Title
DEPUTATIONS REGARDING MOTION 17-G-253 CONCERNING AN APPLICATION FOR OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT - GROVE STREET DEVELOPMENTS IN. C/O GROVE STREET DEVELOPMENTS INC., YMCA LANDS 10-24 GROVE STREET WEST (WARD 2)
Pursuant to Section 4.16 of Procedural By-law 2013-072 as amended, City Council considered a request by Julia Montgomery and Dave Aspden to provide emergency deputations in opposition to motion 17-G-253 regarding an Application for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment - Grove Street Developments Inc. c/o Grove Street Developments Inc., YMCA Lands 10-24 Grove Street West. Upon a vote of City Council being taken, Julia Montgomery and Dave Aspden were permitted to address City Council
1. Julia Montgomery provided a deputation in opposition to motion 17-G-253 concerning an Application for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment - Grove Street Developments Inc. c/o Grove Street Developments Inc., YMCA Lands 10-24 Grove Street West (Ward 2). Ms. Montgomery advised that she was an area resident and she thanked members of Council for the opportunity to speak in person regarding her own and her neighbours concerns associated with the proposed development. She commented that she loved the charm and the older residential feel of the area, including her beautiful back yard. Ms. Montgomery discussed her concerns associated with density of the proposed development, potential traffic congestion that she felt would result from the number of units and people who will potentially reside in the area. She noted her concerns related Grove Street being tiny and the potential overflow of parking from the development onto other streets. Ms. Montgomery indicated that she felt that the intersection of Grove Street and Bayfield Street is narrow and she provided details related to traffic and pedestrian safety issues in this area. Ms. Montgomery discussed that traffic congestion is problematic in vicinity of Hillstreet Public School, especially during rush hour when children are dropped off and picked up from school.
Ms. Montgomery discussed her concerns related to traffic congestion along the route that she drives to work and reiterated her concerns associated with the added traffic congestion, number of residents, overflow parking impacts, and potential for public safety issues. She questioned whether there would be adequate infrastructure in place for children to attend school in the area and commented that bussing children could be problematic. Ms. Montgomery advised that she agreed with more rental units, but noted she felt that the project was too large in scale to be located in such a unique area. She noted that the area is comprised of mostly residential homes and that the height of the complex could be an eye sore. In closing, she expressed her concerns associated with the proposed 10 year construction plan, commented that she moved to this area due to the aesthetics and that she was concerned about the potential construction noise and traffic in the area.
2. Mr. Dave Aspden provided a deputation in opposition to motion 17-G-253 concerning an Application for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment - Grove Street Developments Inc. c/o Grove Street Developments Inc., YMCA Lands 10-24 Grove Street West (Ward 2). Mr. Aspden commented that many citizens did not attend the meeting as they felt it was a waste of time due to the lack of support and the deal already underway for Red Storey Park, all for profit from land sales and development. He discussed his concerns associated with the Staff Report and how he felt some issues were left out or an oversight by City staff. He noted that he felt that the residents have been misled by an Information Session that was held at the YMCA on May 3, 2017 the YMCA presentation was made in the context of the need for affordable housing, noting that 10% of the development would be affordable housing if grants were available. Mr. Aspden questioned what would happen if the grants were not available and why additional affordable housing is not recommended for the proposed development, or if the intent was to reap a large financial return. He questioned whether the Developer intended to change the development to condominiums instead of apartments. Mr. Aspden recalled comments that he made at the June 12, 2017 Public Meeting concerning the reduction in parking and noted that the Applicant’s representative replied that parking was for the units that are to be owned and he noted that apartments are not bought. He discussed his concerns related to the traffic study completed in the area and he noted that he thought 48 hours was not an adequate amount of time to conduct a traffic study. He indicated that he tried to find out information related to the accidents statistics at the intersection of Grove Street and Bayfield Streets in comparison to other intersections within the City. He discussed his observations of traffic incidents in the area. Mr. Aspden advised that he felt that the concessions being provided will only benefit the YMCA and the Developer and not the neighbourhood. He indicated that the YMCA requires funding to relocate and that the Developer is seeking financial benefit from the development. He reviewed comments he provided at the Public Meeting held on June 12, 2017 concerning who would be responsible for the costs associated with an appeal of this application. In closing, Mr. Aspden commented that it is not easy to sit as a member of Council and noted that Council needs to show leadership when considering development applications.