Loading...
MINUTES - Special Council - 19921126TOWN OF AURORA SPECIAL COUNCIL -PUBLIC PLANNING MEETING NO. 55-92 Council Chambers Aurora Town Hall Thursday, November 26, 1992 7:30p.m. MINUTES COUNCIL MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE STAFF MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE Mayor West in the Chair; Councillors Constable, Griffith, Healy, Jones, McKenzie, Pedersen, Timpson, and Weller. Municipal Clerk, Director of Planning, Planner, Planning Technician, and Recording Secretary. Mayor West advised that this meeting had been called as a Public Meeting with regard to the following matters: PL92-119-452-Proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment, Part of Lot 86, Concession 1 E.Y.S., 202 St. John's Sideroad East, Mr. and Mrs. Fulton; D09-04-91 and D14-04-92 PL92-120-453 -Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, Part Lots 3 and 4, Plan 246, 15504 and 15520 Yonge Street, G.L. Heeringa Ltd.; Dl4-09-92 PL92-121-454-Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, Part Lot 27, Plan 246, 25 George Street, Project H.O.S.T.E.L.; Dl4-10-92 PL92-122-455 -Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, Part of Lot 5, Plan 246, 81 Industrial Parkway North, The Alvi Group; D14-11-92 Mayor West advised that applications associated with reports PL92-119-452 and PL92- 120-453 had been withdrawn at the request of the applicants. The Public Meeting procedure and the opportunities available for concerned residents to ask questions of the proponents of the applications scheduled for consideration were explained. Mayor West advised that any person who wished further notice of the passage of the proposed By-laws under consideration could sign the forms available. The Municipal Clerk advised that the required Notices of Meeting for these applications were posted in compliance with the Planning Act by First Class mail to the addresses within 120 metres of the areas, as shown on the last revised assessment roll of the Town of Aurora, to which the proposed By-laws would apply. The necessary signs were posted on the property in accordance with the rules of procedures under the Planning Act. Aurora Special Council-Public Planning Minutes No. 55-92 Thursday, November 26, 1992 - 2 - DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST There were no disclosures of interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. APPROVAL OF AGENDA #724 Moved by Councillor Timpson Seconded by Councillor Weller THAT the content of the Agenda be approved as outlined herein, with the addition of correspondence received from Weston and Associates for consideration along with report PL92-119-452; correspondence received from G.L. Heeringa Ltd. for consideration along with report PL92-120-453; correspondence received from Mr. Terry Kirbyson for consideration along with report PL92-120-453; and correspondence received from the Royal Canadian Legion, Branch 385, for consideration along with report PL92-122-455. CARRIED PLANNING APPLICATIONS PL92-121-454-Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Part Lot 27. Plan 246. 25 George Street Project H.O.S.T.E.L.: D14-10-92 The Director of Planning provided an overview of the application, outlining the requested exceptions to the standard RA2 zone and general provisions of the By-law. A video of the subject lands and surrounding area was shown providing an enhanced overview of the intentions of the applicants. The Director of Planning pointed out that the original proposal for a three- storey condominium project with 12 parking spaces had obtained approval in principle from Council in January of 1990, and that third reading of an implementing by-law had been pending finalization of the site plan agreement. Given the length of time of inactivity since the initial application was presented and in light of the change in proponents and proposed use, staff felt the matter should return to Council as a new application in an effort to be fair to the nearby residents. Staff support the subject application as it conforms with the intent and policies previously developed and adopted by Council. The building promotes housing intensification while creating a transitional area between the existing high and low density uses. The elevations have been designed to blend architecturally with existing surrounding development incorporating local style features. Experience and research in determining parking demands of this nature of project indicates that the front-yard parking may not be necessary and, accordingly, could be eliminated in an effort to protect the integrity of the streetscape. However, to protect future parking demands should the building change hands, it is suggested that the zoning be as site specific to use and occupancy as possible and the site plan agreement incorporate provisions for future restoration of normal parking standards. Other minor matters can be addressed during site plan review. Applicant's Comments Mr. John Rogers, solicitor for the applicant, introduced the representatives of the project. Ms. Jeanette Frost, a planning consultant for Yellow Brick House, addressed Council advising that a meeting had been held with concerned Citadel residents. Ms. Frost provided a brief history of the organization and the expectations of this project. Plans for staffing and building maintenance provisions were presented. Aurora Special Council-Public Planning Minutes No. 55-92 Thursday, November 26, 1992 - 3 - The proponents made copies available of a "Summary Report for the Evaluation of Property Value Impacts: Non-Profit Housing", prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Housing by Eko Research Associates Inc., and the OMB Order impacting the City of Toronto regarding reduced standard parking by-laws and alternative/social housing. Ms. Frost assured those present that the Board of Directors were more than willing to work with Staff and concerned residents to resolve any issues to ensure the success and acceptance of the Yellow Brick House project. Public's Comments Concerns expressed by members of the public included the possible negative impact on property values with the proximity of a such a project; a lack of property maintenance; the elevation and visibility of the front yard parking; a general consensus that area parking was inadequate and as such the resultant impact from the addition of another multiple residence; additional traffic volumes; the removal of the maple tree in the rear yard; the grade of the driveway in relation to the opposite drive and the natural slope of George Street; lack of security and permanent full- time onsite supervision of residents; aesthetic appearance of structure; area property damage during construction; possible structural damage to surrounding buildings due to vehicular driveway traffic; and playground noise. Ap,plicant's Responses The proponents referred to the Summary Report and recent OMB decision to address property devaluation and parking concerns. It was explained that the project is under the direct supervision of a Board of Directors and as such provisions have been made for the maintenance and general upkeep of the building. Unfortunately, damage during construction is always possible, however, this particular project will be subject to a high level of scrutiny to ensure protection of all interested parties. As well, structural engineers are also available to prevent such happenings. It was stressed that this is a "second stage" project, and as such does not require the same level of on-site supervision and security as does a "emergency" shelter. There will be fencing around the proposed play area to ensure the safety of the children involved in the program. It is virtually impossible to save or move the rear yard maple and, accordingly, the proponents are willing to replace it with a mature tree. In addition, the proposed plans include extensive landscaping. Location of the driveway, roof colour, building materials, and fencing will all be addressed during the site plan process to the satisfaction of interested parties. The Public Meeting closed and Council's consideration began. #725 Moved by Councillor Pedersen Seconded by Councillor Weller THAT the application be approved, subject to the zoning being as site specific to use and occupancy as possible while complying with existing provincial laws and ensuring the protection of future parking requirements; while addressing the elimination of the front yard parking and adequate fencing through the site plan process. CARRIED PL92-122-455 -Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Part of Lot 105. Plan 246. 81 Industrial Parkway North The Alvi Group: Dl4-ll-92 The Director of Planning provided a brief overview of the proposed amendments to the provisions of the Ml-9 zone to extend the range of uses to include churches, and religious institutions and schools. Also recommended was the deletion of "plumbing shops" from the list of permitted uses to avoid potentially incompatible land uses. It was suggested the Building Code and provincial licensing requirements be utilized as safeguards to the other concerns raised by Staff. Aurora Special Council -Public Planning Minutes No. 55-92 Thursday, November 26, 1992 - 4 - The Public Meeting closed and Council's consideration began. #726 Moved by Councillor Jones Seconded by Councillor Weller THAT this application be approved subject to the deletion of "plumbing shops" from the list of permitted uses and that all Building and Fire Code requirements be met prior to third reading of the by-law. CARRIED ADJOURNMENT #727 Moved by Councillor Timpson THAT the meeting be adjourned at 9:15p.m. CARRIED J. WEST MAYOR L. ALLISON MUNICIPAL CLERK