:37,400
to click button right there okay so I
can't just click the mouse no right

736
01:06:33,640 --> 01:06:42,480
there yeah
okay I know you have heard directly from

737
01:06:39,920 --> 01:06:49,920
the community about their many concerns
and under the planning act many may wish

738
01:06:45,880 --> 01:06:54,480
to speak tonight as well but is this a
you hear me okay right

739
01:06:56,000 --> 01:07:03,039
many may speak may wish to speak tonight
as well but as this application moves

740
01:07:01,079 --> 01:07:08,240
forward the planning act requires that
we make formal representations to you at

741
01:07:05,599 --> 01:07:14,640
this meeting with regard to land use
planning matters in order to participate

742
01:07:11,079 --> 01:07:19,720
in any future appeal at the Ontario land
tribunal and the planning act also

743
01:07:17,000 --> 01:07:24,440
requires that we present the information
pertinent to your pertinent to your

744
01:07:21,599 --> 01:07:30,119
decision that we would rely upon at the
tribun

745
01:07:26,680 --> 01:07:36,960
additionally due to the changes in Bill
185 we also need to obtain your

746
01:07:33,359 --> 01:07:42,119
agreement that our concerns are valid
and should be and should the applicant

747
01:07:39,000 --> 01:07:48,119
choose not to address them prior to your
consideration of the application we ask

748
01:07:45,119 --> 01:07:53,599
that you deny the application so our
concerns and the expert opinions

749
01:07:50,440 --> 01:07:57,720
supporting them will be fully examined
and arbitrated against those of the

750
01:07:55,559 --> 01:08:04,440
applicants at the
Olt our goal therefore is not to stop

751
01:08:01,559 --> 01:08:11,359
this development but rather to initiate
five changes within the intent of the

752
01:08:07,200 --> 01:08:15,359
planning act the official plan and our
zoning

753
01:08:12,400 --> 01:08:20,799
bylaws to make this proposal
safe and appropriately integrate it with

754
01:08:18,920 --> 01:08:25,159
our surrounding
Community while we recognize that the

755
01:08:23,080 --> 01:08:28,000
applicant has made some changes to the
original

756
01:08:26,000 --> 01:08:34,199
submission they have given little
consideration to our primary concerns so

757
01:08:31,279 --> 01:08:39,440
we come here tonight to State our five
requests to you and ask that they be

758
01:08:37,279 --> 01:08:42,120
considered as you make your final
decision on

759
01:08:46,920 --> 01:08:55,199
Thursday the planning act in section two
also requires that Council shall have

760
01:08:52,600 --> 01:09:00,839
regard to matters of provincial interest
as showing on this chart you fulfill

761
01:08:58,319 --> 01:09:08,080
these responsibilities by maintaining
the official plan and zoning bylaws that

762
01:09:04,679 --> 01:09:12,440
we rely as a community upon for our
continuing protection and quality of

763
01:09:13,279 --> 01:09:21,759
life the planning act also requires in
section

764
01:09:18,520 --> 01:09:27,520
5124 that Council in considering a draft
plan of subdivision regard a the effect

765
01:09:25,920 --> 01:09:33,560
of the development of the proposed
subdivision on matters of provincial

766
01:09:29,600 --> 01:09:39,319
interest as I just showed in section two
see whether the plan conforms to the

767
01:09:36,080 --> 01:09:45,880
official plan and adjacent plans of
subdivision if

768
01:09:41,560 --> 01:09:52,400
any and E the number width location and
proposed grades and elevation of

769
01:09:48,839 --> 01:10:01,320
Highways which means local roads and the
adequacy of them are five requests will

770
01:09:56,760 --> 01:10:01,320
refer to and rely on these

771
01:10:04,320 --> 01:10:12,280
protections and finally our five
requests rely on the county official

772
01:10:09,480 --> 01:10:16,800
plan which also requires that Council
evaluate applications for plans of

773
01:10:15,040 --> 01:10:21,679
subdivision as
being consistent with the objectives and

774
01:10:19,840 --> 01:10:28,440
policies of the official
plan designed to reduce any negative

775
01:10:25,040 --> 01:10:33,960
effect effect on surrounding land
uses the transportation Network or

776
01:10:32,080 --> 01:10:41,800
significant natural
features and lastly designed to be

777
01:10:38,080 --> 01:10:46,600
integrated with adjacent
developments when we purchased our

778
01:10:43,800 --> 01:10:46,600
subdivision

779
01:10:47,080 --> 01:10:53,320
properties we did our due
diligence and we knew these lands would

780
01:10:52,080 --> 01:10:59,000
be
developed but we also knew that we had

781
01:10:56,080 --> 01:11:04,159
all of these protections to ensure the
quality and

782
01:11:00,400 --> 01:11:10,600
safety of any new development to ensure
a design that would compatibly integrate

783
01:11:07,560 --> 01:11:10,600
with our surrounding

784
01:11:13,840 --> 01:11:20,480
Community when Albert Hargraves
developed our alter grain subdivision

785
01:11:18,560 --> 01:11:26,520
plan in
2003 as shown here on our registered

786
01:11:23,320 --> 01:11:31,280
plan he made full vision for the future
development and integration of these

787
01:11:28,520 --> 01:11:31,280
lands to the

788
01:11:32,280 --> 01:11:40,080
north such that they could be developed
without impact on our community or its

789
01:11:42,400 --> 01:11:50,040
safety zooming
in you can see he made provision for a

790
01:11:47,800 --> 01:11:56,199
large landscape Center Island on Lake
View Drive that the parks department

791
01:11:53,360 --> 01:12:02,760
classifies as high hor
Horticulture on the North side at 1 he

792
01:11:59,920 --> 01:12:09,199
provided a primary West entrance to the
property positioned first of all to

793
01:12:06,080 --> 01:12:15,480
provide immediate safe access to
o59 and ensure no flow of traffic

794
01:12:12,199 --> 01:12:19,480
through or impact on our
subdivision two to be well spaced away

795
01:12:18,560 --> 01:12:25,760
from the
island and three to provide space for

796
01:12:22,920 --> 01:12:31,639
the necessary left-and turn lane onto
southbound

797
01:12:27,840 --> 01:12:38,040
o59 this exit has been used safely by
the government for over 20

798
01:12:34,159 --> 01:12:42,040
years at two he provided a second yeast
entrance to the property positioned

799
01:12:39,960 --> 01:12:48,199
first of all to meet the city
requirement for two exits from a

800
01:12:44,440 --> 01:12:55,360
property with more than 26
units to position so as not to interfere

801
01:12:52,239 --> 01:13:01,520
with the island and to operate as a
three-way stop just like the one he

802
01:12:58,440 --> 01:13:07,199
designed by the island at the other end
of Lake View

803
01:13:02,960 --> 01:13:12,880
Drive and lastly together with block 27
to provide for the depth of future lots

804
01:13:10,320 --> 01:13:18,600
to the north backing onto Lake onto
Crestwood

805
01:13:14,440 --> 01:13:27,000
Drive at 3 he provided water sewer and
storm waterer pipe stubs to the property

806
01:13:23,000 --> 01:13:33,920
line within at East Road allowance to
avoid having to later dig up Lake View

807
01:13:30,199 --> 01:13:41,400
Drive and finally he put in place the
1ot reserves mark one marked four and

808
01:13:37,840 --> 01:13:46,480
five along the length of the island to
preserve and protect it from

809
01:13:43,560 --> 01:13:52,400
encroachment and to ensure the future
location of these pre-planned

810
01:13:49,800 --> 01:13:58,800
exits from there he went on to develop
Alder grains within the require ments of

811
01:13:55,639 --> 01:14:05,719
the planning act the official plan and
the zoning bylaws without

812
01:14:02,639 --> 01:14:11,159
exception or any special
Provisions we rely on these provisions

813
01:14:08,320 --> 01:14:14,239
and protections as detailed in our
registered plan of

814
01:14:16,280 --> 01:14:24,679
subdivision when the government chose to
sell this property in 2021 they too did

815
01:14:21,880 --> 01:14:30,880
their due diligence and recognized all
these protections they applied to rezone

816
01:14:27,960 --> 01:14:36,080
these lands as low density
residential in conformance with the

817
01:14:33,080 --> 01:14:41,960
surrounding community and they submitted
this concept for its future development

818
01:14:39,080 --> 01:14:47,159
in compliance with those provisions and
demonstrating the ability of a plan to

819
01:14:44,280 --> 01:14:50,280
be created that conforms with our
adjacent plan of

820
01:14:51,080 --> 01:15:01,320
subdivision zooming in at one
it respected the reserve protecting the

821
01:14:58,639 --> 01:15:08,080
island and the road allowances to the
property at two it provided an R1 Block

822
01:15:05,639 --> 01:15:13,840
in conformance with the infill policy of
the official plan and the R1 homes

823
01:15:11,320 --> 01:15:20,719
across the street on our adjacent
plan at three it provided an R2 block

824
01:15:17,639 --> 01:15:25,840
separating the higher density R3 Block
in regard of the adjacent

825
01:15:23,199 --> 01:15:31,480
subdivision at four the balance of the
land that provided R3 blocks in

826
01:15:28,880 --> 01:15:38,239
recognition of the official plan
location criteria that new high density

827
01:15:34,639 --> 01:15:44,320
R4 locations be adjacent to the central
area and Community Services rather than

828
01:15:42,000 --> 01:15:49,280
adjacent to low density
areas and in addition to conforming to

829
01:15:47,080 --> 01:15:55,600
section two and section 51 of the
planning act it also conformed to the

830
01:15:52,320 --> 01:16:01,040
existing official plan and zoning bylaws
and increase the County's 30 unit per

831
01:15:58,159 --> 01:16:06,480
hectare density standard that Council
has approved in all the recent

832
01:16:03,280 --> 01:16:06,480
subdivisions by

833
01:16:11,000 --> 01:16:19,000
40% when the applicant chose to purchase
this property they too did their due

834
01:16:16,440 --> 01:16:23,520
diligence and were also aware of these
protections and

835
01:16:21,280 --> 01:16:27,400
Provisions because they even asked the
city if they could assume

836
01:16:25,560 --> 01:16:32,400
the government
application instead

837
01:16:29,840 --> 01:16:37,040
however they chose to proceed on the
assumption that they could ignore these

838
01:16:34,400 --> 01:16:42,560
provisions and substantially override
the intent of our official plan and

839
01:16:39,639 --> 01:16:48,880
bylaws as well as the advice of County
staff regarding no access no access

840
01:16:46,679 --> 01:16:55,159
would be allowed to
o59 and they proposed this draft plan of

841
01:16:52,560 --> 01:17:00,920
subdivision containing the local Street
day and five

842
01:16:58,159 --> 01:17:05,120
blocks our concerns with that plan are
as

843
01:17:01,760 --> 01:17:12,120
marked number one the restricted
Northbound exit to R 59 that forces all

844
01:17:09,159 --> 01:17:17,600
southbound traffic to Traverse Street a
to the east exit and then back through

845
01:17:14,639 --> 01:17:23,960
our subdivisions to reach
o59 two the impact of locating the East

846
01:17:21,520 --> 01:17:28,000
exit across the reserve Block in our
subdivision plan

847
01:17:26,239 --> 01:17:33,040
on Long Lake View
Drive three the proposed medium density

848
01:17:31,080 --> 01:17:38,040
block along Lake View
Drive

849
01:17:34,600 --> 01:17:44,320
four the 14 met four story Heights on
the medium density block and five the

850
01:17:42,000 --> 01:17:46,840
zoning and overdevelopment of the high
density

851
01:17:49,440 --> 01:17:57,840
block zooming in on the proposed o59
Northbound only exit you can see in

852
01:17:55,199 --> 01:18:03,120
yellow that it is in the middle of the
one of the most dangerous Community

853
01:17:59,960 --> 01:18:09,320
safety zones in the county and you can
see in red the illegal left and u-turns

854
01:18:07,159 --> 01:18:15,679
and the safety impact created at that
Northbound exit by drivers willing to

855
01:18:12,920 --> 01:18:19,520
make illegal left-hand turns for
immediate access to southbound

856
01:18:19,639 --> 01:18:26,120
o59 you may have noticed me chuckle a
few minutes ago when the video was

857
01:18:23,880 --> 01:18:32,520
played because a
video uh vide taker actually made an

858
01:18:29,760 --> 01:18:35,159
illegal leftand turn onto southbound 59
to make his

859
01:18:35,719 --> 01:18:45,080
video however those illegal turns are
happening today at the similar exit

860
01:18:43,000 --> 01:18:50,440
across the street at the gas station
across the road and we also know a

861
01:18:48,199 --> 01:18:55,320
resident made a submission that's
included in the planning report

862
01:18:52,800 --> 01:19:00,199
expressing the safe same safe
concerns with that

863
01:18:57,600 --> 01:19:05,400
decision similarly as shown in yellow
the sight line will be impaired by

864
01:19:02,080 --> 01:19:09,440
transport trucks parked on the
shoulder while their drivers access the

865
01:19:07,960 --> 01:19:16,719
Tim Horton's
Outlet the exit will also marked in

866
01:19:13,400 --> 01:19:21,400
green take out two of the large public
space trees on the property line that

867
01:19:19,480 --> 01:19:26,440
have been noted in the traffic in the
tree report that should be preserved

868
01:19:29,480 --> 01:19:36,960
of even greater concern to our community
is a safety impact with the resulting

869
01:19:33,920 --> 01:19:45,760
flow of drivers wishing to make legal
access to southbound 59 estimated as 85%

870
01:19:42,199 --> 01:19:50,719
of the 500 residents as shown in red
they would have to go around Street

871
01:19:48,280 --> 01:19:57,560
a which even
though the accesses that Mr her Graves

872
01:19:54,400 --> 01:20:02,600
laid out were 20 M wide The Proposal
here is for a narrower I believe 18 M

873
01:20:00,719 --> 01:20:07,159
wide Road
access as showing in red they would have

874
01:20:05,159 --> 01:20:10,120
to go around Street a and then back
through our adjacent subdivision to

875
01:20:08,920 --> 01:20:15,840
reach
o59 rather than exit directly via the

876
01:20:13,040 --> 01:20:22,400
pre-planned safe exit marked in
green as used by the government today

877
01:20:19,560 --> 01:20:28,840
that adverse flow and its safety impact
was a major major concern expressed by

878
01:20:25,639 --> 01:20:33,960
the community at the April open
house we note that the applicant also

879
01:20:31,400 --> 01:20:38,600
chose to ignore the safe exit onto Lake
View Drive near

880
01:20:35,719 --> 01:20:45,159
o59 contrary to the pre-application
advice of County that o59 access was

881
01:20:42,760 --> 01:20:52,199
prohibited we also note that County
staff subsequently design subsequently

882
01:20:49,040 --> 01:20:57,400
denied the applicant's request for o59
access in the original submission

883
01:20:55,360 --> 01:21:03,400
but it was rejected by Community
planning and subsequently overturned in

884
01:21:00,880 --> 01:21:09,199
granting that limited oneway Northbound
Northbound exit excuse me we see no

885
01:21:07,159 --> 01:21:15,480
justification for that
decision in light of the adverse safety

886
01:21:11,960 --> 01:21:21,639
impact we request that Council require a
draft plan revision as originally

887
01:21:18,440 --> 01:21:28,159
requested by County staff providing
access from the property via the safe

888
01:21:24,800 --> 01:21:30,400
West exit on Lake View Drive prior to
your

889
01:21:33,159 --> 01:21:42,760
approval zooming in on the proposed East
exit on Lake View Drive you can see that

890
01:21:40,239 --> 01:21:48,360
it crosses the registered Reserve block
29 marked in

891
01:21:44,840 --> 01:21:54,600
red rather than use the proposed
pre-planned location provided in our on

892
01:21:51,360 --> 01:21:58,280
our adjacent plan of subdivision marked
with a

893
01:21:55,360 --> 01:22:04,040
one this would result in the removal of
the end of the landscaped Island Mark

894
01:22:01,239 --> 01:22:10,159
two and the excavation of Lake View
Drive to re relocate the provided

895
01:22:07,480 --> 01:22:14,920
utility stubs into the new road
allowance Mark

896
01:22:11,840 --> 01:22:22,400
three as that relocation reduces the
sight line mark four as shown in yellow

897
01:22:18,760 --> 01:22:28,199
the applicant now proposes to clearcut
14 of the 15 Tre on the island as we

898
01:22:26,719 --> 01:22:34,800
will illustrate
later and rather than hide the storm

899
01:22:30,800 --> 01:22:41,920
waterer Pond behind block 27 as per the
government proposal outlined in red the

900
01:22:38,120 --> 01:22:45,239
block five stormwater Pond would now jut
out along Long Lake View

901
01:22:45,960 --> 01:22:55,560
Drive that Reserve block
29 was included in our registered plan

902
01:22:52,639 --> 01:23:02,480
to locate the East exit and prevent all
of those impacts it can only be removed

903
01:22:59,320 --> 01:23:09,280
by Council passing what is called a
deeming bylaw to remove that protection

904
01:23:06,080 --> 01:23:14,320
from our registered plan a registered
plan normally cannot be altered for

905
01:23:11,520 --> 01:23:20,800
eight years but the planning act allows
a council to alter a registered plan

906
01:23:17,560 --> 01:23:25,639
after that point in time if it is in the
interest of the town and the community

907
01:23:23,000 --> 01:23:31,840
and the community
we see no reason for that relocation or

908
01:23:28,560 --> 01:23:39,239
anything preventing that East exit from
being located as pre-planned and in

909
01:23:35,679 --> 01:23:45,120
Conformity with our adjacent plan of
subdivision we request that Council

910
01:23:42,159 --> 01:23:52,920
advise the applicant that they will not
consider a beaming bylaw to remove the

911
01:23:48,480 --> 01:23:58,320
reserve block 29 in that location as it
is not in the interest of the City or

912
01:23:55,040 --> 01:24:02,960
the adjacent plan to do so and that
Council also require a draft plan

913
01:24:00,760 --> 01:24:07,560
revision showing the use of the
pre-planned exit prior to their approval

914
01:24:06,040 --> 01:24:12,880
of the
application we also note that a deeming

915
01:24:10,120 --> 01:24:18,920
by law is solely at the discretion of
city

916
01:24:14,040 --> 01:24:26,320
council and Council refusal to do so may
not be appealed to or ordered by the

917
01:24:22,960 --> 01:24:26,320
Ontario land Tribunal

918
01:24:30,400 --> 01:24:37,560
returning to the full draft plan the
proposal locates a part of the medium

919
01:24:35,040 --> 01:24:43,480
density block
R3 marked with a three along the north

920
01:24:41,960 --> 01:24:49,480
side of Lake View
Drive this does not conform to the

921
01:24:46,000 --> 01:24:54,119
infill policies of the official plan and
the incompatibility of the proposed

922
01:24:51,480 --> 01:24:59,840
setbacks and structures particularly
those of four stories do not conform to

923
01:24:57,480 --> 01:25:05,080
those of the one and two stories in our
adjacent plan of subdivision or those

924
01:25:02,840 --> 01:25:08,560
directly across the south side of Lake
View

925
01:25:06,000 --> 01:25:13,199
Drive while the applicant suggest that
they would be buffered by the trees on

926
01:25:10,360 --> 01:25:17,440
the island we now note they are proposed
to be

927
01:25:14,280 --> 01:25:22,360
clear-cut a low density R1 Block in that
area with standard setbacks would

928
01:25:20,080 --> 01:25:26,920
provide that infill Conformity and
compatibility

929
01:25:24,520 --> 01:25:33,639
we requested Council ask the applicant
to submit a revised draft plan with an

930
01:25:29,960 --> 01:25:38,560
infill conforming R1 block on the north
side of Lake View prior to their

931
01:25:35,960 --> 01:25:44,520
approval of the
application with regard to the medium

932
01:25:40,880 --> 01:25:49,800
density R3 block Mark 4 we will just
speak to the request to increase the

933
01:25:46,520 --> 01:25:57,320
height from three stories to four and 11
M to four stories and 14 M apart from

934
01:25:53,880 --> 01:26:03,679
the privacy and accessibility concerns
raised by forcing tenants of stock Town

935
01:25:59,880 --> 01:26:09,480
Homes to carry themselves and their kids
and their groceries up two flights of

936
01:26:06,080 --> 01:26:14,719
stairs to reach their front doors that
increase in height would be contrary to

937
01:26:12,040 --> 01:26:20,119
not only the characteristics of our
surrounding neighborhood but also the

938
01:26:17,320 --> 01:26:26,040
characteristics of the whole city and
would set an unassailable precedent for

939
01:26:23,560 --> 01:26:32,360
all future infel development throughout
the city we request that Council either

940
01:26:29,320 --> 01:26:38,040
deny the request for four stories or
limit the maximum height of any R3

941
01:26:35,719 --> 01:26:45,080
structure to 11
M finally with regard to block 3 mark

942
01:26:41,360 --> 01:26:50,679
five the zoning of a new high density
location adjacent to low density

943
01:26:47,719 --> 01:26:55,280
residential development that does not
have considerable separation from the

944
01:26:52,920 --> 01:27:01,600
low density area
and is remote remote from the City Corp

945
01:26:58,639 --> 01:27:08,560
its services and direct Transit would
not conform to these multiple policies

946
01:27:04,880 --> 01:27:13,320
or intent of the official plan reference
has been made to the five story

947
01:27:10,679 --> 01:27:18,400
apartment building to the West as part
of the Sally Creek development that

948
01:27:16,080 --> 01:27:24,719
apartment building though is limited to
five stories by the bylaw and is also

949
01:27:21,600 --> 01:27:32,040
located in the Lo located such that it
complies with the official plan complies

950
01:27:28,080 --> 01:27:38,480
with the official plan requirement for a
large uh eye density building to be

951
01:27:35,360 --> 01:27:46,639
located in an area remote from
residential and that building is located

952
01:27:41,199 --> 01:27:51,560
between a large Park and a and a plaza
and a community center across the road

953
01:27:49,320 --> 01:27:57,880
it fits the official
plan the special provisions requested

954
01:27:54,760 --> 01:28:07,719
for that block to significantly reduce
the or 59 setback from 132 to 4 M the

955
01:28:03,639 --> 01:28:14,400
landscaped open space from 35% to
27% and eliminate parking visitor

956
01:28:11,400 --> 01:28:21,360
parking would result in the opinion of
both of our independent plan planners

957
01:28:17,840 --> 01:28:26,840
over development of this
block there is simply not enough room

958
01:28:24,119 --> 01:28:33,360
room on this block to contain the
requested density and meet the space

959
01:28:29,840 --> 01:28:39,000
requirements to support it we request
that Council deny the request to

960
01:28:35,440 --> 01:28:44,480
eliminate 30 visitor parking spaces and
request a revised draft plan meeting the

961
01:28:42,080 --> 01:28:49,560
setback and open space
requirements and providing a more

962
01:28:46,840 --> 01:28:53,719
compatible building form than high
density apartment blocks

963
01:28:56,239 --> 01:29:06,159
in particular as showing here the
reduced setback along o59 from 13 and a

964
01:29:02,159 --> 01:29:12,119
half M to 6 M requires the removal of
two of the large public space

965
01:29:09,119 --> 01:29:18,880
trees the ones without the
shading can can I point at

966
01:29:15,520 --> 01:29:27,560
it it's a jumping mouse
okay these two large trees the first one

967
01:29:22,560 --> 01:29:34,480
to the north is largest 10 m diameter
tree and this tree is almost as big and

968
01:29:30,840 --> 01:29:40,679
as you can see because the building is 6
M from the property line the tree canopy

969
01:29:38,560 --> 01:29:43,000
would bump into the building so they
must

970
01:29:49,080 --> 01:30:01,800
go and they put the Shaded ones the
buildings the four other trees are then

971
01:29:58,760 --> 01:30:08,119
within the critical the building is
within the critical root zone of four

972
01:30:04,840 --> 01:30:14,760
other trees threatening their
destruction we also note that the

973
01:30:10,239 --> 01:30:20,280
proposed tree barrier dotted in yellow
there is within the critical root Zone

974
01:30:18,000 --> 01:30:24,719
contrary to the bylaw requirement for
tree protection

975
01:30:21,960 --> 01:30:30,360
barrier and also note in this
illustration down at the

976
01:30:27,119 --> 01:30:32,520
bottom the clearcut of the 14 trees on
the

977
01:30:33,480 --> 01:30:43,679
island
further the noise study requires a 4.2 M

978
01:30:39,800 --> 01:30:49,360
High brick sound barrier wall to be
located outside the critical rud Zone to

979
01:30:47,440 --> 01:30:52,119
separate the proposed apartment
buildings from

980
01:30:52,199 --> 01:30:59,480
o59 doesn't look like there's too much
room

981
01:30:55,719 --> 01:31:07,320
there if you add the critical root Zone
plus the 1ot requirement away from it

982
01:31:02,880 --> 01:31:12,760
plus 4.2 M assuming you have your walls
got to be an equal distance from the

983
01:31:09,760 --> 01:31:19,960
building as its
height the requirement is at least for

984
01:31:15,639 --> 01:31:24,440
the standard requirement of 13 and 12 M
and more likely 15 m

985
01:31:29,040 --> 01:31:36,280
note the tree bylaw destruction
definition on this

986
01:31:33,440 --> 01:31:43,119
chart disturbance of any part of the
critical root Zone such that it is

987
01:31:39,119 --> 01:31:48,639
likely to be killed is a definition of
destroyed and the applican tree

988
01:31:45,360 --> 01:31:52,920
inventory and preservation plan
acknowledges there are several large

989
01:31:50,760 --> 01:31:58,440
trees lining the western edge of the
property along

990
01:31:54,639 --> 01:32:02,679
59 and references the proposed damage to
their root

991
01:31:59,679 --> 01:32:10,040
Zone and if the tree should die as a
result of the proposed impact it is

992
01:32:06,000 --> 01:32:10,040
recommended they be replaced in

993
01:32:13,800 --> 01:32:23,560
situ we request that Council consider
either an Environmental Protection ep2

994
01:32:19,760 --> 01:32:29,719
Zone to protect these boundary trees or
ADD them to the protection list in the

995
01:32:26,080 --> 01:32:35,760
bylaw as for the trees bounding the East
perimeter of Alder green as shown on

996
01:32:33,040 --> 01:32:43,159
this picture here North is that
direction in case you're lost you'll

997
01:32:38,280 --> 01:32:49,000
also note the exit I referred to of at
the island at the other end of Lake View

998
01:32:46,159 --> 01:32:56,760
with the three-way stop which is exactly
what was designed in our original plan

999
01:32:52,840 --> 01:32:56,760
back at the front front of Lake View

1000
01:33:02,719 --> 01:33:09,320
Drive as the government concept
demonstrated these lands can be

1001
01:33:07,239 --> 01:33:15,560
developed in Conformity with our
existing adjacent plan of

1002
01:33:12,159 --> 01:33:22,760
subdivision with a 40% increase in
density without zoning to high density

1003
01:33:19,280 --> 01:33:27,800
and with our existing official plan and
bylaws we ask that you support our

1004
01:33:25,480 --> 01:33:34,040
request to have these changes
Incorporated in The applicant's Proposal

1005
01:33:31,119 --> 01:33:38,760
either fori either prior to your
consideration or through arbitration by

1006
01:33:36,760 --> 01:33:44,440
the by the
tribunal should you deny the application

1007
01:33:41,480 --> 01:33:50,440
we ask that you cite our five concerns
in the reason for your denial so that

1008
01:33:47,400 --> 01:33:54,560
they may be arbitrated at the tribunal
and the applicant required to provide

1009
01:33:52,480 --> 01:33:59,159
their justification
for ignoring the advice of County staff

1010
01:33:56,960 --> 01:34:05,159
against exiting toor
59 for ignoring the registered reserve

1011
01:34:02,159 --> 01:34:11,159
on Lake View Drive ignoring the infill
provisions of the official plan along

1012
01:34:08,000 --> 01:34:17,239
Lake View Drive ignoring the three-story
limit on town homes and ignoring the

1013
01:34:14,080 --> 01:34:20,880
official plan intents and directions
regarding the location of new high

1014
01:34:19,800 --> 01:34:27,400
density
development our lawyer and planner

1015
01:34:24,040 --> 01:34:35,040
estimate that the tribunal hearing would
require three days to educate these five

1016
01:34:31,480 --> 01:34:41,639
concerns we would be happy to answer any
questions or provide any in additional

1017
01:34:37,880 --> 01:34:47,280
information you require either now or
following our delegation to Council on

1018
01:34:44,360 --> 01:34:54,719
Thursday thank you for your attention we
will email these remarks and attachment

1019
01:34:50,280 --> 01:34:54,719
illustrations to each of you

1020
01:34:58,199 --> 01:35:01,440
thank you Mr Bill any

1021
01:35:01,840 --> 01:35:11,239
questions Mr Bell we covered a lot of
information there

1022
01:35:07,040 --> 01:35:11,239
so Council have any questions at

1023
01:35:12,199 --> 01:35:15,880
all okay seeing

1024
01:35:15,960 --> 01:35:27,000
none I'd ask that you just remind you Mr
Bell to fill out the forms please before

1025
01:35:22,040 --> 01:35:27,000
you sit down will yep thank

1026
01:35:28,960 --> 01:35:37,280
you has mentioned a lot of information
was brought forward there so I'd ask to

1027
01:35:34,239 --> 01:35:42,360
respect everybody's time that uh I'm
asking not to repeat anything please

1028
01:35:40,080 --> 01:35:48,080
thank you very much name address for the
record thank you your worship my name is

1029
01:35:44,239 --> 01:35:52,360
Mike major um I do not live in the area
um but I'm a former senior planner with

1030
01:35:50,199 --> 01:35:56,880
the city of Toronto and I was asked by
the local residents and my brother who

1031
01:35:54,199 --> 01:36:01,199
lives adjacent to the site to provide a
an opinion uh on the appropriateness of

1032
01:35:59,360 --> 01:36:06,360
the de development and I'm going to
focus solely on the provincial planning

1033
01:36:03,440 --> 01:36:11,119
statement and the official plan um the
2024 provincial planning statement is

1034
01:36:09,080 --> 01:36:16,080
intended to ensure sufficient land shall
be made available to accommodate an

1035
01:36:13,360 --> 01:36:21,239
appropriate range and mix of land uses
to meet the projected requirements of

1036
01:36:18,239 --> 01:36:25,960
the current and future residents this
does not mean that every redevelop

1037
01:36:23,840 --> 01:36:31,360
opportunity should look to maximize the
number of units that can be physically

1038
01:36:28,480 --> 01:36:36,199
be achieved on a site but rather to
ensure that the municipality has

1039
01:36:33,679 --> 01:36:42,880
properly considered how it will meet its
future housing needs on a Citywide basis

1040
01:36:40,320 --> 01:36:50,280
and in a manner that is appropriate for
the site and the surrounding area good

1041
01:36:45,760 --> 01:36:56,239
planning must ultimately Prevail section
7.2.2 of your official plan recognizes

1042
01:36:53,199 --> 01:37:01,280
this and states that it is not intended
that residential intensification will

1043
01:36:58,119 --> 01:37:06,400
occur uniformally throughout the city
the location form and intensity of

1044
01:37:04,080 --> 01:37:09,880
residential intensification will be
determined by the policies of the

1045
01:37:08,480 --> 01:37:14,119
various land use
designations with the intention of

1046
01:37:11,840 --> 01:37:19,679
Permitting smaller scale developments
such as individual infill Lots in areas

1047
01:37:16,840 --> 01:37:25,880
designated as low density residential
and directing larger scale projects to

1048
01:37:22,880 --> 01:37:32,480
areas designated as medium and high
density residential and the Central

1049
01:37:28,800 --> 01:37:37,480
Area well most residents I believe are
supportive of Resident residential

1050
01:37:34,600 --> 01:37:42,360
intensification of the site we believe
that the provincial objectives can be

1051
01:37:39,679 --> 01:37:46,599
met with a less intensive form of
development one that is more in keeping

1052
01:37:44,599 --> 01:37:52,119
with the low density character of the
surrounding area more in keeping with

1053
01:37:49,199 --> 01:37:57,560
your official plan policies and one that
minimizes the impacts on the local

1054
01:37:55,159 --> 01:38:02,320
residents with respect to the official
plan section

1055
01:37:59,400 --> 01:38:07,400
7.1.1 states that the city promotes
appropriate infill development and

1056
01:38:04,560 --> 01:38:11,639
intensification of land and buildings in
existing builtup areas of the

1057
01:38:09,280 --> 01:38:15,800
municipality the policies of this plan
are intended to are designed to

1058
01:38:14,599 --> 01:38:21,280
facilitate
intensification while ensuring that new

1059
01:38:18,159 --> 01:38:26,440
development is complimentary to existing
development this proposal is not

1060
01:38:23,840 --> 01:38:31,239
compliment complimentary to the existing
land use pattern it introduces a form of

1061
01:38:29,360 --> 01:38:36,520
development that does not exist in the
immediate area the surrounding Community

1062
01:38:34,360 --> 01:38:41,119
is almost entirely low density
residential and future development

1063
01:38:39,480 --> 01:38:45,440
should respect the established character
of the neighborhood by maintaining that

1064
01:38:43,480 --> 01:38:50,880
low-scale built
form section

1065
01:38:47,440 --> 01:38:56,400
7.2.1 states that it is council's policy
to ensure that new housing is of a human

1066
01:38:53,679 --> 01:39:01,560
scale and is sensitive to and improves
the ex existing physical character of

1067
01:38:58,440 --> 01:39:06,760
the area using the criteria established
in the official plan to guide new

1068
01:39:04,520 --> 01:39:11,040
development a significant portion of the
site is proposed for high density

1069
01:39:08,840 --> 01:39:16,960
residential development with a net
density of 150 units per hectare this is

1070
01:39:14,800 --> 01:39:23,360
more than the original proposal that was
shown to the community and above the

1071
01:39:19,480 --> 01:39:29,800
maximal maximum allowable density of 150
units per hectare and is excessive given

1072
01:39:26,719 --> 01:39:36,560
the low density nature of the area the
proposed net total density of this site

1073
01:39:33,119 --> 01:39:40,880
is is 85 units per hectare which is
significantly higher than the

1074
01:39:38,280 --> 01:39:44,760
surrounding neighborhood the density of
any new development of the site should

1075
01:39:42,520 --> 01:39:50,599
be reduced significantly to ensure
greater compatibility with the existing

1076
01:39:46,800 --> 01:39:55,199
neighborhood where a maximum of uh 30
units per hectar is permitted

1077
01:39:53,840 --> 01:40:00,040
section
7.2.4 point. 1.3 of your official plan

1078
01:39:58,000 --> 01:40:04,239
sets out a number of important
considerations when it evaluating

1079
01:40:02,080 --> 01:40:09,280
development proposals on vacant or
underutilized sites within established

1080
01:40:07,360 --> 01:40:12,960
residential areas by a plan of
subdivision the nature of the proposed

1081
01:40:11,520 --> 01:40:17,400
residential development will be
evaluated having regard for the type of

1082
01:40:14,920 --> 01:40:22,840
housing found in the surrounding
neighborhood as previously stated the

1083
01:40:19,840 --> 01:40:26,800
proposal introduces forms of development
I.E a seven-story apartment building and

1084
01:40:24,880 --> 01:40:33,599
stacked town houses that are not
currently found in the area any new the

1085
01:40:31,000 --> 01:40:38,199
other criteria any new resid residential
lots with direct exposure to an

1086
01:40:35,679 --> 01:40:43,760
established residential street will be
consistent with the size of lots within

1087
01:40:40,719 --> 01:40:47,679
a two block area on the same street and
new residential development will

1088
01:40:45,320 --> 01:40:52,080
maintain setbacks and spacing between
dwellings consistent with the

1089
01:40:49,679 --> 01:40:57,239
established built
form uh established Bill pattern the

1090
01:40:55,520 --> 01:41:03,239
high density nature of the proposed
development results in a lot and setback

1091
01:41:00,000 --> 01:41:09,000
pattern that is in consistent with this
policy Council should also consider the

1092
01:41:06,520 --> 01:41:13,960
extent to which the proposal proposed
development provides for the retention

1093
01:41:11,119 --> 01:41:17,719
of any desirable vegetation or natural
features my brother I believe is going

1094
01:41:15,960 --> 01:41:23,840
to speak to a lot of that so I won't go
over that um given the development site

1095
01:41:21,639 --> 01:41:28,080
is large with few development
constraints greater compliance with the

1096
01:41:25,960 --> 01:41:35,800
existing zoning standards in terms of
setback lot size landscaped open space

1097
01:41:31,679 --> 01:41:41,400
and parking is easily achievable and
appropriate with respect to medium

1098
01:41:37,719 --> 01:41:47,280
density residential um uh we note that
the maximum net residential density

1099
01:41:43,360 --> 01:41:52,239
permitted under uh section 7.2.5 is 70
units per acre the developer proposes

1100
01:41:50,280 --> 01:41:56,639
stacked tow houses with a net
residential density

1101
01:41:53,920 --> 01:42:01,480
of 75 units per
hectare Additionally the city's official

1102
01:41:59,119 --> 01:42:08,520
plan states that any further medium
density residential designations will be

1103
01:42:04,880 --> 01:42:13,040
consistent with certain design criteria
sites which but arterial or collector

1104
01:42:11,000 --> 01:42:19,280
roads or sites situated in a manner
which prevents traffic movements from

1105
01:42:15,920 --> 01:42:24,960
the site from flowing through any
adjoining low density residential areas

1106
01:42:22,239 --> 01:42:31,400
the proposed Street Street a has direct
access to Lake View Drive which Services

1107
01:42:28,000 --> 01:42:34,360
an entirely low density residential area
this will put additional traffic volumes

1108
01:42:33,239 --> 01:42:41,520
on the local
Road um I believe Mr Bell spoke to a lot

1109
01:42:38,119 --> 01:42:45,639
of that so I'll move on any further
medium density residential designations

1110
01:42:43,920 --> 01:42:50,719
will be limited to sites which are
adjacent to the central area designated

1111
01:42:48,360 --> 01:42:57,000
shopping centers service commercial
areas Community facilities high density

1112
01:42:53,199 --> 01:43:01,320
residential districts or uh developed
medium density residential districts

1113
01:42:59,560 --> 01:43:06,199
this site again is in the middle of a
low density residential neighborhood

1114
01:43:03,760 --> 01:43:11,280
quite distant from many of the
above finally with respect to high

1115
01:43:08,440 --> 01:43:16,639
density residential development uh it is
generally uh the official plan uh states

1116
01:43:14,280 --> 01:43:21,239
that it will generally be discouraged
adjacent to low density residential

1117
01:43:19,239 --> 01:43:25,040
development except where such low
density development is proposed for

1118
01:43:23,320 --> 01:43:30,560
redevelopment to higher density land
uses or where considerable separation

1119
01:43:27,800 --> 01:43:35,520
between the low density area and the
proposed high density development

1120
01:43:33,080 --> 01:43:39,520
exists the official plan further states
that the height and density limitations

1121
01:43:37,719 --> 01:43:45,000
applicable to the various forms of
development allowed in the high density

1122
01:43:41,880 --> 01:43:51,960
residential district shall be determined
on the basis of the nature character and

1123
01:43:48,639 --> 01:43:56,520
scale of adjacent land juices the
proposed seven story height limit is

1124
01:43:54,679 --> 01:44:00,880
inconsistent with the surrounding built
form which is predominantly one and two

1125
01:44:03,280 --> 01:44:11,840
stories um in conclusion the revised
proposal represents only a nominal

1126
01:44:08,760 --> 01:44:16,560
change from their earlier submission
with overall density of the site

1127
01:44:13,599 --> 01:44:20,719
remaining a serious concern it still
represents an overdevelopment of the

1128
01:44:18,360 --> 01:44:25,520
site located in the middle of a low
density residential community

1129
01:44:23,520 --> 01:44:30,599
we believe if if the community's
concerns are earnestly considered a

1130
01:44:28,159 --> 01:44:36,119
revised proposal can achieve a
reasonable intensification of the site

1131
01:44:33,760 --> 01:44:41,159
that meets provincial and Municipal
housing objectives is more consistent

1132
01:44:39,000 --> 01:44:45,239
with the city's official plan and
results in a development that is

1133
01:44:42,679 --> 01:44:51,400
compatible with and sensitive to the
established character of the surrounding

1134
01:44:48,239 --> 01:44:58,040
neighborhood thank
you thank you any any questions of Mr

1135
01:44:54,719 --> 01:45:01,960
major councelor Wismer van Mir through
you your worship um Mr major you

1136
01:44:59,920 --> 01:45:06,360
mentioned a few different sections of
the official plan I was trying to keep

1137
01:45:04,040 --> 01:45:09,719
up to writing them down um before you
leave do you mind just sharing them with

1138
01:45:08,520 --> 01:45:13,199
somebody or just letting us know I just
want to go back and just to reference I

1139
01:45:11,760 --> 01:45:18,159
got a few of them but not all of them so
I just hope I can grab those from you

1140
01:45:14,920 --> 01:45:23,880
I've I've submitted my uh talking points
uh to the counselors perfect and uh the

1141
01:45:22,000 --> 01:45:26,360
mayor perfect I was pretty sure we had
some of those but I wasn't sure if

1142
01:45:24,920 --> 01:45:28,920
everything was listed so I appreciate
that

1143
01:45:29,639 --> 01:45:33,560
okay any other Council

1144
01:45:34,599 --> 01:45:39,040
questions okay seeing none thank you
thank

1145
01:45:39,960 --> 01:45:48,000
you Mr major please state your name and
address and i' please ask again try not

1146
01:45:46,080 --> 01:45:53,119
to repeat anything that has been brought
forward that's why mine will be fairly

1147
01:45:50,320 --> 01:45:58,880
brief thank you uh my name is Dan major
I'm a resident of 16 Ridgewood Court I

1148
01:45:55,880 --> 01:46:05,080
back right on to the proposed uh
development site so um so not to

1149
01:46:02,920 --> 01:46:11,599
reiterate a lot of the information that
was given uh by the previous presenters

1150
01:46:08,560 --> 01:46:17,800
uh though I totally support what they've
said but I'll I'll be looking at the

1151
01:46:13,880 --> 01:46:23,520
environmental aspects so
um starting with uh my concerns about

1152
01:46:22,199 --> 01:46:29,880
the uh
forestry report in tree

1153
01:46:26,800 --> 01:46:36,040
preservation firstly the excessive
density that's being proposed

1154
01:46:33,000 --> 01:46:43,560
cannot uh accommodate any significant
tree preservation of the 163 trees that

1155
01:46:40,199 --> 01:46:49,199
they have uh in the inventory they're
looking at clear cutting basically 143

1156
01:46:47,360 --> 01:46:55,159
of those trees that's a pretty
significant tree loss and for us as

1157
01:46:52,119 --> 01:47:01,480
homeowners in the area you can imagine
the impact on our loss of privacy uh the

1158
01:46:59,080 --> 01:47:07,159
dust the noise pollution that we'll
probably have to endure over the next

1159
01:47:03,560 --> 01:47:12,320
three years or more as they do site prep
and do their

1160
01:47:09,599 --> 01:47:18,199
construction now
uh the most disturbing thing really that

1161
01:47:15,920 --> 01:47:24,080
the community as a whole should be
thinking about is the environmental

1162
01:47:21,080 --> 01:47:32,320
impact that the REM of these trees will
have in the uh it'll be removing

1163
01:47:28,719 --> 01:47:39,000
approximately 2500 kilograms of carbon
sequestering potential which is very

1164
01:47:36,040 --> 01:47:44,679
very significant now the developer May
argue that they intend to replace each

1165
01:47:41,400 --> 01:47:52,599
of the trees being removed with three 60
mil uh trees as per the city policy and

1166
01:47:48,679 --> 01:47:58,960
this equates to 429 compensatory trees
how however it'll take decades to

1167
01:47:55,639 --> 01:48:03,520
replace that bio mass that the larger
trees

1168
01:47:59,840 --> 01:48:11,119
will be taken away I might add that the
revised concept plan uh submitted by

1169
01:48:06,520 --> 01:48:18,239
fari indicates only 172 new
trees

1170
01:48:13,639 --> 01:48:18,239
now here so

1171
01:48:19,920 --> 01:48:32,880
um 172 new trees and this equates to a
shortfall of 257 trees that they should

1172
01:48:28,920 --> 01:48:40,599
be compensating for now I know that the
parks department uh can take cash and Li

1173
01:48:36,920 --> 01:48:48,920
instead of uh the tree planting on site
uh now if this were to be the

1174
01:48:44,480 --> 01:48:53,480
case I would suggest that any of the uh
excessed trees be planted on the north

1175
01:48:52,400 --> 01:48:59,639
side
sorry the west side of 59 highway

1176
01:48:55,920 --> 01:49:06,040
between Ridgewood Drive and
17 uh to the

1177
01:49:02,040 --> 01:49:10,800
roundabout and uh you know not take the
cash and

1178
01:49:07,440 --> 01:49:15,400
L um I'd like to acknowledge that in
earlier conversations with the fari

1179
01:49:12,880 --> 01:49:20,280
group uh that they indicated they would
address some of our concerns by

1180
01:49:17,719 --> 01:49:25,880
considering the uh preservation of
existing vegetation along our adjoining

1181
01:49:23,159 --> 01:49:32,239
properties uh during the site plan
process uh is the only uh way that we

1182
01:49:29,520 --> 01:49:39,480
can en assure that we're going to get
protection I mean uh having it approved

1183
01:49:36,159 --> 01:49:45,560
now will not give us that assurance and
of course as a public uh we won't have

1184
01:49:42,320 --> 01:49:52,400
any input at site plan
so um we do realize that growth and

1185
01:49:49,320 --> 01:49:58,639
development is inevitable and there is a
need for affordable housing uh

1186
01:49:55,000 --> 01:50:05,040
legislation such as Bill 23 more homes
built faster is not perfect and some of

1187
01:50:02,480 --> 01:50:10,360
its policies will likely change or be
modified as they find some of the

1188
01:50:07,360 --> 01:50:16,080
shortcomings and flaws in in the bill
and uh with government programs such as

1189
01:50:13,199 --> 01:50:23,119
standardized pre-approved catalog of
Home Designs being uh

1190
01:50:19,679 --> 01:50:28,679
U I guess put in by the federal
government uh will streamline the

1191
01:50:25,480 --> 01:50:32,760
approval process and uh help developers
and Builders alike and hopefully provide

1192
01:50:31,719 --> 01:50:40,560
affordable
housing so I respectfully and I say

1193
01:50:37,239 --> 01:50:45,920
respectfully uh suggest that it's not
the municipal council's job to build

1194
01:50:43,360 --> 01:50:51,840
homes but it is their job to build
communities and that's what we're asking

1195
01:50:48,239 --> 01:50:55,719
you to consider as you uh review this
application

1196
01:50:53,599 --> 01:51:00,639
and I thank you for your
time thank you very much any questions

1197
01:50:58,440 --> 01:51:07,840
of Mr
major Deja Vu

1198
01:51:03,800 --> 01:51:12,520
there seeing none I just remind you yeah
please fill out the form thank you

1199
01:51:10,639 --> 01:51:21,560
welcome state name and address for the
record please Tony 424 Lake through

1200
01:51:17,560 --> 01:51:21,560
Drive okay

1201
01:51:24,560 --> 01:51:32,199
and again I just ask that you respect
and uh keep new comments coming forward

1202
01:51:40,000 --> 01:51:44,040
please your

1203
01:51:44,239 --> 01:51:51,079
yeah okay is this it here yeah that's
the first one okay and then for the next

1204
01:51:48,639 --> 01:51:55,560
one I just click the next one um the
what'll happen is the person who's

1205
01:51:53,119 --> 01:52:02,320
running the the camera they'll click and
then you just have to um scroll down oh

1206
01:51:59,920 --> 01:52:06,639
okay yeah it's Buton okay I can just
scroll down right yeah

1207
01:52:08,360 --> 01:52:20,840
okay okay this is a a letter to U the U
mayor and the council members

1208
01:52:16,239 --> 01:52:20,840
and uh manager development

1209
01:52:21,119 --> 01:52:30,000
planning and uh
before I make comments on the new fari

1210
01:52:27,520 --> 01:52:34,719
amended application I'd like to discuss
briefly the good draft plan from her

1211
01:52:32,480 --> 01:52:43,760
majesty the king government of province
of Ontario GSP group June 23rd

1212
01:52:39,960 --> 01:52:49,800
2021 and that's the view
one it was reasonable for low density

1213
01:52:46,960 --> 01:52:55,719
residential 114 units this would blend
in with the alter range as established

1214
01:52:53,079 --> 01:53:01,360
Community around it most of the large
healthy trees near Highway 59 can be

1215
01:52:58,760 --> 01:53:07,320
preserved I think it's easy acceptable
by the alter Grange Community with the

1216
01:53:03,880 --> 01:53:13,520
residential R1 Zoning for this plant the
lot sizes on Lake F drive for the single

1217
01:53:10,480 --> 01:53:20,480
detached were smaller but still Blends
in reasonably well with alter Grange

1218
01:53:16,199 --> 01:53:26,639
Community two nice exit entries on 401
Lake VI drive and west end and one and

1219
01:53:24,040 --> 01:53:26,639
East End

1220
01:53:26,679 --> 01:53:38,719
lot that's on view one and two uh the
West End first exess near Highway

1221
01:53:34,880 --> 01:53:38,719
59 I'll put this

1222
01:53:45,679 --> 01:53:57,800
down two nice exit exits on 401 Lake F
drive one West End and one East End lot

1223
01:53:54,840 --> 01:54:04,480
the West End first access near Highway
59 will have the brunt of the traffic to

1224
01:54:00,920 --> 01:54:11,520
Highway 59 with much less interference
the R1 Zone single detached nine units

1225
01:54:09,320 --> 01:54:16,760
facing Lake View Drive is attractive and
blends in with Lake View Drive the

1226
01:54:13,800 --> 01:54:24,360
traffic would be much lower around the
island with the 114 units and it's

1227
01:54:19,920 --> 01:54:24,360
manageable with the two exit

1228
01:54:28,079 --> 01:54:37,159
entries the revised application for the
official planned amended draft plan from

1229
01:54:33,560 --> 01:54:42,560
fari holding
Corporation October 30th 2024 Still

1230
01:54:40,920 --> 01:54:47,920
Remains completely opposite to the
original province of antario GSP Group

1231
01:54:45,520 --> 01:54:54,079
Inc for blending in with the established
Community around

1232
01:54:49,520 --> 01:54:58,719
it for Lake V Drive I find the plan by
GSP group much more acceptable for alter

1233
01:54:57,159 --> 01:55:03,480
Grange
Community the

1234
01:55:00,440 --> 01:55:10,880
revised the new revised fari plan still
includes two high density apartment

1235
01:55:05,880 --> 01:55:16,400
buildings for 160 units and now includes
four story

1236
01:55:12,920 --> 01:55:23,920
stacked town houses for 68 units that do
not blend in with the Alder GRE single

1237
01:55:19,960 --> 01:55:23,920
dwelling neighborhood

1238
01:55:28,119 --> 01:55:38,560
the Revis amended version view four and
three includes 254 units residence

1239
01:55:35,280 --> 01:55:42,840
compared to the 114 for province of
Ontario GSP Group

1240
01:55:42,880 --> 01:55:51,159
Inc finally where I
live on

1241
01:55:48,159 --> 01:55:57,560
424 Drive looking across the street is
the exit and at 401 Lake View we will

1242
01:55:54,480 --> 01:56:04,079
face far's latest revised draft plan at
four-story 10 stack tow houses for 20

1243
01:56:01,400 --> 01:56:09,880
units this would remain an I saw
especially with all Island Trees removed

1244
01:56:07,320 --> 01:56:16,199
like a wall compared to the maximum
twostory residential Zone one in alter

1245
01:56:13,159 --> 01:56:21,440
Grange subdivision along Lake View Drive
the four stories 10 stacked tow houses

1246
01:56:19,119 --> 01:56:25,599
for 20 units should be replaced with a
maximum two story residential Zone one

1247
01:56:24,760 --> 01:56:30,560
or
attractive are attractive tow houses

1248
01:56:28,360 --> 01:56:33,040
maximum two stories like the rest of
Lake View

1249
01:56:34,560 --> 01:56:38,280
Drive the single

1250
01:56:43,960 --> 01:56:51,239
entrance the single entrance exit to
link VI will be too busy

1251
01:56:55,679 --> 01:57:02,840
the
two seven story apartment buildings West

1252
01:56:59,960 --> 01:57:08,800
End of Lake View are the highest number
of stories for any building north of the

1253
01:57:05,159 --> 01:57:13,880
temps River in Woodstock why why not
five stories for Less units that creates

1254
01:57:11,119 --> 01:57:21,719
more manageable traffic and parking
especially without visitor parking area

1255
01:57:16,520 --> 01:57:21,719
and the new fari plan that's

1256
01:57:25,880 --> 01:57:37,199
with all the 254 units with possible 500
cars in addition to service Vehicles

1257
01:57:33,920 --> 01:57:45,800
taxis and buses it will be too congested
for only one main entrance on Lake

1258
01:57:42,040 --> 01:57:52,800
View Drive since almost all South Pound
traffic exiting Highway 59 will use the

1259
01:57:48,679 --> 01:57:55,400
exit on Lake View Drive
the other

1260
01:57:56,400 --> 01:58:07,079
exit the other exit and entrance at
Highway 59 are only for Highway 59

1261
01:58:04,119 --> 01:58:07,079
Northbound

1262
01:58:08,599 --> 01:58:15,679
traffic in in
summary Shar and I would like to thank

1263
01:58:13,320 --> 01:58:22,960
you for considering our comments on the
original province of Ontario GSP group

1264
01:58:19,320 --> 01:58:29,560
June 23d 2021 proposal and requests for
a few changes on the new Fier draft plan

1265
01:58:26,599 --> 01:58:36,119
regarding firstly reducing traffic flow
across our street at Exit 401 Lake View

1266
01:58:32,880 --> 01:58:42,400
Drive for safe traffic around the
island second have this four-story stack

1267
01:58:39,400 --> 01:58:47,320
townhouses replaced with twostory homes
or semes to blend in with aler Alder

1268
01:58:45,560 --> 01:58:52,159
grange on Lake View
Drive reduce the two seven story

1269
01:58:50,040 --> 01:58:57,320
apartment buildings to five stories to
provide lower traffic and manageable

1270
01:58:54,360 --> 01:59:02,000
parking achieved from less Apartments
units thank you Tony and Sharon n

1271
01:59:03,199 --> 01:59:08,560
likeus thank you very much any questions
from

1272
01:59:11,480 --> 01:59:20,239
Council seeing none then I would ask you
to fill out the uh the forms there

1273
01:59:17,800 --> 01:59:26,199
before you
leave and again with all due respect I'm

1274
01:59:23,400 --> 01:59:32,159
going to ask again to not be repeating
things over we' all greatly appreciate

1275
01:59:29,639 --> 01:59:32,159
that

1276
01:59:33,760 --> 01:59:41,440
okay uh good evening good evening thank
you for giving me the opportunity to

1277
01:59:39,079 --> 01:59:47,440
speak at this very important meeting uh
my name is Paul lank and my wife Kim and

1278
01:59:44,760 --> 01:59:52,560
I have lived on Lake View Drive for over
20 years uh we wrote a letter to all

1279
01:59:50,360 --> 01:59:59,000
counselors and the mayor
back in December and I was going to read

1280
01:59:56,560 --> 02:00:04,079
portions of that letter now but due to
time I will shorten up

1281
02:00:01,960 --> 02:00:09,760
considerably uh but basically we are
opposed to the revised development as

1282
02:00:06,480 --> 02:00:14,239
submitted um we live at 436 Lake View
Drive which is directly across from the

1283
02:00:11,800 --> 02:00:18,239
proposed development and while we
acknowledge that some revisions were

1284
02:00:15,760 --> 02:00:22,280
made we remain dissatisfied with the
revised application the proposal to

1285
02:00:20,239 --> 02:00:27,440
build a four-story stacked town home
directly across the street from our

1286
02:00:24,000 --> 02:00:32,000
existing single family homes is
unacceptable um it is not compatible

1287
02:00:30,040 --> 02:00:37,079
especially what I'm hearing tonight when
they're going to clearcut 14 of the 15

1288
02:00:34,520 --> 02:00:41,800
trees on the island and have no visual
barrier between the four-story Stacked

1289
02:00:39,560 --> 02:00:48,760
homes on on Lake View Drive backing onto
Lake View Drive and the ranch homes on

1290
02:00:45,000 --> 02:00:48,760
Lake View Drive that are currently

1291
02:00:48,880 --> 02:00:57,800
there when we purchased our property we
were aware that the land across from us

1292
02:00:55,119 --> 02:01:03,560
would be developed we trust that members
of Woodstock city council as stewards of

1293
02:01:00,840 --> 02:01:09,599
the community's long-term well-being
will ensure that any applications are

1294
02:01:06,520 --> 02:01:15,199
carefully considered and developed we
rely on Woodstock city council

1295
02:01:12,920 --> 02:01:20,920
commitment to uphold the Integrity of
our neighborhood through enforcing

1296
02:01:17,440 --> 02:01:26,360
appropriate zoning regulations bylaws
and guidelines that will balance growth

1297
02:01:23,920 --> 02:01:32,320
while maintaining the character and
livability of our neighborhood our

1298
02:01:29,679 --> 02:01:38,639
expectation is that any
intensification is done thoughtfully in

1299
02:01:35,360 --> 02:01:44,159
a way that protects the quality of life
for existing as well as the future

1300
02:01:41,960 --> 02:01:49,280
residents of our
neighborhood

1301
02:01:45,679 --> 02:01:56,560
counselors you have a very difficult job
I can't imagine the amount of time time

1302
02:01:52,760 --> 02:02:01,920
and effort you put forth in listening to
people reading documents trying to make

1303
02:02:00,560 --> 02:02:06,440
the right
decisions it must be incredibly

1304
02:02:04,440 --> 02:02:12,280
difficult please listen to the people of
this neighborhood there are issues still

1305
02:02:09,440 --> 02:02:17,159
with this plan there are problems with
it I know certain groups want to push

1306
02:02:15,560 --> 02:02:21,239
this through and I'm sure you are
feeling the

1307
02:02:18,360 --> 02:02:26,239
pressure please do the right thing and
consider the application very carefully

1308
02:02:24,560 --> 02:02:31,079
thank
you any questions thank you uh any

1309
02:02:29,520 --> 02:02:34,480
questions Mr
lck thank you

1310
02:02:35,840 --> 02:02:42,599
sorry seeing none thank you very much
don't forget to fill it out

1311
02:02:42,800 --> 02:02:51,159
yep welcome state your name and address
and again I will repeat please keep it

1312
02:02:48,960 --> 02:02:57,480
to new information only please I'll do
my best Mr Mr Mayor please do my name is

1313
02:02:54,040 --> 02:03:04,760
Dave King and along with my wife Norma
we're live at 593 Pine View Drive which

1314
02:03:01,880 --> 02:03:07,360
is off of Ridgewood just in the
surrounding

1315
02:03:07,960 --> 02:03:17,679
neighborhood we moved here some 15 years
ago and we did our due diligence before

1316
02:03:14,480 --> 02:03:23,159
purchasing the property and satisfied
ourselves that the

1317
02:03:20,239 --> 02:03:28,639
subdivision plan had all the protection
protection of the official plan and

1318
02:03:25,679 --> 02:03:35,280
necessary bylaws to maintain Alder
grade's development as one of the most

1319
02:03:31,360 --> 02:03:40,440
prestigious subdivisions in Woodstock
just check our tax

1320
02:03:37,079 --> 02:03:46,400
file they're pretty hefty I know mine's
pushing

1321
02:03:42,239 --> 02:03:52,520
7,000 and I got one of the smaller
houses anyway we were fine with the

1322
02:03:50,040 --> 02:03:58,280
existing sub subdivision plan that was
brought

1323
02:03:53,400 --> 02:04:06,199
forward and with the higher ratio on the
hectars we saw no concern with the first

1324
02:04:03,880 --> 02:04:13,880
application however then came the over
densification proposal 85 units versus

1325
02:04:10,360 --> 02:04:19,719
42 from Far Holdings which will change
the fabric of our community stressing

1326
02:04:16,559 --> 02:04:26,480
the traffic safety and Community narrow
streets lack of parking greenspace will

1327
02:04:23,000 --> 02:04:30,320
ultimately make the project unsalable
maybe

1328
02:04:27,520 --> 02:04:35,440
unlivable this project totally motivated
to increase profits as opposed to

1329
02:04:33,199 --> 02:04:40,679
community building I've heard from the
mayor and staff that fari needs more

1330
02:04:38,000 --> 02:04:44,920
units to make the development
profitable it's not council's job to

1331
02:04:43,520 --> 02:04:50,880
make fari
profitable it's your job to follow the

1332
02:04:47,599 --> 02:04:56,840
bylaws and protect the Integrity of the
community

1333
02:04:53,480 --> 02:05:00,159
these variance requests aren't minor you
can drive a truck through

1334
02:05:07,199 --> 02:05:16,199
them I implore Council to do the right
thing turn down this application and let

1335
02:05:13,280 --> 02:05:22,880
the committee assist as a party to the
defense at OTL thank you Mr

1336
02:05:20,199 --> 02:05:28,000
Mayor thank you Mr King any questions
before he walks away of Mr

1337
02:05:28,960 --> 02:05:34,199
King seeing none thank you yes

1338
02:05:35,320 --> 02:05:43,360
please so again just a friendly
reminder uh new information please state

1339
02:05:40,880 --> 02:05:48,119
your name and address for the record
welcome um thank you your worship and

1340
02:05:45,840 --> 02:05:53,400
counselors my name is Melanie mcran I
live at 11 Cedarwood Street along with

1341
02:05:51,639 --> 02:05:59,040
with my husband and
children uh that location is one street

1342
02:05:56,199 --> 02:06:05,040
over from one edge of the proposed
development uh we live there on and off

1343
02:06:01,159 --> 02:06:10,880
for 10 years I now summarize my November
5th 2024 letter sent to All of You

1344
02:06:07,760 --> 02:06:16,760
counselors and uh your worship regarding
far's then and still most recent revised

1345
02:06:14,320 --> 02:06:20,760
application for redevelopment of 401
Lake

1346
02:06:17,960 --> 02:06:25,559
View far's minor revisions are
insufficient in my view as a close

1347
02:06:23,440 --> 02:06:31,239
affected resident to address a number of
problems previously raised to it and to

1348
02:06:28,239 --> 02:06:35,559
you I will summarize these now fari has
communicated its effort to be responsive

1349
02:06:33,639 --> 02:06:43,400
to its own assessment of Resident
concerns by as I understand a aligning

1350
02:06:40,079 --> 02:06:49,440
both slightly smaller footprint seven
story are for apartment buildings each

1351
02:06:46,360 --> 02:06:55,559
with 160 instead of the original 196
units along o59 presumably reducing the

1352
02:06:53,000 --> 02:07:04,159
number of occupants by as few as
72 B increasing the number of R34 story

1353
02:06:59,960 --> 02:07:08,400
stacked town homes from 48 to 68 with 10
aligned on the north side of Lake View

1354
02:07:06,280 --> 02:07:14,639
Drive presumably increasing the number
of occupants by about 60 assuming three

1355
02:07:11,599 --> 02:07:22,679
residents per town home and 80 assuming
four C still failing to provide 30

1356
02:07:18,599 --> 02:07:28,679
required visitor parking spaces D still
failing I understand to provide quite

1357
02:07:25,239 --> 02:07:33,040
all of the required Parkland although um
I I would like to hear if that's not the

1358
02:07:30,320 --> 02:07:40,639
case and E failing to save all of the
large trees along o59 or on the traffic

1359
02:07:37,079 --> 02:07:45,040
the traffic calming Island on Lake View
just off

1360
02:07:42,119 --> 02:07:50,800
o59 thus hundreds of residents would
still suddenly be added to an area with

1361
02:07:48,119 --> 02:07:56,239
almost no Services they would need and
only one infrequently running bus route

1362
02:07:53,639 --> 02:08:02,040
the Northwest route servicing it I'm
very concerned that this is a recipe for

1363
02:07:58,920 --> 02:08:06,159
abundant need for cars and parking
inadequate park space and crowding in

1364
02:08:04,320 --> 02:08:11,159
general I am also very concerned as a
recipe for social ills what is there for

1365
02:08:09,239 --> 02:08:16,320
young people for instance to do in an
area mostly occupied by seniors and

1366
02:08:13,639 --> 02:08:22,559
young families and no services for young
people and few for anyone else assuming

1367
02:08:19,040 --> 02:08:26,440
fari wasn't made to follow every rule
for instance regarding providing the

1368
02:08:24,840 --> 02:08:32,480
required number of visitor parking
spaces falling short in this case by 30

1369
02:08:29,679 --> 02:08:36,800
why not weren't all of those rules made
for good

1370
02:08:33,559 --> 02:08:42,280
reason 30 absent visitor parking spaces
would mean nearby residents like me

1371
02:08:39,719 --> 02:08:47,280
would frequently have cars not our own
or those of our own visitors or close

1372
02:08:44,159 --> 02:08:51,719
neighbors parked in front of our houses
this would change our whole neighborhood

1373
02:08:48,719 --> 02:08:56,440
for the worse in my view does far
imagine its proposed development

1374
02:08:53,760 --> 02:09:02,079
residents won't have the usual number of
visitors because if it acknowledges

1375
02:08:59,040 --> 02:09:07,760
these new residents would have visitors
where else is fari effectively sending

1376
02:09:04,520 --> 02:09:13,559
them to park similarly with inadequate
park space and services wouldn't current

1377
02:09:10,960 --> 02:09:18,440
residents neighborhood parks by
definition be overused not by themselves

1378
02:09:16,639 --> 02:09:24,480
and their own visitors or visitors to
the city but by new residents who would

1379
02:09:20,960 --> 02:09:30,960
have inadequate other places to play or
to serve them Additionally the East End

1380
02:09:27,719 --> 02:09:36,920
of the landscaped traffic calming Island
on Lake View at its intersection with

1381
02:09:33,800 --> 02:09:42,639
o59 part of it will still be removed
presumably lowering current residents uh

1382
02:09:39,679 --> 02:09:47,559
property values of course but also and
concerningly um wouldn't lowering the

1383
02:09:44,800 --> 02:09:52,040
speed limit to 40 kilm an hour there
while actually making it

1384
02:09:49,360 --> 02:09:57,599
easier by um decreasing ing the traffic
calming Island space to speed in this

1385
02:09:54,719 --> 02:10:03,599
area isn't that at best a naive way to
cope with immensely greater traffic

1386
02:10:01,079 --> 02:10:07,840
resulting from hundreds of new residents
who need to use their cars because

1387
02:10:06,079 --> 02:10:12,239
there's no Services nearby they can walk
to and very little bus service given the

1388
02:10:10,440 --> 02:10:17,040
very high number of small children and
seniors in the area might this not be a

1389
02:10:14,320 --> 02:10:20,520
recipe for danger to pedestrians I
understand that in far's most recent

1390
02:10:18,760 --> 02:10:25,360
revised application there continues to
be no assessment of the safety impact on

1391
02:10:22,960 --> 02:10:30,480
the community of various traffic routing
decisions in far's studies and reports

1392
02:10:28,400 --> 02:10:35,760
despite the given area of
o59 H to my understanding being a

1393
02:10:32,840 --> 02:10:39,800
declared or posted Community safety zone
though if I'm mistaken in this I would

1394
02:10:37,880 --> 02:10:44,559
love to see I would be grateful to see
any such safety impact assessment of

1395
02:10:41,960 --> 02:10:49,040
faries I thank Council for considering
my

1396
02:10:46,800 --> 02:10:53,199
comments thank you now you did bring up
a couple of questions pointed questions

1397
02:10:50,960 --> 02:10:59,679
there I'm going to ask if the planner
may be able to speak uh one of them I

1398
02:10:55,360 --> 02:11:05,440
caught was the recreational space is the
adequate and I believe it was 5% Mr

1399
02:11:02,280 --> 02:11:05,440
Gilbert can you speak to that

1400
02:11:05,880 --> 02:11:14,719
please I three Mr Mayor the uh Park
block that's provided in this plan is

1401
02:11:12,040 --> 02:11:19,760
the 5% that's required so there's there
is no further Parkland uh required uh

1402
02:11:17,960 --> 02:11:23,800
for this
development okay

1403
02:11:22,239 --> 02:11:27,360
thank you that's what I thought and was
there something else

1404
02:11:27,880 --> 02:11:37,599
there seeing none if I if I can ask a
question is this is this um I'm not sure

1405
02:11:33,760 --> 02:11:43,800
if I can your word go ahead so is this
is this area uh declared as a community

1406
02:11:40,119 --> 02:11:49,040
safety zone uh no I do not believe it is
I'm looking at the planer to confirm

1407
02:11:45,360 --> 02:11:53,920
that or engineering no no it's not at
least at this point my concern is is

1408
02:11:51,440 --> 02:11:57,360
based on then um there being very many
children small children living there and

1409
02:11:56,239 --> 02:12:03,000
uh as well
as thank you any

1410
02:11:59,679 --> 02:12:03,000
questions of the

1411
02:12:03,199 --> 02:12:07,880
delegation from Council no okay thank
you very

1412
02:12:08,520 --> 02:12:15,440
much now would anyone else like to uh
speak out against this

1413
02:12:19,360 --> 02:12:26,559
application seeing none
okay thank you very much we will move

1414
02:12:23,920 --> 02:12:33,800
along just remind everybody here that we
will be uh having further discussions on

1415
02:12:30,320 --> 02:12:38,599
Thursday and I would ask due to spacing
we don't have as much room at city

1416
02:12:36,239 --> 02:12:43,559
council you will be able to watch it
live on YouTube if you'd rather stay

1417
02:12:41,199 --> 02:12:50,119
home watch the hockey game and
Council thanks everybody for being here

1418
02:12:45,800 --> 02:12:54,159
tonight we'll give a couple seconds to
let e

1419
02:13:27,440 --> 02:13:33,599
okay everybody we've still got five more
items tonight I'd ask if you'd like to

1420
02:13:31,520 --> 02:13:41,119
talk and visit please go outside so we
can continue

1421
02:13:35,040 --> 02:13:41,119
on our meeting please thank you

1422
02:14:04,639 --> 02:14:07,639
than

1423
02:14:33,079 --> 02:14:39,159
ZN 8-24 D28 application for zone

1424
02:14:40,480 --> 02:14:44,320
change Mr Miller thank

1425
02:14:50,040 --> 02:14:54,040
you e

1426
02:15:22,719 --> 02:15:25,639
see my drawings on

1427
02:15:34,440 --> 02:15:39,520
there what's that location number 2428
this

1428
02:15:40,199 --> 02:15:46,079
one 2426 2428 yeah okay

1429
02:15:48,760 --> 02:15:53,559
perfect it's too late for eyes to

1430
02:15:57,040 --> 02:16:01,719
work all right thanks everybody for
being patient and sticking around and

1431
02:16:00,760 --> 02:16:07,320
we'll move
along Mr

1432
02:16:04,719 --> 02:16:12,159
Miller good evening committee staff and
remaining members of the public uh

1433
02:16:09,119 --> 02:16:17,000
application for zone change zn8 2428 in
the name of Audrey Harris care of

1434
02:16:14,599 --> 02:16:21,280
Barbara Yonker and Helen Whitehead the
subject lands are described as

1435
02:16:18,679 --> 02:16:26,760
concession 13 part lot four five
formerly in eora city of Woodstock

1436
02:16:23,320 --> 02:16:30,040
interly known as 231 pitock Park Road
the subject lands are designated a low

1437
02:16:28,360 --> 02:16:33,920
density residential in Oxford County's
official plan uh are currently zoned

1438
02:16:32,399 --> 02:16:38,160
future development and the zoning
request is for them to be zoned

1439
02:16:35,559 --> 02:16:42,240
residential Zone 3 or
R3 the application for zone change

1440
02:16:40,599 --> 02:16:46,319
proposes to reone the subject lands for
future development to residential Zone 3

1441
02:16:44,639 --> 02:16:51,200
to facilitate the development of 20
townhouse units and four semi attached

1442
02:16:48,200 --> 02:16:55,319
units on the subject lands the proposed
will contain four townhouse blocks of

1443
02:16:52,960 --> 02:16:59,240
five units each and two semi detached
blocks for a total of 24 units the

1444
02:16:57,679 --> 02:17:03,599
subject lands currently contain single
attached dwelling and detached garage

1445
02:17:01,040 --> 02:17:03,599
that's to be

1446
02:17:07,559 --> 02:17:12,439
removed at the time of writing this
report one letter of concern was

1447
02:17:11,160 --> 02:17:16,200
received and has been included as an
attachment to this report the letter

1448
02:17:14,160 --> 02:17:20,960
raises concerns over only single
detached dwellings being permitted on

1449
02:17:17,800 --> 02:17:24,920
adjacent lands zoned r119
lack of sidewalks in the area and

1450
02:17:22,559 --> 02:17:30,240
parking and traffic concerns particular
particularly related to pck park traffic

1451
02:17:28,040 --> 02:17:34,479
for Kel's information the city plans to
initiate Road Works in this area in 2026

1452
02:17:33,439 --> 02:17:38,280
including
sidewalks The Proposal is consistent

1453
02:17:36,639 --> 02:17:41,519
with the PPS policies respecting
intensification Redevelopment and

1454
02:17:40,000 --> 02:17:46,679
efficient use of lands and Municipal
services within a settlement area the

1455
02:17:44,319 --> 02:17:50,399
Redevelopment of the lands for 24 units
replacing the existing single attached

1456
02:17:48,319 --> 02:17:54,000
dwelling is an appropriate reuse and
redevelop of under utilized lands and

1457
02:17:52,439 --> 02:17:57,439
will provide additional housing units
and types for the current and future

1458
02:17:55,639 --> 02:18:01,120
residents of the city of
Woodstock The Proposal is consistent

1459
02:17:59,639 --> 02:18:05,439
with the policies of the low density
residential designation the proposal

1460
02:18:03,399 --> 02:18:09,920
represents an appropriate reuse and
development of underutilized sites and

1461
02:18:07,479 --> 02:18:15,840
the proposed density of 28 units per
hectare is permitted in the low density

1462
02:18:12,960 --> 02:18:19,800
designation the proposal also satisfied
criteria for infill proposals as

1463
02:18:18,080 --> 02:18:24,000
contained in the official plan the use
of lands for townhouse is a permitted

1464
02:18:21,800 --> 02:18:27,000
use and the subject lands front onto
pitock Park Road which is a minor

1465
02:18:25,399 --> 02:18:31,319
collector Road and will be serviced by a
single entrance the subject lands are

1466
02:18:29,359 --> 02:18:35,399
also immediately adjacent to pck park
and pck Conservation Area this area of

1467
02:18:33,679 --> 02:18:40,240
the city is characterized by a wide
variety of lot sizes lot areas lot

1468
02:18:37,519 --> 02:18:44,760
frontages and development types and in
and the introduction of 24 dwelling

1469
02:18:42,080 --> 02:18:47,439
units with a common entrance and on an
oversized lot will be compatible with

1470
02:18:46,439 --> 02:18:50,760
surrounding
development although the area directly

1471
02:18:49,479 --> 02:18:54,160
west of the subject lands is car
characterized by very large lots and

1472
02:18:52,439 --> 02:18:58,760
single detached dwellings there are many
smaller single detached dwellings and

1473
02:18:55,800 --> 02:19:02,399
Tow houses immediately to the east The
Proposal also provides all required

1474
02:19:00,359 --> 02:19:05,760
parking and visitor parking the
development will be subject to site plan

1475
02:19:03,880 --> 02:19:09,679
approval where servicing design lot
grading storm water management buffering

1476
02:19:07,599 --> 02:19:13,559
and fencing will be required to be
designed to the satisfaction of the city

1477
02:19:12,240 --> 02:19:16,719
planning staff of the opinion that the
proposed zone change is consistent with

1478
02:19:15,160 --> 02:19:20,719
the provincial planning statement and
the official plan policies respecting

1479
02:19:19,000 --> 02:19:24,319
infield development and low density res
residential areas and should be given

1480
02:19:22,000 --> 02:19:27,399
favorable consideration as such staff
recommend approval of the

1481
02:19:27,679 --> 02:19:34,960
application thank you any questions of
Mr

1482
02:19:31,639 --> 02:19:34,960
Miller councilor

1483
02:19:35,280 --> 02:19:43,240
shenberg yeah thanks uh through the
planner I guess my best question be

1484
02:19:40,920 --> 02:19:48,599
describ would the Builder be required to
or developer be required to to fence the

1485
02:19:45,399 --> 02:19:53,680
entire property both for security of the
uh residents but also for uh protection

1486
02:19:51,840 --> 02:19:57,479
between that and the SLI Trail at the
city of Woodstock

1487
02:19:55,319 --> 02:20:00,600
Parkland uh through the chair that's not
something that is uh it's not a

1488
02:19:58,880 --> 02:20:04,640
requirement through zoning um it is
something we look at through site plan

1489
02:20:02,120 --> 02:20:07,560
to make sure that um any concerns that
neighbors have through privacy and

1490
02:20:06,160 --> 02:20:11,560
things like that can be taken care of
through fencing but it's not something

1491
02:20:08,640 --> 02:20:11,560
that's necessarily

1492
02:20:14,760 --> 02:20:19,720
required Council have any other
questions

1493
02:20:20,880 --> 02:20:29,920
none thank you this I would uh point I
would invite the applicant to come

1494
02:20:27,359 --> 02:20:34,720
forward please state your name and
address in relation to the application

1495
02:20:32,720 --> 02:20:39,880
and uh we'll go from there thank you
hello everybody uh Dave Redford 751

1496
02:20:37,200 --> 02:20:39,880
anzio Road in

1497
02:20:43,080 --> 02:20:52,640
Woodstock just here to support the
application okay thank you any questions

1498
02:20:48,120 --> 02:20:52,640
of the application or of the applicant

1499
02:20:55,680 --> 02:21:00,720
councelor
shenberg yeah sure again it from the

1500
02:20:58,680 --> 02:21:04,560
mayor through to our applicant and
delegation I guess the same question to

1501
02:21:02,600 --> 02:21:08,479
you Mr Redford would there be a plan for
security purposes just to be able to put

1502
02:21:06,359 --> 02:21:13,600
a a fence around the entire property is
that part of the sort of overall plan

1503
02:21:10,520 --> 02:21:17,080
for the uh condominium if that's what
the city would require we could

1504
02:21:15,000 --> 02:21:21,960
definitely do
that and will each unit be sold

1505
02:21:19,359 --> 02:21:26,280
individually as if they minum units or
would they be rentals eventually they'll

1506
02:21:24,160 --> 02:21:31,439
be rentals for
now all done by local uh Builders as

1507
02:21:31,720 --> 02:21:36,760
well thank you any other questions for
Mr

1508
02:21:37,680 --> 02:21:45,000
Redford thank you very much for being
here thank you thanks for your

1509
02:21:42,280 --> 02:21:49,520
patience please y thank
you uh at this point I'd ask if anybody

1510
02:21:47,520 --> 02:21:52,960
would like to speak in favor of this
application to come

1511
02:21:53,040 --> 02:21:58,880
forward seeing none would anybody like
to come forward and speak against this

1512
02:22:01,560 --> 02:22:12,319
application seeing none we'll move along
next up 2D which is ZN 8-24 d26

1513
02:22:10,280 --> 02:22:17,640
application for zone change for Callaway
Real Estate Investment Trust and

1514
02:22:14,200 --> 02:22:21,840
Canadian Tire Mr
Miller thank you

1515
02:22:39,160 --> 02:22:47,399
application for zone change zn8 2426
caway Real Estate Investment Trust Inc

1516
02:22:44,319 --> 02:22:54,359
and cadan higher Properties
Inc the subject the subject properties

1517
02:22:49,920 --> 02:22:59,479
is described as 41 M82 Lots 4 7 and N
part Lots 5 6 8 and 10 in the city of

1518
02:22:57,319 --> 02:23:05,080
Woodstock and are municipally known as
465 and 499 norch Avenue the subject

1519
02:23:03,120 --> 02:23:09,080
lands are designated Regional commercial
node in the County's official plan our

1520
02:23:07,439 --> 02:23:13,160
currently zoned special Regional
commercial Zone

1521
02:23:10,680 --> 02:23:16,520
c61 and the applicants are just looking
to amend that zone in this

1522
02:23:19,040 --> 02:23:24,279
case the the application for zone change
proposes to amend the current zoning

1523
02:23:22,920 --> 02:23:28,840
provisions on the subject lands to
permit an LCBO an additional Standalone

1524
02:23:27,040 --> 02:23:33,120
building and a reduced minimum parking
standard within the commercial Plaza on

1525
02:23:30,640 --> 02:23:36,120
the subject Lance as the proposal will
promote an efficient use of existing

1526
02:23:34,800 --> 02:23:39,560
infrastructure planning staff are
satisfied that the proposed development

1527
02:23:37,720 --> 02:23:42,600
is consistent with the PPS with respect
to land uses within a designated

1528
02:23:41,200 --> 02:23:46,640
settlement
area the regional commercial node

1529
02:23:44,800 --> 02:23:51,720
designation permits a variety wide
variety of commercial uses but the c611

1530
02:23:49,600 --> 02:23:56,279
Zone specific spefically prohibits a
retail food store or supermarket in this

1531
02:23:54,399 --> 02:24:01,200
case Standalone so I know Walmart has a
food market in it but it's it's

1532
02:23:58,160 --> 02:24:06,319
excluding Standalone Food Markets uh a
Brewer's retail outlet and an LCBO

1533
02:24:03,479 --> 02:24:10,720
outlet with regard to Prohibition of of
an LCBO Outlet this provision was

1534
02:24:08,640 --> 02:24:15,720
originally intended to maintain the LCBO
within the city's Central Area however

1535
02:24:13,040 --> 02:24:19,160
the LCBO has since has since relocated
from the central area and the increase

1536
02:24:17,479 --> 02:24:22,520
in the city's growing Pro in the
increase in the city's growing

1537
02:24:20,520 --> 02:24:26,560
population is able to support an LCBO
Outlet within this

1538
02:24:24,399 --> 02:24:30,680
location the requested reduction in
parking from one space per 22 square

1539
02:24:28,680 --> 02:24:36,040
meters of gross floor area of structures
to one space per 22 per 24 square meters

1540
02:24:34,359 --> 02:24:39,760
is a minor departure from the existing
standard and is a resultant from the

1541
02:24:37,760 --> 02:24:44,520
proposed Standalone building which is
shown as Building E on the applicant

1542
02:24:42,200 --> 02:24:48,600
sketch no parking issues have been
identified on site the subject land

1543
02:24:46,800 --> 02:24:51,520
serviced by public transit and staff are
satisfied that the reduction in parking

1544
02:24:50,000 --> 02:24:55,640
will not have a negative impact on the
site or adjon

1545
02:24:53,479 --> 02:24:59,520
properties an additional Standalone
building is is proposed for the subject

1546
02:24:57,560 --> 02:25:03,000
LS the building is proposed to be
located near the South End of the

1547
02:25:00,760 --> 02:25:07,560
subject LS between Walmart and a 3unit
commercial structure the building will

1548
02:25:05,479 --> 02:25:11,840
impact some parking spaces but will not
impact traffic traffic flow through the

1549
02:25:09,600 --> 02:25:16,359
site the subject lands have reached the
maximum gross floor airr structures on

1550
02:25:13,640 --> 02:25:19,840
the site and the proposed 6,000 ft new
building means that the maximum gross

1551
02:25:18,000 --> 02:25:24,240
flare on the subject lands will need to
be increased from

1552
02:25:22,080 --> 02:25:30,319
3532 met to
35,9 met the established gross Fair

1553
02:25:27,800 --> 02:25:35,160
floor area was intended to ensure that
the intended to ensure that the intended

1554
02:25:33,479 --> 02:25:39,279
to ensure the continued functioning of
the site and flow of traffic staff have

1555
02:25:37,640 --> 02:25:43,760
no concerns that the increased maximum
gross floor area will impact the subject

1556
02:25:41,399 --> 02:25:47,040
lands or adjacent properties planning
staff are satisfied that the proposal is

1557
02:25:45,640 --> 02:25:49,880
consistent with the policies of the
provincial planning statement and meet

1558
02:25:48,680 --> 02:25:53,040
the general intent and purpose of the
official plan respecting commercial uses

1559
02:25:51,720 --> 02:25:57,600
within the regional commercial no
designation and can be given favorable

1560
02:25:55,520 --> 02:26:00,160
consideration as such staff recommend
approval of the

1561
02:26:00,960 --> 02:26:09,880
application thank you any uh questions
councelor Wismer vanir of Mr Miller of

1562
02:26:07,800 --> 02:26:14,319
course um through your worship to Mr
Miller do we know what the Standalone

1563
02:26:11,479 --> 02:26:18,520
building is going to have in it I first
I was confused I thought it was the LCB

1564
02:26:16,200 --> 02:26:22,479
LCBO asking to go in there but I can see
that it's not it's going into the old

1565
02:26:20,279 --> 02:26:27,240
re's location potentially but this
Standalone it just I wasn't sure if

1566
02:26:24,600 --> 02:26:30,600
that's been clarified uh it's probably
the best for the appin agent who's here

1567
02:26:29,160 --> 02:26:36,399
to answer that question I believe is
something Financial but he might be able

1568
02:26:32,680 --> 02:26:36,399
to confirm for you uh when he comes

1569
02:26:36,760 --> 02:26:42,160
up thank you any other questions or the
planner from

1570
02:26:43,279 --> 02:26:47,560
Council seeing none thank you very

1571
02:26:47,880 --> 02:26:55,760
much I believe the agent is here this
evening if you'd like to speak to the

1572
02:27:01,080 --> 02:27:09,680
application again please state your name
and address for the uh record uh my name

1573
02:27:06,279 --> 02:27:14,080
is Daniel brania thank you um so good
evening

1574
02:27:10,920 --> 02:27:19,200
Council uh staff and uh and the
public um I'm here today on behalf of

1575
02:27:16,439 --> 02:27:23,319
smart centers who is the owner of the
lands for this applic

1576
02:27:21,840 --> 02:27:26,720
and I'm also joined by our planner
Kristen barrisdale uh from GSP group

1577
02:27:25,720 --> 02:27:33,240
who's in the
audience and uh she can come up if uh if

1578
02:27:30,439 --> 02:27:37,359
needed to provide some additional
information uh I'd like to thank Justin

1579
02:27:35,279 --> 02:27:41,240
for giving a comprehensive
um review of our application our request

1580
02:27:40,120 --> 02:27:47,760
here
tonight and it's great to see that staff

1581
02:27:44,720 --> 02:27:52,800
are recommending approval of our request
as indicated in their staff report

1582
02:27:51,520 --> 02:27:57,399
um I can provide some additional
background information about smart

1583
02:27:54,359 --> 02:28:03,399
centers our application and then answer
any questions you may

1584
02:28:00,000 --> 02:28:07,399
have so smart centers as many of you
know are owners and operators of

1585
02:28:05,920 --> 02:28:13,279
shopping
centers uh throughout Canada we have

1586
02:28:10,640 --> 02:28:16,800
approximately 195
locations and we always strive to

1587
02:28:15,319 --> 02:28:22,920
provide value and
convenience to our customers

1588
02:28:20,960 --> 02:28:29,000
in the city of Woodstock we have been
here for over 20 years since we first

1589
02:28:26,319 --> 02:28:32,920
opened our shopping center back in
2002 um that's also when the Walmart

1590
02:28:31,800 --> 02:28:39,720
opened
here we're proud to be part of this

1591
02:28:36,000 --> 02:28:43,520
community and um we believe that we
offer excellent service and we're

1592
02:28:42,160 --> 02:28:47,160
dedicated to this
community as is represented by our

1593
02:28:45,600 --> 02:28:52,200
shopping
center but going forward

1594
02:28:50,560 --> 02:28:58,160
we'd like to take this opportunity to
further improve our retail offerings by

1595
02:28:54,760 --> 02:29:03,439
opening a second LCBO on the property
this is the second LCBO that will be in

1596
02:29:00,760 --> 02:29:07,920
Woodstock and a new 6,000 foot
commercial

1597
02:29:05,279 --> 02:29:11,760
building and to facilitate these
proposed developments we're just asking

1598
02:29:09,880 --> 02:29:17,359
for some minor amendments to the zoning
bylaw which I'll go through now the

1599
02:29:13,880 --> 02:29:23,960
first of which is a minor increase to
the total gross floor area permitted in

1600
02:29:20,560 --> 02:29:31,880
the zone to accommodate the new 6,000 ft
building this represents less than 2% of

1601
02:29:26,880 --> 02:29:37,399
the overall size of the shopping center
and according to population estimates

1602
02:29:34,720 --> 02:29:43,600
the city of Woodstock has experienced
robust population

1603
02:29:39,640 --> 02:29:48,600
growth growing by approximately
13.6% from 2016 to 2021 which is our

1604
02:29:47,359 --> 02:29:51,920
census
data which is more more than double the

1605
02:29:50,800 --> 02:29:58,240
provincial
average it's estimated that the existing

1606
02:29:54,359 --> 02:30:03,040
population of 46,000 will be more than
58,000 within the next 10 years all of

1607
02:30:01,840 --> 02:30:07,680
this is to
say all these new residents existing

1608
02:30:06,000 --> 02:30:14,279
residents and new residents are going to
need a place to shop and we believe this

1609
02:30:10,600 --> 02:30:18,279
minor 6,000 foot increase in retail will
be able to support be be supported by

1610
02:30:16,399 --> 02:30:23,160
the
population the second request is a minor

1611
02:30:20,640 --> 02:30:29,080
decrease to the parking ratio which is
to accommodate the building footprint

1612
02:30:26,120 --> 02:30:33,240
this is approximately 54 spaces
reduction of 54

1613
02:30:30,720 --> 02:30:37,800
spaces but it's important to note that
even after

1614
02:30:35,240 --> 02:30:44,120
development we will still be offering
over 1,500 spaces to

1615
02:30:41,200 --> 02:30:47,399
Shoppers um the building will be located
in a in a portion of the property that

1616
02:30:46,279 --> 02:30:55,279
is
underutilized um with um parking spaces

1617
02:30:51,200 --> 02:30:59,479
that are usually unoccupied in general
there's throughout the whole shopping

1618
02:30:57,120 --> 02:31:04,520
center there's many parking spaces that
are unoccupied indicating that there's a

1619
02:31:01,640 --> 02:31:09,439
surplus of parking
there in addition we're finding that

1620
02:31:07,000 --> 02:31:15,040
Shoppers today are choosing other forms
of transportation as well including

1621
02:31:12,439 --> 02:31:21,880
public transit which is reducing the
Reliance on individual

1622
02:31:17,080 --> 02:31:21,880
Automobiles and parking

1623
02:31:22,160 --> 02:31:29,880
and to add to that for additional
context our shopping center immediately

1624
02:31:28,000 --> 02:31:34,479
adjacent to our shopping center there's
two public transit routes that are

1625
02:31:32,439 --> 02:31:38,120
easily accessible to Shoppers Route 5
and Route Six that can be

1626
02:31:38,960 --> 02:31:47,520
used our last request is to add a second
LCBO in the city of

1627
02:31:45,359 --> 02:31:53,479
Woodstock in today's
market alcohol is readily available in

1628
02:31:50,720 --> 02:31:58,760
many locations including grocery stores
convenience stores and gas stations so

1629
02:31:56,439 --> 02:32:02,040
in our in our opinion putting an
additional location here is

1630
02:32:03,040 --> 02:32:10,800
appropriate this this represents a great
opportunity for us at this time to

1631
02:32:08,880 --> 02:32:15,560
enhance our shopping
center and provide much needed in demand

1632
02:32:13,640 --> 02:32:21,520
services for the
community overall the requested amend

1633
02:32:18,240 --> 02:32:24,720
amendments are quite minor
and they will facilitate development

1634
02:32:23,160 --> 02:32:30,600
that's going to be similar to what's
already existing on the shopping center

1635
02:32:26,960 --> 02:32:35,439
so we foresee this being as a seamless
integration and will maintain the

1636
02:32:32,880 --> 02:32:43,080
existing character of our shopping
center therefore when all things are

1637
02:32:40,160 --> 02:32:50,000
considered we believe our request
represents good planning and should be

1638
02:32:47,279 --> 02:32:54,479
approved so thank you for taking the the
time to listen to this

1639
02:32:51,760 --> 02:33:01,160
presentation and we would be happy to
take any questions

1640
02:32:56,840 --> 02:33:06,479
now thank you any questions of Mr
bro councelor Wismer

1641
02:33:03,640 --> 02:33:10,680
vanm um through your worship to Mr vcia
did you mention what was potentially

1642
02:33:08,319 --> 02:33:14,880
going in that out
building um in your presentation so I

1643
02:33:13,000 --> 02:33:19,080
was trying to read some of this smaller
print on here with my really bad eyes

1644
02:33:16,640 --> 02:33:23,800
and I'm not sure if you if you mentioned
it when I was reading that information

1645
02:33:21,439 --> 02:33:29,240
yeah absolutely through the mayor um
it's going to be a financial

1646
02:33:25,520 --> 02:33:29,240
institution perfect thank you so

1647
02:33:30,920 --> 02:33:36,760
much any other
questions of the

1648
02:33:37,560 --> 02:33:43,840
applicant seeing none thank you very
much for being here tonight thank you

1649
02:33:45,120 --> 02:33:52,359
mayor at this point I'd ask if anybody
would like to come forward and speak in

1650
02:33:49,399 --> 02:33:52,359
favor of this

1651
02:33:53,840 --> 02:34:00,160
application seeing none anybody here
would like to speak against this

1652
02:34:02,560 --> 02:34:06,800
application seeing none moving

1653
02:34:12,279 --> 02:34:24,560
along next up uh
sorry 2 e ZN 8-24 D20

1654
02:34:20,319 --> 02:34:24,560
application for zone change Mr

1655
02:34:27,240 --> 02:34:35,120
Miller application for zone change zn8
2420 name of 10 99979.89116

1656
02:34:49,760 --> 02:34:54,640
first letter is from the landowner and
the second letter is from radar Property

1657
02:34:52,760 --> 02:35:00,080
Management Inc outlining improvements to
the property uh they've been included as

1658
02:34:56,760 --> 02:35:04,359
attachments six and seven in the report
the subject property is described as

1659
02:35:02,200 --> 02:35:09,160
part lot 20 East side of delater street
plan 10 as in

1660
02:35:06,680 --> 02:35:14,520
39779 5 in the city of Woodstock and
municipally known as 18 and 20 delater

1661
02:35:11,439 --> 02:35:17,600
Street the subject lands are designated
uh Central commercial in the city of

1662
02:35:16,120 --> 02:35:21,160
wood or Central area in the city of
Woodstock land use plan and Entre R

1663
02:35:19,760 --> 02:35:24,720
preneurial district and the City of
Woodstock Central Area development

1664
02:35:28,479 --> 02:35:34,439
plan the applications for Zone the
application for zone change proposes to

1665
02:35:32,479 --> 02:35:39,800
reone the subject lands from special
residential Zone r225 to special

1666
02:35:36,880 --> 02:35:43,800
entrepreneurial District c311 to
facilitate the addition of four dwelling

1667
02:35:41,560 --> 02:35:47,399
units to an existing three dwelling unit
converted dwelling this change will

1668
02:35:45,800 --> 02:35:50,080
result in a development that is
consistent with the definition of a

1669
02:35:48,720 --> 02:35:54,760
multiple attached dwelling and is
permitted in the C3 Zone the applicant

1670
02:35:53,080 --> 02:35:58,000
proposes an addition to the rear of the
existing Residential Building to

1671
02:35:56,279 --> 02:36:02,040
accommodate the four extra dwelling
units and proposes to relocate the

1672
02:35:59,960 --> 02:36:06,000
existing accessory structure on the
property to accommodate additional

1673
02:36:03,520 --> 02:36:10,200
required parking the applicants intend
to retain the accessory structure for

1674
02:36:08,080 --> 02:36:14,120
storage space for the residents and for
storage of Maintenance

1675
02:36:11,920 --> 02:36:16,720
equipments as the proposal were promote
an efficient use of land and

1676
02:36:15,240 --> 02:36:20,040
infrastructure a mix of range and
housing options planning staff are

1677
02:36:18,560 --> 02:36:23,800
satisfied that the proposed development
is consistent with the policies of the

1678
02:36:21,560 --> 02:36:28,160
PPS with respect to housing needs within
a designated settlement area by

1679
02:36:25,600 --> 02:36:31,920
providing rental housing and Woodstock
with regard to the Zone provision

1680
02:36:29,600 --> 02:36:35,720
requesting reduced lot Frontage sard and
parking area setbacks these features

1681
02:36:34,240 --> 02:36:39,120
currently exist on site with the
existing structures and with the

1682
02:36:37,319 --> 02:36:42,720
exception of the parking area setb have
previously been recognized in the

1683
02:36:40,439 --> 02:36:46,760
current r225
Zone the proposed addition or relocation

1684
02:36:45,359 --> 02:36:50,560
of the accessory structure will not
further reduce the Zone Provisions

1685
02:36:48,359 --> 02:36:54,000
associated with the existing structure
law Frontage Provisions are intended to

1686
02:36:52,200 --> 02:36:58,160
ensure that sufficient space is provided
for a building envelope access and off

1687
02:36:55,760 --> 02:37:01,319
street parking side yard Provisions are
intended to ensure that adequate space

1688
02:36:59,840 --> 02:37:04,960
is provided for Access and normal
maintenance of structures parking area

1689
02:37:03,520 --> 02:37:08,880
setbacks are intended to ensure that
adequate space is provided for parking

1690
02:37:07,160 --> 02:37:12,680
and that Vehicles do not trespass onto
adjacent properties when parking given

1691
02:37:11,279 --> 02:37:16,640
the long-term existence of the
conditions of the development staff do

1692
02:37:14,520 --> 02:37:20,319
not anticipate anticipate a negative
impact from the alternative Zone

1693
02:37:18,000 --> 02:37:23,279
Provisions requested
resulting from the proposed addition and

1694
02:37:22,040 --> 02:37:26,120
increase in dwelling units the
applicants have also requested

1695
02:37:24,479 --> 02:37:30,800
alternative Zone Provisions with respect
to lot area per dwelling unit landscaped

1696
02:37:28,600 --> 02:37:33,840
open space and amenity space these
Provisions are intended to ensure that

1697
02:37:32,439 --> 02:37:38,560
sufficient space is provided for
amenities outdoor space and space for

1698
02:37:36,160 --> 02:37:44,359
drainage the applicants have requested a
minimum lot area per dwelling unit from

1699
02:37:40,960 --> 02:37:49,720
150 dwelling 150 square meters to 141
square meters a minimum required

1700
02:37:46,200 --> 02:37:54,120
landscaped open SP space from 35% to 30
2% and to reduce the minimum required

1701
02:37:52,080 --> 02:38:00,200
amenity space from 30 square met per
dwelling unit to 15 Square

1702
02:37:57,520 --> 02:38:03,600
met for the most part these are minor
departures from the existing go Zone

1703
02:38:01,880 --> 02:38:07,080
standard and are not anticipated to have
an netive impact on the proposed

1704
02:38:05,080 --> 02:38:10,920
development further the subject lands
are approximately 17 meters from the

1705
02:38:09,000 --> 02:38:13,880
city's Central area where these
Provisions are significantly reduced and

1706
02:38:12,720 --> 02:38:18,279
where the city anticipate in
significantly more dense development

1707
02:38:16,600 --> 02:38:21,760
planning staff are satisfied that the
proposal is consistent with the policies

1708
02:38:19,920 --> 02:38:24,680
of the provincial planning statement and
meets the General intent and purpose of

1709
02:38:23,200 --> 02:38:29,520
the official plan respecting permitted
uses and residential in intent

1710
02:38:28,120 --> 02:38:34,080
intensification within the
entrepreneurial District designation it

1711
02:38:31,520 --> 02:38:37,960
can be given favorable consideration uh
as such staff recommend approval of the

1712
02:38:38,080 --> 02:38:46,479
application thank you any questions Mr
Miller councilor

1713
02:38:44,160 --> 02:38:50,520
shenberg yeah from the chair through to
Mr Miller the garage at the back of the

1714
02:38:49,040 --> 02:38:55,120
property I think the last time we saw
that proposal for the idea was it to

1715
02:38:52,640 --> 02:38:59,399
move it or remove
it is it still supposed to be moved to a

1716
02:38:57,920 --> 02:39:02,920
different location or different location
on that property yes through the chair

1717
02:39:01,439 --> 02:39:07,840
it's intended to be moved to a different
location so that they can incorporate

1718
02:39:04,439 --> 02:39:14,520
all of the required parking um
while while retaining the garage on

1719
02:39:12,120 --> 02:39:21,840
site I believe in the sketch that's up
on the screen they kind of see a hatched

1720
02:39:17,319 --> 02:39:26,920
area where it is just southeast of words
it's shown in the

1721
02:39:24,319 --> 02:39:32,200
drawing I remember asking uh before
previously again with the last time they

1722
02:39:28,520 --> 02:39:36,120
were here that the the garage was
awfully close or quite close to the sort

1723
02:39:34,040 --> 02:39:40,640
of the loading dock area for a Shopper
Drug mark behind it which also thought

1724
02:39:38,319 --> 02:39:45,120
to me was a little bit of a kind of a
predicament location for that for that

1725
02:39:42,560 --> 02:39:49,080
garage to even be existing there my next
question is how big does a lot have to

1726
02:39:46,880 --> 02:39:54,040
be for low density commercial this is
more generic question when you talk

1727
02:39:51,240 --> 02:39:57,479
about 30 units per hectare or 12 units
per acre how long how large is a lot

1728
02:39:56,080 --> 02:40:00,920
have to be before some of that math
applies does it have to be at least an

1729
02:39:58,880 --> 02:40:05,720
acre I mean obviously this is less than
an acre so through the chair there are

1730
02:40:04,040 --> 02:40:09,640
minimum Zone Provisions for minimum
lotteries so it depends on what type of

1731
02:40:08,200 --> 02:40:15,240
low density development you're going to
do um I can't tell you what those are

1732
02:40:12,800 --> 02:40:20,120
off the top of my head but um they're
they're quite small and that's why to

1733
02:40:18,279 --> 02:40:23,760
appropriately
design the site uh the way the city

1734
02:40:22,000 --> 02:40:27,520
wants to it's why we establish minimum
Lotter are per per dwelling unit so that

1735
02:40:26,200 --> 02:40:30,560
we make sure that there's still a
minimum lot size

1736
02:40:32,560 --> 02:40:36,800
provided any other questions of the

1737
02:40:38,319 --> 02:40:46,080
planner just wait I I'll come to you
this is for Council right now uh I do

1738
02:40:43,920 --> 02:40:50,560
have a question for you uh going back to
the garage that's being moved thinking

1739
02:40:49,359 --> 02:40:56,439
of
arus um would it be possible to have

1740
02:40:53,880 --> 02:41:00,520
additional residential units go into
this Garage in the

1741
02:40:58,240 --> 02:41:06,520
future not in this case I believe the
current aru zoning B only permits arus

1742
02:41:04,080 --> 02:41:10,279
in uh single detached dwelling semi-
detached dwellings in Street fronting

1743
02:41:08,000 --> 02:41:15,399
tow houses so because this is a multiple
attached dwelling uh it wouldn't be

1744
02:41:12,600 --> 02:41:19,840
eligible for an aru theoretically they
could apply for them to be extra units

1745
02:41:17,479 --> 02:41:24,640
but they wouldn't be subject to the same
discounts and things like development

1746
02:41:21,200 --> 02:41:24,640
charges that arus typically

1747
02:41:25,080 --> 02:41:35,479
get okay and just to be clear there's no
uh intentions of living area within the

1748
02:41:32,920 --> 02:41:39,960
garage area at this point that's
accurate um if that was proposed that

1749
02:41:37,640 --> 02:41:45,399
way uh they would be then be deficient
on parking further deficient in things

1750
02:41:42,080 --> 02:41:50,160
like uh dwelling unit per square meters
which might raise concerns through the

1751
02:41:47,640 --> 02:41:54,120
review process again and I'm asking that
for uh residents in the neighborhood

1752
02:41:52,760 --> 02:41:58,960
that have asked me so I just wanted to
be clear thank you very much any other

1753
02:41:56,560 --> 02:42:01,520
questions or the planner before I open
it to the

1754
02:42:01,680 --> 02:42:08,200
public okay I'm seeing none first I'd
like to invite anybody to speak in favor

1755
02:42:06,880 --> 02:42:14,960
of this
application to come

1756
02:42:11,399 --> 02:42:19,540
forward applicant thank you or sorry the
applicant would the applicant like to

1757
02:42:17,680 --> 02:42:24,960
come forward I'm not sure if they're
[Music]

1758
02:42:20,960 --> 02:42:27,600
here miss gearlink say yeah thank you
very much for that

1759
02:42:27,760 --> 02:42:35,160
counselor uh seeing no applicant here
tonight then I'll open it up to the

1760
02:42:32,720 --> 02:42:40,560
floor I'm sorry no one here just speak
in favor of it I

1761
02:42:37,880 --> 02:42:44,040
assume anybody wishing to speak against
this application please come

1762
02:42:46,000 --> 02:42:51,800
forward and I would ask that you state
your name and address for the record

1763
02:42:50,200 --> 02:42:57,560
when you come to the podium and
afterwards I'll ask you to fill out the

1764
02:42:54,680 --> 02:43:04,840
form perfect thank
you hi everybody I'm Susan rampersad um

1765
02:43:01,640 --> 02:43:10,960
I spoke at the last meeting so um good
evening uh your worship counselors um so

1766
02:43:09,040 --> 02:43:15,880
thank you for allowing me to speak I had
a few questions um I ju I'm just before

1767
02:43:13,880 --> 02:43:22,720
I start speaking has there have there
been any changes proposed since our last

1768
02:43:19,920 --> 02:43:25,840
meeting everything is the same how many
parking spaces are

1769
02:43:28,640 --> 02:43:36,520
there just reading
it it's up on the screen yeah thank you

1770
02:43:34,760 --> 02:43:40,880
so through you it's I believe the
minimum parking space requirement is 1.5

1771
02:43:38,760 --> 02:43:46,080
spaces per unit and there's seven units
so there's seven units and we so we

1772
02:43:42,640 --> 02:43:50,399
would round it up so what's that 14 15 7
plus 3 plus 4 11 spaces and where are

1773
02:43:48,840 --> 02:43:56,080
those 11 space is going to be in front
of the

1774
02:43:51,560 --> 02:44:00,720
garage like in that back area has this
property including the garage been

1775
02:43:58,560 --> 02:44:04,920
approved for commercial
use because I think we heard at the last

1776
02:44:03,080 --> 02:44:11,319
meeting that the garage was rented out
to an auto body shop that was being used

1777
02:44:08,359 --> 02:44:16,319
for commercial purposes so through the
chair it's not currently approved

1778
02:44:13,240 --> 02:44:22,560
approved for commercial uses the r225
Zone permits uh basically what's this so

1779
02:44:19,680 --> 02:44:27,840
uh just the residential uses
um the C3 zone is the in designation is

1780
02:44:25,960 --> 02:44:33,200
an entrepreneurial District which does
support some commercial uses but that's

1781
02:44:29,640 --> 02:44:38,000
not what's being applied for here okay
right so I I already raised my

1782
02:44:35,319 --> 02:44:41,279
objections at the last meeting I I'm
understanding that nothing has really

1783
02:44:39,399 --> 02:44:47,319
changed from a planning perspective so
I'm just reasserting the same objections

1784
02:44:44,200 --> 02:44:53,359
that we had before namely density uh
parking on the street um disruptions to

1785
02:44:49,960 --> 02:44:57,240
the neighborhood uh traffic and just the
fact that on this small City Block we

1786
02:44:55,040 --> 02:45:05,279
already have two
high-rise um apartment buildings with

1787
02:45:00,560 --> 02:45:09,160
several units and now it it's the the
community the residents are really

1788
02:45:06,840 --> 02:45:14,439
opposed to this because it's just too
many people in a small area and again um

1789
02:45:13,560 --> 02:45:18,680
me
personally I'm trying to flag an issue

1790
02:45:16,840 --> 02:45:23,880
that the applicant is not here he wasn't
here the last meeting it really doesn't

1791
02:45:21,040 --> 02:45:27,359
feel like he cares and at that last
meeting I was really shocked to learn

1792
02:45:25,840 --> 02:45:31,640
that the garage was being used for
commercial purposes that's shocking and

1793
02:45:29,439 --> 02:45:36,240
would explain why at 3:00 in the morning
every morning I'm hearing the sound of

1794
02:45:33,399 --> 02:45:42,120
drilling and sawing why we have so much
police involvement um we have uh

1795
02:45:39,319 --> 02:45:46,680
violence and domestic abuse and you know
all kinds of things I think the

1796
02:45:43,600 --> 02:45:51,600
community is really in favor of
lowincome um affordable housing right

1797
02:45:49,520 --> 02:45:58,040
that's not the issue here the issue is
the owner and the landlord we heard of

1798
02:45:53,880 --> 02:46:02,920
cockroaches no Plumbing no ability to
flush and I would like to raise that as

1799
02:46:00,600 --> 02:46:08,479
like can we call Public Health can we do
something about the situation that

1800
02:46:05,240 --> 02:46:13,479
already exists before we approve this
dead beat landlord to add more units and

1801
02:46:11,439 --> 02:46:19,359
create more
problems that's it thanks everybody any

1802
02:46:17,160 --> 02:46:22,479
questions before you go away councelor
Wismer

1803
02:46:20,200 --> 02:46:27,720
vanir three your worship and Sora I
missed your last name so rampersad my

1804
02:46:25,040 --> 02:46:33,240
mom lives we live next door my mom is 92
tomorrow so I'm really here speaking on

1805
02:46:30,880 --> 02:46:37,680
her behalf well I hope she has a great
birthday tomorrow um I mean I think and

1806
02:46:36,399 --> 02:46:41,560
I'm not sure if you've had a chance to
see the agenda there was some photos

1807
02:46:39,080 --> 02:46:44,640
provided for us from the um property
owner as well as the individual that's

1808
02:46:43,160 --> 02:46:49,399
looking after the property now doing the
maintenance and stuff um I know um some

1809
02:46:48,040 --> 02:46:53,800
residents that live in this area that
had still been sharing some photos with

1810
02:46:51,000 --> 02:46:58,399
me to say this is what's here today this
is what's going on so as nice as it is

1811
02:46:56,080 --> 02:47:03,040
to have these photos it's easy for me to
send you a photo of when my place looks

1812
02:47:00,560 --> 02:47:06,439
good um I don't suspect they're going to
always show us the photos of when things

1813
02:47:04,359 --> 02:47:11,560
are not looking good right um so I do
still have concerns um you know when

1814
02:47:09,000 --> 02:47:16,399
neighbors are still sending me photos uh
showing that um it's maybe not being

1815
02:47:14,680 --> 02:47:20,319
cared for the way that's being depicted
is that something that you're that

1816
02:47:18,200 --> 02:47:24,720
you're or your is witnessing or other
people in the neighborhood that you've

1817
02:47:21,960 --> 02:47:31,200
spoken to so since that meeting my
mother's property has

1818
02:47:27,760 --> 02:47:35,279
been I guess invaded is the correct word
twice from someone coming over from that

1819
02:47:33,520 --> 02:47:41,040
side of the property and stealing all of
her furniture specifically like the

1820
02:47:38,399 --> 02:47:47,279
metal furniture presumably to sell she
since put up a fence along the wall that

1821
02:47:44,640 --> 02:47:54,240
divides our backyard from their backyard
and you know they just people can climb

1822
02:47:50,399 --> 02:47:58,359
over fences so yeah I mean the front
porch I mean I'm not inside so at the

1823
02:47:56,800 --> 02:48:01,680
last meeting I was really shocked to
learn at the of these horrible

1824
02:48:00,080 --> 02:48:06,640
conditions inside but outside this
building looks like it's falling apart

1825
02:48:03,960 --> 02:48:11,080
so I'm not understanding I'm I'm not in
favor of adding more

1826
02:48:08,479 --> 02:48:14,279
units um to someone that doesn't care
enough to be at these meetings and

1827
02:48:12,439 --> 02:48:17,800
doesn't care enough to improve the
living conditions of the people that are

1828
02:48:15,880 --> 02:48:20,720
already there so I would say there's
been no change

1829
02:48:22,439 --> 02:48:26,840
any other
questions of the

1830
02:48:27,240 --> 02:48:32,160
delegate well please wish your mom a
very happy birthday thank you thanks I

1831
02:48:30,840 --> 02:48:37,040
know it's been a long night so thanks
for allowing I know we're just The

1832
02:48:33,840 --> 02:48:40,120
Underdogs here the Galler's empty but we
still we still count

1833
02:48:40,720 --> 02:48:46,960
right anyone else like to speak against
the

1834
02:48:44,760 --> 02:48:53,760
application somebody hiding underneath
the bench somewhere no good all right

1835
02:48:51,359 --> 02:48:53,760
moving

1836
02:48:54,000 --> 02:49:03,600
along uh where am I
2f application for zone change ZN 8-4-1

1837
02:49:01,960 --> 02:49:08,399
16 cach a
developments car Road Mr

1838
02:49:15,040 --> 02:49:24,200
Miller applications for zone change zna
24 16 in the name of cachier

1839
02:49:20,720 --> 02:49:28,479
developments Woodstock Inc and zn8 2418
in the name of K Road Land Development

1840
02:49:26,760 --> 02:49:34,239
Corporation
uh the subject property is described as

1841
02:49:31,080 --> 02:49:38,080
Lots 14 and 30 plans 16-21 in the city
of Woodstock and is applicable to the

1842
02:49:36,479 --> 02:49:41,080
lands within draft approved plan of
subdivision SB

1843
02:49:41,800 --> 02:49:49,040
21138 the subject lands are currently
designated residential Environmental

1844
02:49:46,120 --> 02:49:52,319
Protection in open space uh within the
within the County's official plan and

1845
02:49:50,399 --> 02:49:56,760
within the residential density plan low
medium and high residential density this

1846
02:49:55,279 --> 02:50:00,680
within the city of Woodstock zoning
bylaw the existing zoning is

1847
02:49:58,479 --> 02:50:07,359
Environmental Protection two open space
one open space two special residential

1848
02:50:03,640 --> 02:50:12,680
Zone r129 special residential Zone r240
special residential Zone 3 r355 and

1849
02:50:12,920 --> 02:50:24,479
r356 and special residential Zone 4
r420 uh the proposed Z zoning seeks to

1850
02:50:19,520 --> 02:50:31,000
amend the r129 Zone amended uh special
residential r240 special residential

1851
02:50:27,279 --> 02:50:34,319
r335 r355 and r356 and special
residential Zone

1852
02:50:36,960 --> 02:50:43,560
r420 the application for zone change
proposes to replace a special provision

1853
02:50:41,160 --> 02:50:47,800
in the r240 zone to clarify the intended
setbacks between the dwellings to reduce

1854
02:50:45,399 --> 02:50:55,399
the minimum exterior side yard in the
r240 Zone from 4.5 M to 4 M to reone a

1855
02:50:51,880 --> 02:50:58,640
subject ption lands from r129 to r240
and to reduce the site triangles and

1856
02:50:57,080 --> 02:51:02,720
distances from intersection Provisions
toit a minimum distance permitted

1857
02:51:00,239 --> 02:51:07,399
between a driveway and intersection of 5
meters within a draft approved plan of

1858
02:51:05,359 --> 02:51:11,000
subdivision last week the applicant's
agent provided me with an opinion letter

1859
02:51:08,920 --> 02:51:15,720
requesting a different site triangle and
and intersection setbacks then were

1860
02:51:14,000 --> 02:51:19,040
requested through this application
unfortunately due to the limited amount

1861
02:51:17,359 --> 02:51:22,359
of time prior to this meeting
Sydney City engineering staff who

1862
02:51:20,760 --> 02:51:25,600
planning would rely on to review this
information confirmed that they would

1863
02:51:23,800 --> 02:51:28,920
require more time to review the new
submission I indicated to the

1864
02:51:27,680 --> 02:51:32,239
applicant's agent that we could defer
the application at the applicant's

1865
02:51:30,160 --> 02:51:35,640
request to review the new information
however the agent requests that we move

1866
02:51:33,640 --> 02:51:40,120
forward to this meeting for council's
consideration the new sub submission

1867
02:51:37,680 --> 02:51:43,399
requests a setback of 7.5 meters for a
driveway from an intersection where lots

1868
02:51:42,000 --> 02:51:48,920
that have a frontage of more than 12
meters require 9 meters in the in the

1869
02:51:46,399 --> 02:51:52,080
City Zoning bylaw
the applicants have requested that three

1870
02:51:50,319 --> 02:51:58,680
losss in the plan of subdivision losss
one to three shown on plate four be

1871
02:51:54,520 --> 02:52:02,720
rezoned from r129 to r240 the effect of
this portion of the proposed zoning is

1872
02:52:00,880 --> 02:52:08,040
to permit Lots with narrow frontages
reduced lot areas and increased lck

1873
02:52:04,920 --> 02:52:12,160
coverage and decreased sidey yard and
decreased interior sidey yard widths

1874
02:52:09,920 --> 02:52:16,279
staff have no objection to the proposed
zoning the applicants have requested to

1875
02:52:14,359 --> 02:52:22,000
reduce exterior side yard width in the
r240 zone from 4.5 to 4 met the intent

1876
02:52:20,359 --> 02:52:25,120
of the minimum interior side yard with
is to ensure that adequate space is

1877
02:52:23,520 --> 02:52:28,640
provided for regular maintenance of the
RightWay to provide space for grading

1878
02:52:27,399 --> 02:52:34,120
and drainage and to ensure that
buildings are adequately set back to M

1879
02:52:30,640 --> 02:52:38,520
maintain sight lines and a consistent re
and a consistent streetcape building and

1880
02:52:36,760 --> 02:52:42,040
uring staff have not identified any
safety concerns with the reduced

1881
02:52:40,000 --> 02:52:46,399
setbacks provided sight triangle
setbacks are maintained through the

1882
02:52:44,359 --> 02:52:50,200
subdivision review process engineering
staff will further ensure the adequate

1883
02:52:48,120 --> 02:52:54,520
grading drainers can be provided to the
subdivision based on the approved

1884
02:52:52,319 --> 02:52:57,960
setbacks the applicants have requested
the exist that the existing Zone

1885
02:52:56,239 --> 02:53:02,680
provision for interior side yard widths
be clarified in the r240 zone the intent

1886
02:53:00,880 --> 02:53:06,479
of this change is to provide Clarity on
minimum interior side yard widths to

1887
02:53:04,600 --> 02:53:11,120
facilitate easier interpretation of the
Zone Provisions the application the

1888
02:53:09,200 --> 02:53:15,239
applicants suggested clarifi the
applicants suggested clarification is

1889
02:53:13,720 --> 02:53:20,040
consistent with staff's interpretation
of the existing r240 Zone provisions and

1890
02:53:18,239 --> 02:53:24,279
as such staff have no concern with the
proposed changes and have forwarded

1891
02:53:21,920 --> 02:53:28,359
suggested new wording to the applicants
agent staff are satisfied that portions

1892
02:53:26,840 --> 02:53:32,080
of the proposal relating to
clarification of interior side yard

1893
02:53:29,840 --> 02:53:37,279
setbacks reduced minimum interior side
yard setbacks and res zoning of three

1894
02:53:34,000 --> 02:53:40,760
lots from r129 to r240 are in keeping
with the intent and purpose of the

1895
02:53:38,319 --> 02:53:44,560
official plan the proposed residential
uses are consistent with the policies

1896
02:53:42,319 --> 02:53:48,479
relating to row to low density
residential uses the applicants have

1897
02:53:46,800 --> 02:53:51,520
also requested a reduction in setback
Backs from required corner lot sight

1898
02:53:49,920 --> 02:53:56,120
triangles and distances from
intersections in both cases the required

1899
02:53:53,720 --> 02:54:00,200
setback is 7.5 M and the applicants are
requesting a reduction to 5 meters again

1900
02:53:58,560 --> 02:54:05,439
this is different than new information
that came to us last week section 5.1.3

1901
02:54:04,120 --> 02:54:09,520
states that a sight triangle a
triangular space formed by intersecting

1902
02:54:07,720 --> 02:54:15,000
intersecting Street line of a corner lot
shall be measured back 7 and a half

1903
02:54:11,760 --> 02:54:20,040
meters in all residential zones and 9 m
in all other zones within site within a

1904
02:54:18,439 --> 02:54:24,000
sight triangle of a corner lot no
obstruction higher than 2 ft above the

1905
02:54:21,760 --> 02:54:29,160
grid including any building structure
sign landscape planting or parking of

1906
02:54:25,960 --> 02:54:33,720
vehicles is permitted section 5.4.1
point11 establishes driveway standards

1907
02:54:31,279 --> 02:54:37,760
and section 5.4.1
111.6 specifically identifies distances

1908
02:54:36,200 --> 02:54:41,560
from intersections and states that where
a lot is greater than 12 M the minimum

1909
02:54:40,160 --> 02:54:45,760
distance from a driveway intersection
shall be 9 M and where a lot line of

1910
02:54:44,239 --> 02:54:50,920
buting the street is 12 meters or less
the minimum setback shall be 7.5 meters

1911
02:54:48,960 --> 02:54:53,760
as it applies to this subdivision due to
the prevalent lost frontages most

1912
02:54:52,439 --> 02:54:58,880
driveways are required to be at least
7.5 meters from

1913
02:54:56,359 --> 02:55:01,880
intersections City and staff city and
county staff consider established

1914
02:55:00,319 --> 02:55:04,920
setbacks including distances from
intersections and corner lot side

1915
02:55:03,200 --> 02:55:08,239
triangles to be important safety
standards to support Road Safety by

1916
02:55:06,520 --> 02:55:12,160
prohibiting driveways or obstructures in
close proximity to intersections the

1917
02:55:10,520 --> 02:55:16,640
requested reduction to 5 meters is
shorter than one parking space which has

1918
02:55:13,720 --> 02:55:19,680
a minimum length of 5.5 m and is
equivalent to less than one car length

1919
02:55:18,120 --> 02:55:24,279
being being provided before a driveway
or obstruction at an intersection in

1920
02:55:22,239 --> 02:55:27,640
staff's opinion a new plan of subdivis a
new plan of subdivision must be able to

1921
02:55:26,080 --> 02:55:33,880
accomodate the minimum safety standards
established in sections 5.1.3 and 5.4.1

1922
02:55:31,640 --> 02:55:37,640
point1 point.
111.6 the port the portion of the

1923
02:55:36,160 --> 02:55:41,000
proposal relating to setbacks from site
triangles and distances from

1924
02:55:39,439 --> 02:55:44,399
intersections for driveways is not
considered to be in keeping with the

1925
02:55:42,319 --> 02:55:48,080
intent and purpose of the official plan
the road section of the official plan

1926
02:55:45,960 --> 02:55:52,800
establishes policies for public roads in
the city of Woodstock the roads policies

1927
02:55:50,319 --> 02:55:55,720
direct that that city council shall
consider the potential effect of

1928
02:55:54,120 --> 02:56:00,399
development on safety efficiency and
volume flow volume and flow on adjacent

1929
02:55:58,279 --> 02:56:03,600
streets through the application process
City staff have identified safety

1930
02:56:02,040 --> 02:56:07,000
concerns related to the proposed
reduction in sight triangle distance

1931
02:56:05,080 --> 02:56:11,239
from intersection setbacks and do not
support this part of the proposal

1932
02:56:09,160 --> 02:56:14,960
planning staff are satisfied that the
that this portion of the application

1933
02:56:13,399 --> 02:56:21,160
related to clarification on interior
sidey guards re reduced minimum exterior

1934
02:56:18,359 --> 02:56:25,640
sard and the resoning Lots from R1 to
r240 is consistent with the policies of

1935
02:56:24,040 --> 02:56:29,319
the PPS and meets the General intended
purpose the official plan respecting low

1936
02:56:27,760 --> 02:56:33,000
density residential uses and can be
given favorable consideration planning

1937
02:56:31,319 --> 02:56:36,760
staff are not satisfied that the portion
of the application related to relief of

1938
02:56:35,080 --> 02:56:40,160
site triangles and distances from
intersection for driveways meets the

1939
02:56:38,680 --> 02:56:43,600
General intended purpose of the official
plan respecting roads in this portion of

1940
02:56:41,800 --> 02:56:46,120
the application should not be given
favorable

1941
02:56:47,239 --> 02:56:54,359
consideration to review the new site
triangle intersection setbacks requested

1942
02:56:51,680 --> 02:56:58,160
last week staff had recommended to the
applicants that they defer this

1943
02:56:56,239 --> 02:57:02,040
application to allow staff more time to
review the new information however as

1944
02:57:00,439 --> 02:57:05,239
requested by the applicant's agent staff
are prepared to make a recommendation

1945
02:57:03,680 --> 02:57:09,760
contained within the report without
consideration of the newly requested

1946
02:57:07,840 --> 02:57:14,279
intersection and site triangle setbacks
in staff's recommendation if staff's

1947
02:57:12,279 --> 02:57:17,640
recommendation is followed as written in
the report that you have here the

1948
02:57:15,920 --> 02:57:22,560
applications the applicants will need to
make new appliations consistent with the

1949
02:57:19,479 --> 02:57:27,600
request made last week alternativ
alternatively staff recommend the

1950
02:57:24,160 --> 02:57:33,040
recommendations that are included in the
report okay thank you any questions of

1951
02:57:30,680 --> 02:57:36,600
the Planner councelor
shenberg yeah from the mayor through Mr

1952
02:57:35,239 --> 02:57:40,880
Miller I guess the the first thing is
try to use an example that you may be

1953
02:57:39,120 --> 02:57:46,319
able to correlate to what they're asking
for in this at the top of page page

1954
02:57:43,520 --> 02:57:50,479
number five where they talk about 1.2
meters on one side of the lot line .6

1955
02:57:48,720 --> 02:57:54,439
meters on the other side of the lot line
I know in the city of Woodstock on

1956
02:57:52,359 --> 02:57:59,200
Anderson Street there's some areas
called zero lot allowance which I think

1957
02:57:56,640 --> 02:58:02,680
are even less than 6 meters on one side
of the property I think it's like six

1958
02:58:00,880 --> 02:58:06,920
inches on one side of the property and
four feet on the other side of the

1959
02:58:04,760 --> 02:58:11,720
property line as if the house is built
on the property line in essence can you

1960
02:58:09,640 --> 02:58:15,640
explain Anderson Street and and explain
how this is

1961
02:58:13,359 --> 02:58:18,279
different through the chair I'm not
specifically familiar with that I can

1962
02:58:17,239 --> 02:58:22,680
probably look into it before for
Thursday's meeting and give you a better

1963
02:58:20,279 --> 02:58:26,880
answer um I'll just write down Anderson
Street when I get back to my chair um

1964
02:58:24,640 --> 02:58:30,399
but I don't I'm not aware of anywhere
where the city is permitted zero lot

1965
02:58:28,960 --> 02:58:34,399
lines sometimes when we're permitting
the

1966
02:58:31,120 --> 02:58:39,040
0.6 meter setback once you put Eaves and
gutters and things like that on you're

1967
02:58:36,000 --> 02:58:43,800
pretty close um but I'm not sure and
maybe Craig has a better idea while he's

1968
02:58:40,800 --> 02:58:43,800
here

1969
02:58:49,120 --> 02:58:57,399
Mr chairman through to the question
talking about 0.62 foot side

1970
02:58:55,239 --> 02:59:01,720
yards the the question from the
counselor was that uh Anderson Street

1971
02:58:59,960 --> 02:59:06,080
and is there a
zero zero lot line setback from

1972
02:59:04,239 --> 02:59:11,920
development there yeah that was the
shikan subdivision so I forget the exact

1973
02:59:09,640 --> 02:59:16,800
Provisions but uh I
believe one House was built on the

1974
02:59:14,160 --> 02:59:22,000
property line but there was an easement
created on the adjacent lot which

1975
02:59:19,720 --> 02:59:27,399
allowed that homeowner to go onto the
neighbor's property to access the side

1976
02:59:24,479 --> 02:59:33,279
side of the house that's the uh only
example that we have in in Woodstock for

1977
02:59:30,200 --> 02:59:33,279
that type of

1978
02:59:36,680 --> 02:59:42,640
situation does that satisfy I guess by
followup it' be as long as the fire

1979
02:59:40,560 --> 02:59:47,640
department is is fine with these houses
being this close together then i' likely

1980
02:59:45,120 --> 02:59:51,359
would be fine with it as well because we
also have the Tom black Boulevard and

1981
02:59:49,880 --> 02:59:56,760
whatnot where some of the houses I think
are closer together than what is

1982
02:59:53,600 --> 03:00:01,520
seemingly less than 8
feet Mr chairman if I could just

1983
02:59:58,920 --> 03:00:07,279
continue this so so your concern is the
two- foot sidey yard so in

1984
03:00:05,399 --> 03:00:13,960
the
rontok uh Champlain subdivision that's a

1985
03:00:12,080 --> 03:00:20,960
I'm just guessing that's roughly 15
years old so from the chicken ants

1986
03:00:18,760 --> 03:00:25,720
subdivision which we didn't like the
zero lot lines so I believe it was

1987
03:00:23,560 --> 03:00:32,479
Thomas field Holmes came into Woodstock
they introduced the the two foot side

1988
03:00:29,239 --> 03:00:39,120
yard in that subdivision so the one
house had to be a minimum of 2 feet the

1989
03:00:36,040 --> 03:00:43,040
lot adjacent had to be a minimum 4 feet
so you had six feet between the

1990
03:00:46,160 --> 03:00:55,680
houses this would appear to be the same
then so I I say I'm fine with

1991
03:00:51,439 --> 03:00:55,680
it okay any other questions of the

1992
03:00:57,560 --> 03:01:02,680
planner seeing none is the applicant
here for

1993
03:01:05,439 --> 03:01:12,319
this and I'll certainly say thank you
for sticking around and having a long

1994
03:01:14,520 --> 03:01:20,600
evening so if you don't mind nameing yep
thank you you you know the

1995
03:01:27,080 --> 03:01:33,880
drill that's
great okay good evening uh my name is

1996
03:01:31,239 --> 03:01:38,239
Brandon fling I'm a planner with GSP
group um thank you for your time this

1997
03:01:36,479 --> 03:01:43,080
evening I I will keep this pretty quick
it's been uh it's been a long eventful

1998
03:01:40,319 --> 03:01:47,960
night but uh nice to uh be up here when
the Galler is empty and not so worried

1999
03:01:44,479 --> 03:01:51,439
about something I'm I'm here for so um I
think Mr Miller did a good job of going

2000
03:01:49,359 --> 03:01:56,080
over our request and I just want to hit
a few highlights and then talk about the

2001
03:01:52,880 --> 03:02:00,760
one one area where we we did essentially
change our request um late in the

2002
03:01:58,319 --> 03:02:07,800
process as he noted
so

2003
03:02:03,760 --> 03:02:12,439
um so as noted in the staff report our
uh requested amendments look to clarify

2004
03:02:10,920 --> 03:02:17,920
the separation or the distance between
dwellings reduce the exterior sidey yard

2005
03:02:15,040 --> 03:02:23,680
setback uh small resoning of three lots
from r129 to r240 and then to reduce the

2006
03:02:21,640 --> 03:02:27,200
reduction of a setback of a driveway to
an intersection and that's the one where

2007
03:02:25,640 --> 03:02:31,600
we've sort of changed our request
Midstream and um I'd like to present

2008
03:02:29,399 --> 03:02:37,560
that to
council so quickly um I think perhaps a

2009
03:02:35,640 --> 03:02:41,640
clarification Pro was provided about the
separation between dwellings but um is

2010
03:02:40,040 --> 03:02:45,840
really just to clarify the wording so
that if it's not Mr Miller or myself or

2011
03:02:44,120 --> 03:02:51,600
or the current developers looking at the
application that everyone was clear what

2012
03:02:47,920 --> 03:02:56,479
setbacks apply so 1.2 meters on one side
0.6 on the other side and always a

2013
03:02:53,720 --> 03:03:00,600
minimum of 1.8 between dwellings and
that's it's basically the way the

2014
03:02:58,319 --> 03:03:05,000
original bylaw was written but we just
it it wasn't perfectly clear for

2015
03:03:02,920 --> 03:03:10,160
interpretation and we wanted to uh to
reest that clarification so um we're

2016
03:03:08,640 --> 03:03:14,000
staff has recommended report of this
change and uh that that would suit the

2017
03:03:12,560 --> 03:03:17,880
developers
needs the next request was a minor

2018
03:03:16,279 --> 03:03:22,000
change of a reduction in the exterior
side yard setback so from the 4 and a

2019
03:03:20,080 --> 03:03:26,479
half meters as required down to a 4
meter exterior side yard setback uh

2020
03:03:24,880 --> 03:03:30,520
again staff has recommended approval of
this request um and that would that

2021
03:03:28,760 --> 03:03:34,920
would suit the needs of the developer
it's really just gives them a bit more

2022
03:03:32,040 --> 03:03:39,720
design flexibility in this neighborhood
there are significant topographical um

2023
03:03:38,319 --> 03:03:44,399
changes throughout the neighborhood and
just citing the individual Lots having a

2024
03:03:42,120 --> 03:03:50,040
little bit more wiggle room uh helps to
make the grading and drainage and site

2025
03:03:46,399 --> 03:03:55,560
design work so that's that request comes
from the next one just quickly the The

2026
03:03:52,640 --> 03:04:00,720
Zone changed from the r129 to the
r240 um so on the original draft plan

2027
03:03:58,160 --> 03:04:04,640
these Lots were going to be uh 12 meter
Frontage Lots so a little bigger Lots

2028
03:04:02,720 --> 03:04:08,880
but through the detailed design uh and
the engineering design it was found that

2029
03:04:06,880 --> 03:04:12,640
a bit more flexibility allowing uh
smaller frontages for these three lots

2030
03:04:11,160 --> 03:04:16,640
uh would assist with the overall grading
design of the subdivision um again

2031
03:04:15,080 --> 03:04:21,080
staff's recommending approval of this
request uh um and that will that will

2032
03:04:19,080 --> 03:04:25,520
help the developer and the engineers you
know appropriately design and um the

2033
03:04:23,359 --> 03:04:30,160
grading of the site so I think we're
we're all good on that one as

2034
03:04:27,640 --> 03:04:34,560
well so the next one is the request for
the setback of driveways to

2035
03:04:32,239 --> 03:04:40,560
intersections our original request as
noted by Mr Miller was for reduction um

2036
03:04:37,479 --> 03:04:45,800
from the requirement of 9 meters down to
five um and this is only applicable to

2037
03:04:43,200 --> 03:04:51,640
Lots with frontages of 12 meters or
greater we've since looked looked at the

2038
03:04:48,439 --> 03:04:55,520
detailed design um in more detail and
realized when we asked for the request

2039
03:04:53,160 --> 03:05:00,279
of the 5 meter setback the uh the
engineers and designers had provided

2040
03:04:57,720 --> 03:05:04,359
double width driveways on those Corner
Lots um and that's not it's not

2041
03:05:02,840 --> 03:05:09,279
necessary it's not required as part of
their design so we we're really reducing

2042
03:05:07,439 --> 03:05:15,319
our request from five meters or
increasing it I suppose up to a seven

2043
03:05:11,479 --> 03:05:20,640
and a half meter setback for lots that
are 12 meters or greater so the driveway

2044
03:05:17,720 --> 03:05:25,520
can be within or has to be 7.5 M or
greater from the intersection that same

2045
03:05:23,680 --> 03:05:31,319
requirement is actually permitted with
lots that have 12 meters Frontage or

2046
03:05:28,080 --> 03:05:35,040
less so say you had an 11 meter lot the
the zoning bylaw allows a 7 and a half

2047
03:05:33,359 --> 03:05:39,600
meter setback for the driveway from an
intersection it's only when it's greater

2048
03:05:37,080 --> 03:05:45,120
than a 12 meter lot that the increased
setback up to 9 meters is required we

2049
03:05:42,439 --> 03:05:51,080
can provide the 7.5 but we can't provide
the nine so the request again again has

2050
03:05:48,040 --> 03:05:57,760
increased from five up to
9 I just want to clarify quickly

2051
03:05:54,279 --> 03:06:01,479
through um the zoning bylaw and the
actual detailed design what this looks

2052
03:05:59,399 --> 03:06:07,640
like on the ground so on the left side
of the screen is the actual zoning bylaw

2053
03:06:03,960 --> 03:06:11,080
and the definition of of Street line is
coincident with the definition of

2054
03:06:09,120 --> 03:06:14,920
property line and as you can see in the
diagram here the the red dotted line

2055
03:06:12,920 --> 03:06:19,760
would identify the the street line or
the property line when you're looking at

2056
03:06:16,520 --> 03:06:24,800
the the zoning law versus the drawing on
the right hand side is actually you're

2057
03:06:22,120 --> 03:06:24,800
not following my

2058
03:06:24,840 --> 03:06:28,040
presentation not

2059
03:06:31,120 --> 03:06:40,520
helpful Matt can you uh
adjust the um oh yep thank

2060
03:06:44,840 --> 03:06:53,520
you my apologies
yeah I suppose I should check my blind

2061
03:06:50,680 --> 03:06:57,319
spots and see what's actually on the
screen Kristen you had one

2062
03:07:10,920 --> 03:07:16,239
job I will keep it quick once we have
the graphic

2063
03:07:19,319 --> 03:07:21,439
can

2064
03:07:26,920 --> 03:07:33,160
I go okay
should

2065
03:07:33,319 --> 03:07:41,160
okay let's try this
again okay this is what I'm speaking to

2066
03:07:39,040 --> 03:07:45,279
so the drawing on the left is from the
the zoning bylaw and you can notice the

2067
03:07:43,439 --> 03:07:50,520
red dash line I've just added that in to
highlight the zoning bylaw identifies

2068
03:07:48,200 --> 03:07:55,560
the street line or the property line as
the the same point in um in measured

2069
03:07:53,640 --> 03:07:59,840
scale the drawing on the right is our
actual detailed engineering design and

2070
03:07:58,279 --> 03:08:05,040
the important part here to highlight is
that the property line again I've I've

2071
03:08:02,560 --> 03:08:09,239
shown it in a red dash line is different
from the physical Street line or the

2072
03:08:06,760 --> 03:08:12,920
location of the actual road base so the
actual Street line I've shown at the

2073
03:08:11,080 --> 03:08:17,640
edge of the there's a blue
line um and the importance is that

2074
03:08:15,239 --> 03:08:22,160
there's a 3 met 3 meter Boulevard in
this case there's no sidewalk on this

2075
03:08:19,520 --> 03:08:25,359
corner so it's the the smallest example
so therefore the one where the the

2076
03:08:23,680 --> 03:08:29,040
driveway would be the closest to the
intersection but there's a 3 meter

2077
03:08:27,359 --> 03:08:33,359
Boulevard that is actually beyond the
property line before the physical Street

2078
03:08:31,200 --> 03:08:39,960
Edge versus the drawing on the left
which is from the bylaw presumes them to

2079
03:08:35,520 --> 03:08:45,840
be the same the same point um in in plan
so our our request is for the the

2080
03:08:43,160 --> 03:08:50,239
driveway setback to be 7 and2 meters
from the actual property line or the

2081
03:08:47,880 --> 03:08:55,720
ownership line but in reality there's an
additional 3 meters beyond that that is

2082
03:08:52,920 --> 03:09:00,239
the um the actual Street line so the the
driveway setback when you add up those

2083
03:08:57,479 --> 03:09:05,040
two numbers is over 10 meters from the
actual Street line so again in the

2084
03:09:02,279 --> 03:09:09,239
zoning bylaw the interpretation is that
the the road is right at the property

2085
03:09:06,880 --> 03:09:13,160
line um and the the site triangle is
measured at that same corner but in

2086
03:09:11,200 --> 03:09:17,600
reality there there is a
boulevard uh that's provided beyond the

2087
03:09:15,960 --> 03:09:22,120
beyond the property line and and the
physical Street Edge so that that's an

2088
03:09:20,439 --> 03:09:27,040
important point of clarification and I
think staff is aware of that but I think

2089
03:09:25,000 --> 03:09:31,160
it's important in reality to understand
what this looks like in terms of

2090
03:09:28,840 --> 03:09:35,960
navigating the street and and providing
a parking space there or having a safe

2091
03:09:33,359 --> 03:09:35,960
entrance to the

2092
03:09:36,479 --> 03:09:43,439
driveway um quickly as Mr Miller noted
we did submit a letter from Paradigm

2093
03:09:40,840 --> 03:09:48,359
Transportation who who reviewed the
proposed setback and again they reviewed

2094
03:09:45,640 --> 03:09:54,239
the setback at 7 and2 meters
as 7.5 m versus our original request

2095
03:09:50,840 --> 03:09:59,399
which was 5 m they found it's it's
reasonable and acceptable based on the

2096
03:09:56,279 --> 03:10:04,120
uh traffic Association of Canada design
guidelines um as far as guidelines for

2097
03:10:01,880 --> 03:10:08,319
setbacks from driveways and
intersections um and they've also noted

2098
03:10:06,960 --> 03:10:12,359
and as I've highlighted in my
presentation the zoning bylaw already

2099
03:10:10,439 --> 03:10:17,399
permits a s in a half meter driveway
setback for Lots with 12 meter frontages

2100
03:10:15,560 --> 03:10:21,840
or less we're just asking for it for for
the lots that are greater than 12 M and

2101
03:10:19,439 --> 03:10:24,600
really in the context of the subdivision
it's the corner Lots it's the corner

2102
03:10:23,319 --> 03:10:30,640
single detached lots that would be
impacted by this um further I just

2103
03:10:27,359 --> 03:10:35,560
highlight that other areas nearby uh
kitner waterl ingersol and tilsonburg

2104
03:10:33,000 --> 03:10:39,520
all have a 7 and a half meter or less
requirement so it's it's not something

2105
03:10:37,439 --> 03:10:44,000
that's out of the ordinary or certainly
in the within the county both ingersol

2106
03:10:41,120 --> 03:10:48,640
and tilsonburg uh do permit that 7 and a
half meter

2107
03:10:45,680 --> 03:10:53,960
setb so all of that being said I think
um certainly appreciate staff's report

2108
03:10:51,840 --> 03:10:59,600
and there three recommendations that
recommend approval of our a three

2109
03:10:57,560 --> 03:11:02,960
requests then the fourth one where they
had recommended refusal again they were

2110
03:11:01,840 --> 03:11:07,239
looking at slightly different
information that then in front of

2111
03:11:04,640 --> 03:11:12,560
council tonight but um I have provided
some recommended wording that would uh

2112
03:11:10,640 --> 03:11:17,800
it would suit our request based on the
the revised request and it's really that

2113
03:11:15,239 --> 03:11:23,239
um according to that section of the B
541

2114
03:11:19,880 --> 03:11:27,960
11.6 uh that A reduced setback from 9 M
to 7.5 M would be permitted with lots

2115
03:11:26,279 --> 03:11:33,040
with greater than 12 meter
Frontage um so I know Council has the

2116
03:11:31,279 --> 03:11:39,080
ability to you know take the staff
recommendations to um to make changes of

2117
03:11:36,279 --> 03:11:44,520
what the case might be but um I guess my
request going forward would be that um

2118
03:11:41,399 --> 03:11:47,960
perhaps staff consider this request and
maybe can come back on Thursday with

2119
03:11:46,000 --> 03:11:51,840
additional information
um that Council perhaps consider our

2120
03:11:50,600 --> 03:11:56,239
amended
recommendation um and then the third

2121
03:11:53,560 --> 03:12:00,840
option I suppose would be accept the
three that staff are recog uh approval

2122
03:11:58,439 --> 03:12:03,640
for and defer this last item so that we
could still get the momentum on the

2123
03:12:01,960 --> 03:12:07,160
other zoning items and have those
clarified um but if we could do it all

2124
03:12:05,680 --> 03:12:11,640
on Thursday with a revised
recommendation that would be more

2125
03:12:08,960 --> 03:12:15,880
efficient um but certainly if if there's
an ability to approve the first three

2126
03:12:13,160 --> 03:12:18,439
and defer this this last item uh versus
refusing it we would be open to that

2127
03:12:17,239 --> 03:12:22,120
discussion as
well so I think that was a lot but

2128
03:12:20,800 --> 03:12:24,760
hopefully you followed along and I'm
happy to answer any

2129
03:12:24,960 --> 03:12:29,000
questions any questions from

2130
03:12:31,279 --> 03:12:37,439
Council I guess I do maybe because it's
a late night and I'm trying to follow

2131
03:12:35,760 --> 03:12:43,040
the bouncing ball
here um and maybe I'm going to direct

2132
03:12:40,200 --> 03:12:48,319
this to Mr Miller if I might with this
new information would that or does that

2133
03:12:46,000 --> 03:12:56,920
change any type of
recommendations from planning

2134
03:12:52,200 --> 03:13:02,080
department um not from not for me the
planner um just because we rely on

2135
03:13:00,040 --> 03:13:06,880
getting that information for what is a
safe setback from the city's engineering

2136
03:13:04,640 --> 03:13:10,840
department um the city's engineering
department indicated to us that they

2137
03:13:09,000 --> 03:13:16,359
couldn't fit within their timelines a
chance to review that letter and respond

2138
03:13:12,520 --> 03:13:19,880
to it prior to this week's meeting so I
I as the planner who's a lay person

2139
03:13:18,680 --> 03:13:24,319
can't tell you whether that's a good
thing or

2140
03:13:20,920 --> 03:13:27,319
not then maybe I'll direct that to
engineering

2141
03:13:27,359 --> 03:13:34,359
then just again to respect timelines and
is there any chance to get this all done

2142
03:13:31,880 --> 03:13:40,680
on Thursday or do we look at deferral if
we do need more time your opinion please

2143
03:13:36,800 --> 03:13:46,080
through to the chair um yeah I think we
can have um a recommendation to staff by

2144
03:13:43,800 --> 03:13:53,000
Thursday by coun to council I mean by
Thursday okay well thank you very

2145
03:13:49,880 --> 03:13:58,439
much any other
questions oh councelor

2146
03:13:56,520 --> 03:14:03,760
shenberg yeah from the mayor through to
Mr fuelling I guess the question is

2147
03:14:00,160 --> 03:14:08,200
related to uh triangles at intersections
would would a subdivision never have any

2148
03:14:05,520 --> 03:14:13,120
policies that sort of say you can't put
a ornamental Bush or something like that

2149
03:14:11,279 --> 03:14:16,120
that close to the corner either because
we've all seen people who like to grow

2150
03:14:14,479 --> 03:14:20,840
Hedges and all of a sudden they may not
realize that that hedge is inside the

2151
03:14:18,479 --> 03:14:25,000
traffic
triangle thank you through you Mr mer

2152
03:14:23,080 --> 03:14:29,160
the um the zoning byla certainly has
those requirements um talks about the

2153
03:14:27,319 --> 03:14:35,800
height of of anything within that
visibility triangle um so that does get

2154
03:14:31,720 --> 03:14:40,439
applied to to all of the Lots um I can't
say that I've seen it as a specific call

2155
03:14:38,200 --> 03:14:47,040
it call out item in a subdivision
agreement but um I guess it's really

2156
03:14:43,160 --> 03:14:50,279
relying on the zoning bylaw for that um
you know keeping an eye on it and then

2157
03:14:48,720 --> 03:14:56,600
if it becomes an Enforcement issue the
zoning bylaw is the the tool to identify

2158
03:14:53,160 --> 03:15:01,840
it and sorry if I could just perhaps add
to that after the detailed design a

2159
03:14:59,200 --> 03:15:05,600
reduction in the the triang corner
visibility triangle is no longer

2160
03:15:03,399 --> 03:15:08,760
requested it's just a setback to the
driveway in the intersection

2161
03:15:12,279 --> 03:15:20,680
now can you repeat can you repeat
that again I'm feeling a little confused

2162
03:15:18,399 --> 03:15:24,600
here certainly our original request
looked for a reduction in the corner

2163
03:15:22,600 --> 03:15:29,800
visibility triangle as well as the
setback of a driveway to an

2164
03:15:27,800 --> 03:15:33,359
intersection and now that we've done
some more fine-tuning and looked at it

2165
03:15:31,239 --> 03:15:38,520
in more detail the corner visibility
triangle and the the the requirements of

2166
03:15:35,800 --> 03:15:42,920
that we can satisfy that on each of the
Lots it's just the physical separation

2167
03:15:41,040 --> 03:15:47,120
of the edge of the driveway to the edge
of the street line that that we're

2168
03:15:44,279 --> 03:15:52,960
requesting reduction in now
thank you for that no

2169
03:15:49,479 --> 03:15:52,960
problem any other

2170
03:15:54,560 --> 03:16:03,239
questions seeing none thank you very
much with that in case there's some

2171
03:16:01,000 --> 03:16:08,479
people hiding uh anybody like to speak
in favor of this

2172
03:16:05,600 --> 03:16:13,239
application going
once anybody like to speak against this

2173
03:16:15,040 --> 03:16:18,920
application seeing none

2174
03:16:22,560 --> 03:16:28,399
well that concludes tonight's meeting a
decision on these items will be made at

2175
03:16:26,000 --> 03:16:32,760
the council meeting on Thursday and I'm
going to look for a mover for

2176
03:16:30,720 --> 03:16:37,439
adjournment councilor leather barel
second by councelor Wismer vanm all

2177
03:16:34,840 --> 03:16:42,000
those in favor we are now adjourned
thanks everybody have a good night