Title
APPLICATION FOR AN OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT AND DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION SUBMITTED BY MACNAUGHTON HERMSEN BRITTON CLARKSON PLANNING LIMITED (MHBC) ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER 3251586 CANADA INC. (BARRIE HERITAGE PHASE IV) - YONGE STREET AND POPLAR DRIVE (WARDS 9 AND 10) (FILES: D12-394/D14-1495/D09-127)
Ms. Kris Menzies of MacNaughton Hersen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited (MHBC) advised that the purpose of Public Meeting was to discuss three planning applications submitted by Barrie Heritage Phase IV for a development on Yonge Street near the GO Station.
Ms. Menzies discussed slides concerning the following topics:
• The developer’s involvement in building communities in Barrie over last 30 years;
• The uniqueness of the Yonge GO Village, site and proposal;
• A concept plan illustrating the proposed attributes and amenities associated with the development including the location of roads, types of units, number of units and parkland;
• Images of the built form;
• Neighbourhood park and trail system;
• A cross section of the proposed back to back stacked townhomes;
• A summary of the three planning applications;
• The studies completed in support of the application;
• An aerial image illustrating the site and surrounding uses;
• Maps detailing the existing Official Plan designation and proposed Official Plan designation;
• An aerial image identifying the major transit node and corridor intensification area;
• Maps illustrating the existing zoning and proposed zoning for the lands;
• The requested changes to the Zoning By-law uses, standards, general provisions and definitions; and
• An illustration of the Draft Plan of Subdivision.
Merwan Kalyaniwalla, Manager of Sustainable Development for the City of Barrie provided details related to the application, the comments received from the public who attended the neighbourhood meeting on September 27, 2016 and the primary planning and land use items being considered by City staff.
VERBAL COMMENTS
1. Mr. Andrew Strauss, 211 Walnut Crescent asked questions of concerning the request to allow for 10-storey buildings, when the developer’s representation indicated the developer is only proposing to construct 6-storey buildings. He asked who was responsible for promoting the higher development. Mr. Strauss also requested that Council or the developer provide a commitment that Poplar Drive would not be used for construction access for the stormwater management pond.
Mayor Lehman raised a question related to the comments.
Ms. Menzies provided a response to the questions raised.
2. Mr. Richard Amos, 212 Walnut Crescent thanked the developer as he felt that their representatives had listened to some of the concerns related to building height and density. He noted that he was still concerned about the number of units and noted that it would be located next to the proposed Baywood Development. He commented that a lot of people would be located in a small area. Mr. Amos reiterated his concerns associated with the density and building height and also noted concerns associated with area services. Mr. Amos commented that the roadworks on Pine Drive have just been completed and the residents would be disappointed if the road required rebuilding after just being repaired.
Mayor Lehman raised a question related to the comments provided. Staff provided a response to the question raised.
3. Mario Titus, 2 Toronto Street questioned if this matter would be coming back at another meeting with more details.
Mayor Lehman explained the Planning Act process.
4. Mr. Bob Lowery, 7 Ester Drive commented on his concerns related to the building height and noted that he was pleased to see the reduction to the 6-storeys which is the maximum he felt was appropriate. He stated that he would not want to see 10-storeys.
5. Ms. Pam McWhirter, 257 Pine Drive commented that her main concern was associated with the proposed density of the property and noted that the amount of buildings being proposed are far too many for such a small parcels of land. She discussed that she felt that schools and recreation centres in the area over capacity and would not be able to accommodate the families that may move into the subdivision. Ms. McWhirter asked Council members to keep the long term residents in mind when making planning decisions.
6. Mr. Bryan Doucette, 259 Pine Drive questioned why the proposed location for the stormwater pond was identified close to houses on Pine Drive when there is a large amount of green space available. He requested that consideration be given to moving the stormwater pond further away from Pine Drive.
Ms. Menzies provided a response to the question raised.
7. Ms Mindy Amos, 212 Walnut Crescent discussed the September Neighbourhood Meeting and noted that a number of residents were not able to attend this meeting. She commented regarding the amount of calls and emails that were submitted regarding the application and the high level of attendance at meeting held at St. Peter’s Catholic School where the developer indicated that they would lower the building heights to 6-storeys. She commented on her concerns associated with the safety in the area, the building height and residents being crammed on the property. She noted that she has lived in the neighborhood for 17 years and did not move to the area to stare at apartment buildings. Ms. Amos reiterated that her primary concerns associated with the proposed development were height and density. She discussed that not a lot of people had spoken, but there have been a number of residents who have called and emailed to complain and noted that not all received notices of the Public Meeting. In closing, Ms. Amos indicated that she loves the area, and it was a good place to raise family. She requested that the developer not be permitted to build higher than the 6-storeys proposed.
8. Mr. Andrew Strauss, 211 Walnut Crescent commented that there was vacant land off of Mapleview Drive and suggested consideration be given to use these lands for construction access to the stormwater management pond.
9. Mr. Bryan Doucette, 259 Pine Drive asked questions concerning the permitted uses associated with a parcel of land zoned as open space with a site specific provision that was included in the development plan.
Staff provided a response to the question raised.
Members of General Committee asked a number of questions and received responses from the presenter and City staff.
WRITTEN COMMENTS
1. Correspondence received from Ms. Jen Slykhuis, dated December 2, 2016.
2. Correspondence received from PowerStream, undated.
3. Correspondence from the Ministry of Transportation dated November 23, 2016.
4. Correspondence from Enbridge, dated November 28, 2016.
5. Correspondence from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, dated September 29, 2016.
6. Correspondence from Phil Smith, received September 29, 2016.
7. Correspondence from the Simcoe County District School Board, dated September 28, 2016.
8. Correspondence from Claudia Eselt, dated September 27, 2016.
9. Correspondence from Metrolinx dated November 16, 2016.
10. Correspondence from Genevra Wilcox, dated September 28, 2016.
11. Correspondence from Michael Slinger dated September 28, 2016 to November 12, 2016.
12. Correspondence from Jen Slykhuis, dated September 29, 2016.
13. Correspondence from Mary Lou Staples, dated September 24, 2016.
14. Correspondence from Fran Burton, Paul and Bodil Neilson, dated September 29, 2016.
15. Correspondence from Sandy Ross, dated September 30, 2016.
16. Correspondence from the Simcoe County District School Board, dated December 12, 2016.