Agenda - Special Council - 20060927Spare
PUBLIC PLANNING
AGENDA
NO.06-26
WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 21, 2006
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AURORA TOWN HALL
PUBLIC RELEASE
22/09/06
TOWN OF AURORA
SPECIAL COUNCIL - PUBLIC PLANNING MEETING
AGENDA
NO. 06-26
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
7.00 p.m.
I DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
II APPROVAL OFAGENDA
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the content of the Agenda be approved as presented.
III PLANNING APPLICATIONS
IV READING OF BYLAWS
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the following listed by-law be given 1st, 2nd and 3rd
readings, and enacted:
4861-06.0 BEING A BY-LAW to Confirm
Actions by Council Resulting
From This Meeting - Wednesday,
September 27 2006.
V ADJOURNMENT
pg. 30
Aurora Special Council — Public Planning Agenda No. 06-26 Page 2
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
AGENDA ITEMS
1. PL06-116 - Applications to Amend the Official Plan and pg. 1
Zoning By-law 2213-78, as Amended
Loblaw Properties Ltd.
15900 Bayview Avenue
Files D09-04-06 and D14-12-06
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council and Staff receive public comments respecting the
Applications to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law (Files D09-04-
06 and D14-12-06); and
THAT Council direct Staff to report back to Council with a
recommendation for the subject applications, taking into account public
comments received, and after a peer review of the parking demand study
has been conducted.
2. PL06-117 - Zoning By-law Amendment Application pg. 19
2091585 Ontario Inc.
15565 Yonge Street
Part of Lot 90, Registered Plan 246
File D14-08-06
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Report PL06-117 be received as information and that Council
determine their position with respect to the application, subject to public
comments received.
PLANNING — SEPTEMBER 27, 2006
TOWN OF AURORA
PUBLIC PLANNING REPORT No. PL06-116
SUBJECT: Applications to Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law 2213-78,
as Amended
Loblaw Properties Ltd.
15900 Bayview Avenue
Files: D09-04-06, D14-12-06
FROM: Sue Seibert, Director of Planning and Development Services
DATE: September 27, 2006
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council and Staff receive public comments respecting the Applications to
Amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law (Files: D09-04-06, D14-12-06); and
THAT Council direct Staff to report back to Council with a recommendation for
the subject applications, taking into account public comments received, and after
a peer review of the parking demand study has been conducted.
BACKGROUND
Location
As illustrated on Figure 1, the subject lands are located west of Bayview Avenue, to the
south of St. John's Sideroad, on the east side of Earl Stewart Drive, and is to the north
of the LCBO that is currently under construction. The lands are municipally known as
15900 Bayview Avenue. The property has extensive frontage on the three roadways
noted above, and contains an area of approximately 4.64ha (11.5ac).
Surrounding Land Uses
To the North:
Residential
East:
Residential
South:
Commercial
West:
Industrial
Official Plan
The subject property is designated as "Community Commercial Centre Special", by the
—1—
PLANNING — SEPTEMBER 27, 2006
September 27, 2006 - 2 - Report No. PL06-0116
site specific Official Plan Amendment #25. Site specific policies pertaining to the
subject lands are as follows:
■ The use of the lands shall be developed for a retail supermarket;
■ The maximum permitted retail gross floor area (GFA) shall be 7,580m2
(81,590ft);
■ A mezzanine may be permitted, and shall include non -retail uses, such as
offices, community meeting rooms with kitchen facilities, seating and rest areas,
a photo lab, supply, mechanical and storage rooms and public washroom
facilities;
Zoning By-law
The subject property is zoned "Campus Commercial (C9-1) Exception Zone" by the
Town of Aurora Zoning By-law 2213-78, as amended. The by-law requires that the
subject lands only be used for a supermarket. Additional site specific provisions of note
are as follows:
■ Maximum permitted retail GFA = 7,580m2 (81,590ft2)
■ Parking: 5.5 parking spaces per 100m2 of retail floor area; 3.3 spaces per 90m2
of mezzanine floor area, and 1 space per 90m2 for all other floor area.
■ Loading Bays shall be located such that they do not directly face Bayview
Avenue.
Minor Variance Approvals D13(76-79)-03
The following minor variances were granted on November 13, 2003:
D13-76-03 a fitness centre with child care facility was added as an additional
permitted uses on the mezzanine;
D13-77-03 a juice/coffee bar was added as an added 'retail' permitted use on the
mezzanine;
D13-78-03 a medical office use was added as an added permitted use on the ground
floor; and
D13-79-03 permitted a maximum width of 25m (82ft) for ingress and egress for all
access ramps onto Earl Stewart Drive.
PROPOSAL (Figures 2&4)
The applicant proposes to expand the existing supermarket by approximately 4258m2
(45,832ft2). The expansion would result in the supermarket having the following floor
areas, which have been categorized by use:
—2—
PLANNING — SEPTEMBER 27, 2006
September 27, 2006 - 3 - Report No. PL06-0116
Use
m2
ft2
Food and Food Prep Area
5,852
62,994
Retail and Service Area
6,174
66,457
Other (storage, stairs, electrical rooms,
etc.)
3,884
41,807
TOTAL
15,910
171,258
The necessary Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments required to facilitate the
subject proposal are as follows:
Official Plan Amendment
Increase permitted retail GFA from 7,580m2 (81,590ft2) to 11,575m2 (124,591ft);
Permit a juice/coffee bar and a medical clinic as permitted uses on the
mezzanine. (Please note the juice/coffee bar use is already a permitted use as
per minor variance D13-79-03. This section of the OPA is considered by the
applicant to be a matter of 'housekeeping'.)
Zoning By-law Amendment
■ Increase permitted retail GFA from 7,580m2 (81,59oft) to 11,575m2 (124,591ft2);
■ Include approved minor variances D13(76-79)-03 into the amended zone
(housekeeping);
■ Include a medical clinic as a permitted use on the mezzanine;
■ Loading bays to be permitted adjacent to Bayview Avenue where approved by a
site plan;
■ Reduce the on -site parking requirement by 180 spaces. The applicant has
calculated that 684 parking spaces are required to be supplied on -site given the
proposed expansion, thus proposes to revise the site specific parking standard to
implement a minimum of 504 spaces. A parking supply of 504 spaces translates
into a parking demand ratio of 3.17 spaces per 100m2 irrespective of the interior
uses.
COMMENTS
Planning Department
Market Conditions
The Town of Aurora strives to achieve a strong diversified competitive economy that is,
in part, facilitated and reflected by its land use policies and zoning provisions. Given
this objective, a peer review of the applicant supplied market demand and impact
analysis, prepared by Kircher Research Associates Ltd. (KRA), was conducted by Scott
—3—
PLANNING — SEPTEMBER 27, 200.6
September 27, 2006 - 4 - Re"ort No. PL06-0116
Morgan & Associates Limited. The intent of obtaining said peer review was to have an
objective industry experienced consultant examine whether the proposed Real
Canadian Super Store (RCSS) expansion would significantly disturb the existing, and
projected, planned function of other community commercial centres. A severe
competitive market imbalance, resulting from having a supply that is significantly greater
than demand, could undermine the existing planned operation of other community
commercial centres. Creating such an imbalance between community commercial
centres could alter long established traffic flow patterns within the community, and could
ultimately alter the diversified economic complexion of the Town.
Scott Morgan concluded that the proposed RCSS expansion is fully justified given the
findings of the KRA market study. In addition, Mr. Morgan states concludes that,
"...the potential. sales impacts of the proposed expansion of the RCSS are moderate,
and that the expansion is warranted in terms, of market growth and will not generate
sales transfers beyond those anticipated in normal competitive realignments as a result
of the incremental introduction of new space."
It is noted that the peer review accounted for the recently approved Rice/Trinity
application located at the northwest corner of Bayview Avenue and Wellington Street
East.
Given the above, Staff are of the opinion that the subject OPA and ZBA applications -'
support municipal objectives of having a strong diversified competitive economy within
the Town of Aurora.
Parking Availability
The proposed expansion would have a parking supply deficit of 180 spaces given the
.existing site specific parking standards. Staff met with the applicant to discuss this
significant parking shortfall. At this meeting, the applicant contended that the predicted
by-law parking shortfall does not accurately project post -development parking demand,
and that the proposed on -site parking supply of 504 spaces would be adequate. The
applicant did note; however, that parking supply would be problematic in the presence
of the annual garden centre, which traditionally occupies 74 parking spaces. It was then
requested that Staff suggest issues that should be addressed in a revised parking
study, which would have the purpose of more accurately predicting on -site parking
demand.
Staff communicated to the applicant that the basis of establishing a new parking
demand rate for food stores that have significant retail components should consist of, in
part, existing & projected population growth within the identified trade areas (Figure 3),
together with existing & projected competitive market conditions. Items that were
considered in the KRA market study analysis. Variables such as market competition,
purchasing habits, average personal disposable income, and physical geography, can '
—4—
PLANNING — SEPTEMBER 27, 2006
September 27, 2006 - 5 - Report No. PL06-0116
all be components of a consumers' decision to choose one market competitor over
another when purchasing similarly offered goods. By conducting parking demand
surveys in communities that that have a similar demographic and socioeconomic
composition to that of what the Town of Aurora is projected to be, Staff are able to
obtain a better grasp of what would constitute and acceptable, and supportive, new
parking standard that is based on consumer decisions in other similar markets.
Given Staff comments, the applicant undertook a parking study in seven (7) different
mature communities in Ontario that consisted of analyzing:
1. peak parking demand of large format stores located within mature markets (a
measure of observed demand);
2. net available square feet of retail space per capita (a measure of the competitive
environment in which the store operates);
3. average sales per customer by store size (an indication of the temporal profile of
trip making for food); and
4. parking dwell time (an observed measure of the time an individual parking space
is occupied).
It is noted that all of the stores that were surveyed were Loblaw stores. The end results
illustrate that the maximum observed parking demand ratio of the seven (7) surveyed
communities was 3.09/100m2, which occurred in Mississauga. It is noted that the
Mississauga store is considered by the applicant to operate within a less competitive
market than that of the projected Aurora market. Hence, theoretically if competition
increased in this area of Mississauga, the above noted demand ratio would decrease
on the same day the parking demand survey was taken.
The subject application would represent an overall parking supply ratio of 3.17/100m2
given the size of the store expansion. Therefore, the parking study provides support for
the subject application as the proposed parking supply ratio of 3.17/100m2 is higher
than the maximum observed parking demand ratio of 3.09/100m2, that was observed in
the seven (7) surveyed communities. However, please note that the 3.17/100m2 supply
ratio excludes the operation of the seasonal garden centre, which if calculated, would
result in a parking supply ratio of 2.70/100m2.
Although Staff do see some merit in the parking study methodology, there are still
concerns in supporting such a drastic reduction in parking standards on a site specific
basis and without the input of a parking study peer review. As such, Staff reserve
judgement until such time as a peer review is conducted on the parking analysis that
addresses the site specific request.
—5—
PLANNING — SEPTEMBER 27, 2006
September 27, 2006 - 6 - Report No. PL06-0116
Site Plan
A site plan amendment is required to be submitted and processed in order to conduct
the proposed works. Planning Staff acknowledge the resolution by Council pertaining to
the subject lands from July 11, 2006 which states,
"THAT the Property Manger of the Real Canadian Superstore in Aurora be requested to
install accessible doors in the medical clinic, on behalf of the Aurora Accessibility
Advisory Committee."
Staff will work with the applicant through the site plan process to improve pedestrian
accessibility to the building.
Other Departments and Agencies
The Public Works, Leisure Services, and Economic Development Departments' have no
objection to the proposed OPA and ZBA and confirm' that a site plan application is
required prior to proceeding with the proposed development. The Building Department
has no objection to the subject applications; however, have recommended slight
changes in the formatting of the proposed implementing zoning by-law. Powerstream
has also communicated that they have no objections to the subject amendments.
PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT
The proposal is consistent with the policies of the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement.
SERVICING ALLOCATION
N/A
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Development charges and other associated development fees will be generated as a
result of the subject development proposal.
LINK TO STRATEGIC PLAN
The Strategic Plan contains objectives to ensure high quality comprehensive community
planning to protect the overall investment of citizens in the community. The processing
of the proposed development through the official plan amendment, rezoning, and site
plan process, will facilitate this objective.
OPTIONS
At the Public Planning Meeting, taking into consideration comments from staff and U
PLANNING — SEPTEMBER 27, 2006
September 27,.2006 - 7 - Report No. PL06-0116
residents, Council has the option of approving the applications in principle, subject to
the resolution of outstanding issues. They also have the option of resolving that the
application is brought back to Council, or a further public meeting, upon resolution of the
major outstanding issues, or they have the option of denying the applications outright.
CONCLUSIONS
Applications have been submitted to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law
pertaining to the subject lands. Although the applications are supported in terms of
market growth, Staff have concerns as to the adequacy of on -site parking supply,
particularly when considering the construction of the seasonal garden centre. As such,
it is recommended that Council direct staff to report back to Council with a
recommendation for the subject applications, taking into account public comments
received, and after a peer review of the parking demand study has been completed.
ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1 — Location Plan
Figure 2 — Conceptual Site Plan
Figure 3 — Trade Area
Figure 4 — Conceptual Elevations
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 — Draft OPA
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Management Team Meeting — September 20, 2006
Prepared by: Andrew Harper, B.E.S., Planner
Extension 4349
Seibert, M.CJ.P., R.P.P.
;tor of Planning and Development Services
John S. Rogers
C.A.O
—7—
Isaacson C
Dr
LOCATION PLAN
OWNER: LOBLAW PROPERTIES LTD.
FILES: D09-04-06 & D14-12-06
AURORA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DATE: SEPTEMBER 27TH, 2006
z
ST. JOHN'S SIDEROAD
Hartwell Way
o
0 50 100 AuRopA.
Ygahs u,. good, cruyzvy
Metres FIGURE 1
Location Plan Map created by the Town of Aurora-Pg"ing Department, August 2nd, 2006. Base data provided by York
PLANNING -_ SEPT_EMBER 27, 2006
LU
IYCI SSNI Y
\/�� Iltl All
`,`----- - -- ---------------- ---- _
Zz
0
OF
�� x
1
W .�
H411
Z c �
� I
I
� I 1
I
I
II
II
• ♦ � i s
I a
r I
1
I
�\1
sel wau _
e
,
3AIN4 1dVM31S -lUV3
-9-
.� ,0
PLANNING - SEPTEMBER 27, 2006
II I P
{ ,I
I
/m_�
_tf ILA.." I.i ( f N�pd:�. SAr
���f I'y
V IN(s',
j i�®r c'�r# .n1i1Sa f=Y"f-I In�6.3n1.1
-�I Seconda Zone V
�r1, ry l� Nab I,I,
* 'r Newmarket
_4
y
IR- 'I'T- FF�'�- �5 4 4i 7S^cY I i+�` 4 41 f _ h�/• •ail
a t I' L� f �e ,
�
RE
r �APILVI
• 'i - ;,. �t�'-,1r.`-'vY°�.''"TE6W`6�3:i3�d.' t 1� ems. .,.:?;^I�
-
"r
i d � v:l
�,ia�ui►= e _
Primary Zone
To
f r, j
Al
LL•a. Tj S z x�l � t, 6--�_C°tsl "� ... � e � f ; Secondary Zone
_r.
i�' i� W ' NIJ Whitchurch-
+-Iinr� Lax' ell (.c
j £r E'er �# r d StouFFville
8.
pil
a.e,� '•�� Iq a✓� Iry � , � �'5'� � >• � �� +' `e. r _ II . I �. "... Srb
,,.,
�IIcF�i��5�,�9 �1.; a,L���
a" Secondary Zone v Qb
a E¢ Aurora , �, "P`A+
7
�
REAL CANADIAN SUPERSTORE AURORA f- '
p
TRADE AREA
f
Site
Primary Zone Boundary
-- - - - Trade Area Boundary
-10-