Transcript - Developments Deferred Over Concerns - Planning and Development Committee

Developments Deferred Over Concerns - Planning and Development Committee - March 23, 2026

Another live stream audio check one two. A live stream audio check one Hi, Councelor Forini. Can we test your mic? Yes. Good evening. Thank you. Hi, councelor Tur. Can we check your mic? Hi, good evening. Thank you. Good afternoon everybody and welcome to the planning development committee meeting Monday March 23rd. I'll do a roll call. Deputy mayor Singh councelor Santos councelor Vincente councelor Burr councelor Keenan. So I think councelor Santos and councelor Keenan are going to come in after. Councelor Keenan is trying to get on line. Council Maduros. Oh, we hear we heard you. Council for Thank you. C. Council Forini present. Councelor Tour present. Councelor Power. And if Mayor Brown is not uh it's called order. We have approval of the agenda. I'm going to add a discussion item uh that relates to the housing um the uh wastewater management the water uh report from the region appeal. Um I think we should have a discussion about that report. There's some inaccuracies as far as uh from what I can see. So, and then I have a motion, but I'd like to add that and be a 10.1. Perfect. Thank you, clerk. 10.1 um declarations conflict of interest. Any member like to declare any conflicts of Defer. Which two items are they? Sorry. 7.5 7.6 um are being deferred at the request of the applicant. Correct. Yes. Um all in favor. That's moved by Deputy Mayor Singh. That carries. Declarations of uh interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. Any members like to declare if they have a conflict that anything on the agenda here today? See none. Seeing none online. Our consent agenda. I don't think there was anything that was really What's 75 right 9.1 minutes active transportation advisory committee consent 9.2 2 BMPon Heritage Board consent. There's really nothing else other than that. Been moved by councelor Ber. All in favor? That carries. We have no general delegations. Our next item is the statutory public meeting. So we have a number of items that are part of the statutory public meetings. And what does that mean? It means that um somebody is bringing forward even the city has initiated public meetings as well. So the city and um applicants are bringing something forward for the public, for the public only, not for members of council to talk about, not for us to discuss, not for us to debate or um provide any or ask any questions or anything like that. If a member of council wants to speak, they can uh go to the washroom and speak to the mayor as far as I'm concerned because these items are only here for the public. They're only here for you, for you to listen and for us to hear what you have to say about those items. Then those items will go to staff. Staff will write a report. It'll come back to planning for when that when is when planning committee will debate and discuss and approve those items to be put toward to council and then council will then ultimately ratify them. So I want to go through them. If there isn't if there's some statutory public meetings on the agenda here tonight that you're not here for then we're going to get those out of the way um just by adjourning them and by a show of hands when I call out the item that you are here for. If you can just put your hand up and then I'll just hold that and then we'll come back to it. Okay. The first one is a city initiated public meeting. It's an application to amend the official plan for minor clerical corrections city initiated to propose an amending bylaw to correct clerical errors to the numbering of eight previously adopted official plan amendments. The proposed changes are administrative in nature and do not alter the intent, scope or implementation of the original official plan amendments enacted under the respective bylaws. So that's item 6.1. Is anybody here to to hear a staff presentation on that item? Seeing yes, you're here to No, you're staff you can. Um, that item is adjourned. Thank you very much. The next item is 6.2, another city initiated. Uh, it's an application to amend the community improvement plan CIP for office employment. The purpose to propose amendments to the community improvement plan CIP for the office employment bylaw 197-2024 to extend bylaw 197-2024 to November 2027. Reduce the minimum square footage requirement and remove references to the region appeal major office incentive program. There are no delegations. Is there anybody here that would like to hear a presentation on that item? Seeing none, that item is adjourned. The next one is also a city initiated public meeting. It is the application to amend the zoning bylaw to add a prohibition stating that window wells shall not encroach into the minimum obstructed path of travel to a principal entrance. The review will also include consideration of the provisions related to the encroachments in general into required yards and the path of travel around dwelling units. Anybody here tonight that would like to hear a presentation on that item? Yes. Thank you. Item 6.4 is a public meeting. It's an application to amend the official plan and zoning bylaw Glenn Schnar and Associates uh Dulko Construction Inc. to prevent the development of a commercial plaza consisting of one singlestory commercial building and twostory mixeduse commercial buildings with a commercial uses at grade and office uses on the second floor with atgrade and below grade parking at 8680 Chinkusi Road southwest corner of Chinuzi Road and Bonnie Braid Drive ward 4. Anybody here? Thank you. The next item has a delegation. Uh 6.6 has delegations. 6.7 has a delegation. 6.8 has a delegation on behalf of the applicant. So I'm going to read it out. 6.8 8 application amendment zoning bylaw 8550 Goreway Portfolio Inc. and Canadian Tire Corporation Carav Zelena Priamo Limited to uh purpose to permit outdoor storage consisting of shipping containers, oversized motor vehicles, transportation trailers in conjunction with the existing in industrial use. Location is 8550 Goreway Drive. Are there any residents that would like to hear a staff presentation on that item? That item is adjourned. Our next item is 6.9. 6.9 is an application to amend the official plan zoning bylaw GeForce Urban Planners and Consultants Sukinder S. Sena to permit the development of a commercial plaza that will consist of two story buildings featuring 14 retail units on the first floor and four office units on the second floor. The project site encompasses 7,47.34 square meters with a g total gross floor area GFA of 23968 meters. It is located at 3288 Countryside Drive, Ward 10. Anybody in attendance that would like to hear a staff presentation on that item? Yes. 610 has no delegations. That is an application public meeting application to amend the official plan zoning bylaw and for draft plan of subdivision to permit the development of a mixeduse community comprised of 13 residential towers ranging from the height ranging in height from 8 to 44 stories at a number of square footage. 897 square meters of institutional space. privately owned public space and a natural heritage system feature an associated buffer is also proposed. That is zero heritage road six. Anybody here in attendance that would like to hear a staff presentation on that item? Anybody in attendance? That item is adjourned and the rest are planning applications. Okay. So, now we'll go back to item 6.3. Correct, Madame Clerk? Item 6.3 and we'll bring up uh David. David's going to come up for the uh city initiated report public meeting to add a provision stating the window wells shall not encroach, which is city initiated. David, take it away. My name is David Vanderberg and I'm a manager in the development services section. I will be presenting on a proposed city initiated zoning bylaw amendment related to encroachments into the path of travel to entrances for additional residential units. Next slide please. As background to this amendment, the zoning bylaw allows additional residential units. And just a note, I'll be abbreviating abbreviating them as ARUS in the rest of my presentation. In single detached, semi- detached, and townhouse dwellings, a basement apartment would be one example of a type of ARU, but they are only allowed a certain criteria are met. Uh, one of the required criteria is that a 1.2 meter wide, approximately 4 foot unobstructed pedestrian path of travel be provided to the principal entrance of the ARU. The zoning interpretation had previously been that a window well can encroach into this required path of travel but only up to a maximum of 0.55 meters which is just under two feet. Next slide please. As some may be aware, council approved a new comprehensive zoning bylaw on February 4th of this year. And the work for the new zoning bylaw included a review of this issue and whether window wells should be allowed to continue to encroach into the path to travel to an ARU entrance. And to maximize public safety and access, the outcome of that review was that they should no longer be permitted to encroach. So the new zoning bylaw as a provision clearly stating that a window well may not encroach into the minimum obstructed path unobstructed path of travel to the principal at entrance of an ARU. Next slide please. When council adopted the new comprehensive zoning bylaw. There was also direction provided to hold a public meeting on adding the same provision for window wells to the existing zoning bylaw. And for reference, the full text of the pro section there is on the screen with the addition highlighted at the end stating that the a window well shall not encroach into the minimum obstructed unobstructed path of travel. The primary reason for making the change to the existing zoning bylaw is to ensure that the new rules for encroachments come into effect as soon as possible. A new zoning bylaw can be appealed to Ontario land tribunal. It is normal that when cities are doing that for the whole city that it does happen and that is has in fact happened to ours. So making the change to the existing zoning bylaw ensures that are ensures the new rules are not delayed while the new zoning bylaw is at the Ontario land tribunal. The change also ensures that the new rules apply to the parts of the city not currently included in the zoning bylaw because work was still needed to advance the policy for several of them. There are several and parts full or parts of major transit station areas not included in the new comprehensive bylaw. This change ensures that the new rules for encroachment also applies in these geographic areas. And this applies this primarily affects a few neighborhoods in the downtown. Next slide, please. In addition to the specific change described previously, the city is also seeking input on the tonight on the following related matters to inform potential additional changes to the bylaw. One is the first two are related to encroachments into required yards. And one is should the restrictions for window well encroachments be expanded beyond restricting them in required paths of travel to ARU entrances to also include restrictions in other yards? And if so, should there be also be new restrictions for encroachments for other types of structures? And the second is for paths related to paths of travel around a dwelling unit and should the zoning provisions related to paths of travel to the principal entrance of an aru be brought in to improve access to arus and generally around dwellings. So we'll also be looking at this these questions as part of a review and taking any input on these questions as part of tonight's meeting. Um and then the discussion and recommendations on those will be included in the re recommendation report to be forward to planning committee in the future. Next slide please. This slides identifies some of the key issues that will be considered as staff continues the work. First is public safety and the impact of any zoning changes on safety for residents. The second is the usability of homes and the impact of any new provisions uh or on encroachments um on the ability of residents to use and improve their homes. And third is the increase or the effect on of the new rules on the of on housing supply and how they affect housing supply including provisions of arus. Next slide please. This slide shows where we are in the process and identifies the next steps. So, we are currently at the public meeting stage. We're collecting input from the community on the proposed changes. The next step will be for staff to prepare a report to planning and development committee with a recommendation and final language for the changes to the zoning bylaw and the input received tonight will be an important factor as we prepare that report. I would note that we will follow up with everyone who has provided comments or expressed interest in this matter. about on the timing of the recommendation report before it is brought forward so they know when it is coming. Next slide please. As a final note, this presentation and report are available online and the recommendation report related to the enactment will be posted on the city's planning and development committee meeting agenda in advance of the future meeting. For any questions or comments, you can contact me at David Vanderberg at the contact information shown on the screen. and thank you and have a good evening. Thanks, D. Um, is there anybody that would like to come down and ask any questions about the item? Anybody else like to come down? Uh, please state your name for the record. McDermott, um, Ward three, uh, resident. Um just with regards to the um uh 1.2 meter setback um according to the Ontario land or sorry landlord tenency act um snow and ice is also considered an obstruction. So is there a way to ensure that that also because typically what we're talking about here are arus because it's been noted. So if it's meaning to be an ARU, we want to ensure that that path of travel is kept clean and we've just gone through a winter and we've seen how that hasn't occurred. So if it's actually spelt out in the bylaws, then it it provides some teeth to actually provide enforcement, please. Okay, great question. We'll take it back. Does it right now speak to it? Okay, so we'll take that back and consider. Okay. And can I get follow up on that, please? 100%. Thank you. Thanks. Um, you need to Sorry, Catherine, you need to go and sign your name in the book. Come on up. Please state your name for the record. Uh, my name is Tan Ry. Uh the biggest point I know is if there won't be any window wells and the encroachment into the path of travel, will they accept any kind of grading on top of the window well so they can walk on top of that window? Walk on top of the well. Yeah. So that's pretty common in Toronto. If there is a window well, they'll have some kind of grading on top. So at least you can walk. That will not obstruct the path of travel. We can still have the windows but at least that will pass because if that loss comes into effect most of the houses or semi detach in Bmpton they are all out of that range. Most of the new detached houses they are all out of the range because the new designs the way city has approved them they're with 4T setback on one side and 2 ft set on the other side. That disqualifies all of them and on one side city is working to legalize all the basement and on on the other side they're closing that channel. So you're kind of putting everybody in the middle like nobody would want to come to Red Channel anymore. I don't think so that's the right way to go. Again, this is just my opinion. But if the grading comes in, at least you get away with the path of travel unobstructed that works out and you can still work with the the zoning bylaw as well as the building code to meet the requirements of a street dwelling unit at the basement. Okay, we'll take it back. Okay. And just behind you if you can write your information there. Anybody else like to come down and ask a question? Come on down. And if there's anybody else, come on down. This is a big agenda, so we're going to move things along. You're allowed. You're a allotted time to speak, but I just want to move things. So, my name is Armen Bar. I'm a resident. Um, and I'm actually building an ARU. I'm the one I'm the one who actually did I did my own permit. I did my own permit drawings. Um, I also did the I made sure everything was per OBC and I did all the drawings. And one of the questions there was that the egress window should not be in the path of travel. And I made sure the egress window was not in the path of travel. Unfortunately, the new houses that are being built uh they barely give you 4 feet four and a four and a quarter inch uh four and I know 4 and 1/2 ft of space. So what I did was I actually built a retaining wall around my windows. And one of the points that this gentleman mentioned was around looking into access towards your backyard as well. I believe that was one of the points. So what I did was I built a retaining wall of stones and basically my intention was to then cover that window out so that people can actually walk over it. So if the city comes with a new bylaw tomorrow, I'm able to kind of accommodate it. So my request to the city is look at options. Do not just give us problems. Look at options to solve those problems. That's thanks a lot. Anybody else? Seeing none, uh, councelor Power will move receipt of the item 6.3. All in favor along with the added delegations. Next is item 6.4, correct? Or was that adjourned? Is held. Okay. And who do we have? Andrea Andrea and it's uh the 8680 Chinuzi Road, southwest corner of Jinuzi Road and Bonnie Bray. Welcome. How are you? Good. Good. Take it away. Good evening, chair and vice chair, members of committee, members of the public and city staff. My name is Andrea Zan and I am the plleer assigned to process and review the subject application. The purpose of this public meeting is to provide information to the public and seek feedback on the application filed by GSAI on behalf of DO Construction Inc. Next slide, please. The subject property is located in W 4 at 8680 Chinkuzi Road in the southwest part of Bmpton. The nearest major intersection is Chinkuzi Road and Bony Bridge Road. Next slide, please. The slide shows an overview of the site. Surrounding land uses include to the north is Bonib Bris Drive beyond which is lowrise residential dwellings and park to the south is lowrise residential dwellings. To the east is chinkusi road beyond which are institutional use which is Burton manor and lowrise residential dwellings. To the west is Elmrest Drive beyond which is low-rise residential and a flat plan containing natural heritage features. Next slide please. The slide shows a further overview of the subject site and the surrounding uses and developments. Next slide, please. A site visit was conducted on February 6, 2026. Photos from the visit are shown on screen. Next slide, please. The subject site is originally zoned as institutional one special section 21105 and institutional one special section 2326 zone through city file oz-2021-000044 a bylaw was passed on August 10th 2022 to reszone the site to residential apartment A1- section 3646 to permit uses including stacked town houses, backto-back town houses, backtoback stacked town houses, and accessory uses. Next slide, please. The development application is proposing to facilitate the development of a a commercial plaza consisting of one single sttory commercial building, one twostory mixuse building, including commercial at grade and office on the second floor and at grade and one level of underground parking. Further details include net site area of 0.74 hectares gross floor areas of 3500 9.71 square meters including office area around 1245 square meters approximately and retail commercial of 2264 square meters approximately with a lot coverage of 33.44% 44% and building height of 80 uh 8.2 meters landscape area of 18% 75% um total parking provided of 144 spaces. Next slide please. Prior to finalizing recommendations to council, this application will be further evaluated against the documents shown on the slide. Next slide please. The subject line is designated residential in the city of Bmpton official plan 2000 2006. The residential designation permits a predominantly residential land uses. Complimentary uses in the commercial and institutional land uses are also permitted to facilitate this development and requested uses. An amendment to the official plan is required. Next slide please. In the new Bmpton plan 20 2023, the subject site is designated community areas on schedule 1A and the neighborhoods on schedule two. Next slide, please. The subject lines are located within the credit valley secondary plan area 45. They are designated as medium high density residential which permits a range of townhouse housing forms including stacked town houses and backto-back town houses. Amendment to the secondary plan is required to permit permit the requested uses. Next slide please. The proposed official plan amendment will redesate the subject site in credit valley secondary plan from medium high density residential to special policy area mixed use commercial. Next slide please. The subject lands are zon residential apartment 1A- section 3646. Permitted uses in the R4A-3646 zone include bar but are not limited to stack town houses, backto back town houses, backtoback stack town houses and the purposes accessory to the other permitted uses. A zoning bylaw amendment is required to permit the uses. Next slide, please. As such, the application is proposing to amend the zoning bylaw by reszoning the subject site from the current residential apartment 1A- section 3646 zone to residential apartment 1A zone with a new special section. The newly created zone will permit the uses in the commercial one zone in addition to the existing permitted townhouse and residential uses. The zoning allows for a maximum gross floor area of 3600 square meters and a maximum building height of 15 meters. The minimum parking requirements are 144 parking spaces and a minimum of 40% of the site is required to be maintained as landscaped open space. The minimum setback to the lot line abing Elm Crest Drive is 3.5 meters and the minimum setback to the lot line abing proud court is 2.4 meters. Next slide please. At this time, key issues and consideration that will need to be addressed include ensuring traffic impacts on Elmrest Drive, which is the local residential street are mitigated, ensuring compatibility with the surrounding low density residential neighborhood. Ensuring adequacy of buffering and belt form transition, ensuring privacy considerations related to parking and building messing. Ensure noise and lighting impacts on adjacent residential properties are considered and mitigated. Ensuring sufficient parking supply and avoiding potential neighborhood spill over. Next slide, please. staff is hosting a statutory public meeting this evening to share information of the proposed official plan and zoning bylaw amendment on the subject site and provide an opportunity for members of the public to express their opinions. The following steps will include reviewing the application and bring a final recommendation report for council decision in the future. issues risk will be addressed in the recommendation report. Staff will follow up with members of the public and other stakeholders who have spoken, written in or advised of an interest in monitoring this proposal. Next slide, please. For more information on the development proposal, the apply consummission materials, they are all publicly accessible through the city's brand plan online portal. through brand plan online. Members of the public can click the search for an application link, then type for the file number of the application in the required field, which in this case is Oz-2025-000051. This brings up the file page. While clicking the file info tab will allow all drawings and documents associated with development application to be viewed. Next slide, please. This public meeting presentation will be available online as part of the planning and development committee meeting minutes. The final recommendation report will be posted on the city's PDC meeting agenda in advance of the future meeting. Once again, my name is Andrea Zen and my contact information is posted on the screen along with the contact information of the applicant Patrick Pearson from GSAI who is representing the land owner. For any questions or comments about this development application, please feel free to contact myself, my manager or the applicant. This concludes my presentation. Thank you, Conley, and have a great evening. Thank you, Andrea. And we'll go to our first delegation, which is uh Charvin Bear. Uh Charvin, welcome. Good evening. My name is Shraan. I live on Bonnie Brace. I want to begin thanking city staff and the council for their dedication to long-term planning and community livability. We truly appreciate the chance to share our perspective. First of all, we want to formally u you know oppose the planned uh development uh amendment here. The proposed development is not compatible with the low density residential character of our neighborhood. The commercial use brings noise, bright lighting, delivery activity and loss of privacy. Parking overflow is also a serious concern with the risk of blocked driveways and crowded residential streets. There are fairly lot of accidents that are happening within the Elm Street as well as the Bonnie brace. It's a very common thing in a on a morning. These changes would negatively impact property values as well and overall the quality of life as it is. So, we respectfully ask the city to preserve residential compatible land use and reconsider the zoning amendment. We also have a couple of community neighborhood friends who have joined me here and they will raise their own concerns as we move. Thank you so much for the opportunity. Thank you very much for your Anybody else like to come down and say a few words and if there's anybody else they can come down. Please go ahead. Just please state your name for the record. Yeah, my name is DH Udeal and I live on Bonny Bridge Drive. First, I would like to thank you city staff and council for the time and effort you put into reviewing community input and managing growth responsibility. We appreciate the opportunity to speak and to be heard. Our primary concern is traffic and road safety on Bonnie Pace Drive already experiencing congestion and near miss incidents on a daily basis especially during peak hours. The proposed commercial development would significantly increase vehicle traffic delivery trucks and short-term stopping. This raises real safety concern for families, children, seniors, and residents exiting their driveways. The road infrastructure was designed for residential use, not commercial activity. We respect respectfully ask the city to reconsider this proposal or require a comprehensive traffic and safety study before moving forward. Now I welcome my colleague Rajir. Thank you very much. And just go to the back and and sign in. If there's anybody else who'd like to come down, um please do so. Please state your name for the record. Good evening everybody. My name is Rajri Kjal and I live in 170 Bony Bre. Thank you administration and council for your continued engagement with our neighborhood and for maintaining open public dialogue. We value the city commitment to balanced and safe development. Our concern relate to the public safety and security. A commercial paza introduced continuous uncontrolled foot traffic into a quite residential area. This increased the risk of littering and pandalism and after hours activities. Residents are also concerned about enforcement challenges and unauthorized business operation. These risks directly affect our sense of safety and well-being in our homes. We respectfully request the council prioritize residential safety and reconsider land uses that better align with the character of our community. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you very much for your delegation. Nobody else. Okay. Thank you. Uh the report and delegations will be received by uh I think Keenan's on. All in favor? That carries. Next item. 6.5. Is that correct, Madam Clerk? Yes. Uh 6.5. We have presentation by Raj. I didn't uh remind everybody, but can I remind everybody? Uh just to have your cell phones on uh inaudible. Just make sure that they're they're silent. A lot of people are coming up and speaking for the first time. We want as minimum distractions as possible. Please rush. Thanks. Uh good evening Mr. Chair, Mr. Vice Chair, members of the committee, members of the public and city staff. My name is Raj Lamishani and I'm the planner assigned to process and review the subject application with the city file number OZ-2025-000052. The purpose of this presentation is to provide information to the public and seek feedback on the application filed by CANF group to permit a diverse mix of employment users on the subject lands. Next slide please. The subject subject lands are located in W 6 and municipally known as 1876 and 1990 Holliststone Road. The site is located to the north and south of Holy Road along east of Misaga Road. Next slide please. Uh this slide shows an overview of the site. The surrounding land uses are described as the following. To the north is obs office and employment development which is currently under construction beyond which is natural system and stills avenue west. To the south is the highway 47 beyond which is the city of missisala. To the east are leak associated natural heritage features single dwellings and mda space. To the west are Churchill business community including Loblaws and Air Canada operations center. Next slide please. This slide uh presents an an oral overview of the subject lines and the surrounding area. The pro the subject property is currently occupied by the streetsville Glen Golf Club. A gas service station is also located at the northeast corner of Missaga Road and Hollist Road. Next slide, please. Planning staff conducted a site visit of the subject lines on February 28th, 2026. The photographs displayed on the screen are views of the subject lines captured during the site visit. Next slide, please. The applicant is seeking to amend the officer plan and zoning bylaw to facilitate a mix of employment related land uses on the subject lines including manufacturing, warehousing, research and development, data storage, self storage, medical laboratory and accessory outside storage. The proposed industrial GFA is approximately 85,000 square meter or roughly 913,000 square ft. 141 vehicular parking spaces and 180 loading spaces are also provided and approximately 14.6 hectares of natural system are protected. Next slide please. Prior to finalizing a recommendation report to council, this application will be further evaluated for compliance with the planning act, consistency with the provincial planning statement 2024 and confirmity to the city of Bmpton offic 2006, Bmpton plan 2023, Bram West secondary plan and principles of Bmpton 24 division. Next slide please. Current planning context. Official plan B plan 2006. The subject lines are designated employment and open space in schedule one and office and open space in schedule A of the BMTON official plan 2006. The permitted uses within the office designated lands include office research and development accessory retail and service commercial uses limited high performance prestige industry uses and other supportive and complimentary employment uses. An amendment to the official plan is not required since the relevant Missaga road corridor special study area of policies in Bmpton plan are in effect. Next slide please. The subject lands are designated employment and naturality system in schedule 2 of Bmpton plan 2023 and are located within the Misaga road corridor Bram West special study area. Office research and development preage industrial uses advanced manufacturing and other supportive and complimentary employment uses are permitted on the subject lands. Whereas warehousing, logistics, heavy manufacturing and outside storage are currently not permitted on the subject lens. As such, an amendment to the Bton plan is required. Next slide, please. The subject lands are located within the Bram West secondary plan area and are designated office center, highway and sub service, commercial and valley lands. The permitted uses on the subject lines include offices, research and development facilities, ancillary light manufacturing uses, hotels, conference, convention center and limited accessory retail and business service business support services. Warehousing and distribution uses are not permitted. As such, an amendment to the secondary plan is required to permit the proposed development. Next slide, please. The applicant is proposing an officer plan and secondary plan amendment with site specific policies that include removal of prohibition to warehousing, logistics, food processing, packaging, heavy manufacturing and outdoor storage uses from the Misaga road corridor special study area policies in Bmpton plan. Red designation of office center and highway service center highway so highway service commercial lines to prestice industrial in the secondary plan and permissions for additional uses such as data storage and medical laboratory facilities. Next slide please. The subject lines are zoned recreation commercial, recreation commercial section 2620, highway commercial 2 section 2831 and floor plane. Permitted uses in recreation commercial zone include golf course, driving range, skating rink, racket or hand court, animal hospital and accessory uses. Permitted uses in highway commercial to zone include a gas per a motor vehicle washing establishment and accessory uses and amendment to the zoning bylaw is required to permit the proposed development. Next slide please. The proposed joining by amendment will reszone the subject lands to industrial one and flood plane zones to facilitate the proposed development with site specific requirements related to lot size, yard, building height and landscaping as shown on the screen. Next slide please. At this time the key issues and considerations related to the development proposal are as follows. confirmity of the proposed employment uses with the with the city's vision for the Mrs. Saga road corridor office center and quantum of resties and complimentary employment uses to secure an appropriate office GFA. Accommodation of appropriate build form, site circulation, building orientation, landscaping and gateway treatment. Protection of natural features and considerations to an appropriate transition and minimizing noise and visual impacts on the adjacent dwellings to the east and establishing a shared access with the joining property to the north to create a fourlegged intersection at Misaga road and wear road. Next slide please. The next steps in this application are this application was deemed complete on January 19, 2026. Staff will continue to review the application including addressing comments from the public and technical staff and will advance a final recommendation report to council for a decision. Issues raised will be addressed in the recommendation report. City staff will also contact and follow up with those residents who have spoken, detained in or advised of an interest in monitoring this application. Next slide, please. This development application can be accessed by the public through the city's brand plan online portal. Through brand online, members of the public can click the search for an application link, then type the file number oz-2052- sorry 2025-000052 in the required field. This brings up the file page where clicking the file info tab will allow all drawings and documents to be viewed. Next slide, please. This public meeting presentation will be available online shortly. For any questions or comments about this application, please contact myself, my manager or the applicant. Once again, my name is Raj Lamishani and my contact information is posted on the screen along with the applicant's contact information. Next slide, please. Thank you very much and have a wonderful evening. Thanks, Raj. Uh, great job. Um, I'd like to add a delegation on this. Sorry, I just moved my We have two delegations, I think. MDA. Um, Mike, Melissa, are you there? Sorry, did you say Melissa? Mike or Melissa? I think I Oh, hi. Welcome. Good evening. Um, my name is Melissa Cass. I'm the senior director of business transformation at MDA Space, and I have a statement that I'd like to read. Thank you very much. Um we do have concerns about the possible reasonzoning changes. Um MDA space is a global space technology company whose headquarters our global headquarters is in this area. Um we are the world leading world leading in commercial satellites in earth observations um and space exploration and infrastructure. Our team spans the globe. We call Bmpton our global home. We are proud to work with commercial and government partners worldwide including the government of Canada, the Canadian Space Agency, NASA, European Space Agency uh to do amazing things like take the the humans to the moon and beyond. Um we're proud that we have called Bmpton our home for 30 years. Our people have grown up here. Our technology has grown up here. Um and we can will continue to do that. For years um we have been looking for the next site of our global headquarters. Um we in talking with Bmpton we uh agreed to land on the Streetsville Glenn neighborhood mostly because of its high prestige corporate R&D uh zoning. Uh we were looking for a place that we could call home um with high-tech prestigious corporate uh like-minded folks. Um and we have found that in this sector this corridor has become the showcase of companies in the forefront of technology, health space, aerospace transformation and other sectors truly world leaders in these areas um like Air Canada, Canon and Loblaws. It's also become a focal point for a lot of high-profile dignitaries and visitors to the area um because they come and visit these worldleading innovators in Bmpton. The collective brand that we have built in this area uh sends a powerful signal to the city, the province and the global market that Bmpton is an optimal destination for high value corporate activity, investment and innovation. When we entered into our lease, the city of Bmpton pledged to protect this zone for prestigious offices, corporate headquarters, and research and development. Um, the most recent reszoning proposal, however, allows for the potential of heavy industrial warehousing that threatens that original uh zoning. So, we have been through this before. We're extra sensitive to this because in our last location in Spar Drive, it was overcome with heavy industrial transportation and distribution. Um, so our move to this area was very strategic because this is our global headquarters for a very fast the world's leading aerospace company right now is fast growing. So we are worried that this change will undermine the global headquartering brand that we've built in that area. um making it making it less attractive for high-profile clients, dignitaries, and government officials to visit the area. The increased truck traffic, congestion, noise, and infrastructure could ne negatively impact our ability to attract highprofile talent um for this very unique technology company that we run as well as the visit the dignitaries that visit us. We propo we believe that proposing the resoning con is a conflict to the longstated strategy of this area to foster innovation growth and attracting premium investments in by mixing the this prestigious b business zone with the logistics areas. So thank you to the to your attention for this critical issue. We we look forward to a collaborative solution that both preserves BMP Bmpton's reputation as a premier destination for worldclass businesses and allows us to continue to showcase Canada on this global scale. Thank you. Thanks Melissa. We're also proud to have you here in Bmpton. Um, and I'm sure that staff will be working uh side by side with you to uh uh to come back with with providing them with all the information and then that'll come back for uh for a planning decision. Thank you, Melissa. Uh, anybody else that like to come and delegate on this item? Yes, please. Good evening everyone. Uh I'm a resident of um this zone where 187 uh 76 and 1990. I live on legendary circle and um while I recognize the need for the growth and housing in the city of Bmpton, I have serious concerns regarding the scale, environmental impact and infrastructure implications of this proposal, compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. We have a school. We have a lot of residences around and the proposed density and built form do not appear to align with the existing character of the surrounding residential community. This raises concerns about appropriate transition overdevelopment and long-term neighborhood stability, traffic and infrastructure capacity. The surrounding road network including Hollstone Road is already experiencing in increased congestion, additional high density development with future strain traffic flow, reduce safety and impact daily commuting of residents specifically because there's also a school there. Increase storm water runoff and flooding risks. Over the past few years, with the additional of new commercial developments in the area, residents have already observed noticeable changes in the neighbor by stormwater pond, including expansion and rising of water levels closer to the residential properties. From a planning and engineering perspective, this is a serious concern. Urban development increases hard surfaces such as road, rooftops and parking lots which significantly reduces natural water absorption and increases increases the storm water runoff. Munible guidance confirms that without ade adequate capacity excess runoff can lead to flooding of streets and homes. Additionally, when storm water systems become overwhelmed during heavy rainfall events, water can accumulate on properties and even lead to blaz basement flooding through surface water intrusions or sewer backup. So, res residents are requesting to kindly reconsider this development and um I thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Um and so, just to let you know, it's not a reconsideration or anything. Anybody is allowed to bring something forward. Um and this is that process and and the public and I know there's a number of people um from the community that is online and here today. Uh again this is anybody's uh provided with an opportunity to come before us to put any application forward. It's just for the public staff are going to ask for a ton of information. They're going to write a report. That report's going to come back to planning where you will be given another opportunity to to see it um to speak to it if if you so wish um and then uh council will or planning will debate that item. So just to let you know that this is this is the ongoing this is the process for that. Is anybody else like to come down and delegate on this item? Now is a perfect opportunity that if you're here for the item, you want to say something, now is the time to come down and say it. If not, uh there's a number of correspondents and you can send uh correspondence to Raj. His information was there. If you don't have it, grab them after. I'll give you his home cell phone if you want it. Call him, talk to him. He's a great guy. Um and if anybody has any other questions, please feel free to the area counselors too. Also fantastic individuals. Councelor Brier, myself. With that, uh nobody else. Um, council Berser is happy to receive the item along with correspondence and delegations. All in favor that cares. Our next item is 6.6. It is the application to amend the zoning bylaw plan of subdivision Blackthornne Development Corp. Amarjit Singh Sa Shahi to permit the creation of one residential block consisting of six semi- detached homes for 12 residential units. One environmental protection block access to provided from Turo Circle through a proposed private lane. We have Marina. Marina is here. Go ahead Marina. Good evening chair, vice chair, members of the committee, members of the public and city staff colleagues. My name is Marina Shaf and I am the planner assigned to this file Ozus-2025-000047. The purpose of this public meeting is to provide information to the public and seek feedback about the application filed by Black Thorn Development Corp. on behalf of Amujet Singh Shahi to amend the zoning bylaw and for a draft plan of subdivision. Next slide, please. The subject lands are located in Bart 6 at 1285 May Road. The subject site is located south of this rope. Next slide please. This slides provides information regarding the surrounding land uses. To the north there is Malala Ysef Zi public school and agricultural lands in the town of Kaledan north of Mayit road. To the south is open space and natural features and exiting low density residential. To the east is existing lowdensity residential. To the west is existing low density residential beyond which are open space and natural features and other existing residential uses. Next slide please. This is an aerial view of the subject property and the surrounding area. Next slide please. This slide displays photos from a site visit conducted towards west and east of the property. Next slide, please. These photos are towards the north and south of the property. Next slide, please. The development application was submitted to propose a zoning bylaw amendment and for a draft plan of subdivision to facilitate the creation of one residential block consisting of six semi- detached homes for 12 residential units and one environmental protection block. Access is proposed to be provided from tour through a proposed private lane. With regards to the buildings, the semi- detached dwellings are three stories. Half of the units are dual frontage and the rest is conventional design. 10 units will have a gross floor area of 210 square meters and two units will be 170 square meters. There is a site work proposed along the private lane. Next slide, please. Prior to finalizing a recommendation to council, the application will be further evaluated against the documents shown on this slide. Next slide, please. The official plan 2006 designates the subject property as residential as per schedule 8 general line use designations. Residential designation permits a full range of dwelling types from single detached houses to high-rise apartments. Therefore, an amendment to the official plan 2006 is not required. Next slide, please. In the BMPON plan 2023, the subject site is designated as community areas within schedule 1A and neighborhoods within schedule two. Both designations permit residential. Therefore, an amendment is not required. Next slide, please. The subject property is designated as long and medium density residential within the Mount Pleasant sec plan area 51. Permitted uses in this designation include single detach and semi- detach detached homes to lane base town houses among other uses. Therefore, an amendment to the secure plan is also not required. Next slide please. The subject site is mainly zone agriculture. Small portions of the lands are zon residential single detach one R1F zone. Permitted uses in agricultural zone generally include agricultural purposes uses a single detached dwelling, an animal hospital and a canel. Permitted use in R1F zone generally includes a single detached dwelling. Therefore, an amendment to zoning bylaw is required. Next slide, please. The applicant plans to amend the zoning bylaw to reszone the subject site from agricultural and residential single detach zone to residential semi- detached 2C zone in block one and open space zone in block two. A bylaw amendment application has been provided for the city's review. A summary of the proposed regulations has been included on this slide. Next slide, please. Planning has noted some considerations and issues in relation to the development application that includes appropriateness of the proposed built form scale massing and architecture design proposed density and housing mix, environmental protection and buffer requirements, servicing and infrastructure capacity, appropriateness of the proposed access strategy, servicing um sorry traffic impacts on circle. Next slide, please. Staff are holding a statutory public meeting to share information regarding this application and giving the public the opportunity to share their opinions. The following steps will include reviewing the files and bringing a recommendation report for the council. Staff will follow up with residents who have spoken and commented as it moves forward. Next slide, please. Development applications can be accessed by members of the public through BL brand plan online. Committee members can click to search for an application and then type in the file number oz-2025-000047. On the file page, please click the file info info tab to gain access to the drawings and studies. The final recommendation report will be posted on the PDC meeting website before the meeting. Next slide, please. The presentation will be made available to you shortly after this meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me, Marina, or the applicant, Maritzio Rugato. Next slide, please. That concludes my presentation. Thank you all and have a good evening. Great job. Thank you, Marina. Uh, we're going to go to our delegations. We have six listed. Our first delegation, Nav Dave or Dave No. Come on down. After that, we have Hardell Brainder Chennai. Then, Harmon Bra Summer Pete Jabra and then Terillo is an audio delegation. Okay. No. Okay. Welcome. You have five minutes, sir. I'm Dave. Um, and I'm uh I live right uh ravine backing home immediately besides the proposed construction. many homes along Turo Circle back onto the ravine and homeowners paid significant uh premiums and thousands of dollars uh for quite um quiet setting, natural views and privacy that's landscape that this landscape provides. My home is right beside the proposed neighborhood. Uh and I paid $80,000 for the peace and quiet of uh of nature. I know my neighbors also paid similar uh amounts. Uh so we're disheartened to think that someone would rip apart our peaceful or peace and sanity for to make profit. Constructing new homes here would undermining those expectations and uh erode the peaceful nature oriented environment that's specifically invested in when purchasing the properties. Further uh development means less green space and nature landscaping. Uh green space plays an essential role in maintaining neighborhood liability and provides environmental benefits such as improved air quality, storm water observ uh uh observation and urban heat reduction. Neighborhoods rely on trees uh vegetation and open space to support healthy and balanced environment for residents. Further reducing available green space in favor of dense construction would de dim diminish the nature character of the area and limit limit the opportunities for us to enjoy nearby greenery and nature. That was point number one and I'll pass it on to my colleagues. Thank you very much. Please come. Uh Hardell Hardell's next. Where'd he go? Just kidding. Is Hard online? Don't see him. Okay. Good evening, council members. My name is You have five minutes. Please begin. No, one minute is okay. Okay. Good evening, council members. My name is Kulandra Singha and today I'm here to speak on behalf of Mount Pleasant neighborhood resident who are concerned about the proposed project in our enclosed family neighborhood. Turo Circle is a small quiet street made for local traffic and families. This proposal for 12 semi detached homes along with possible basement zones would bring too much uh density and does not uh does not fit the character of our neighborhood. It would put pressure on our infrastructure including roads, drainage, schools and parks and increased traffic in an area where children often play. The city of Bmpton official plan says new development should match the neighborhood and be supported by the infrastructure. This proposal does not meet those expectations. Therefore, we strongly urge council to reject this proposal in its current form. Thank you. Thank you very much. Uh Harmon bra and some are preach next. Welcome Har. Good afternoon chair, members of the committee. Uh my name is Harmon. I'm a resident of Truro Circle. Before I start, I actually want to thank Marina. She did a wonderful job with pointing out those five points that I was going to talk about today. Um, I was going to go a little bit more into detail. Uh, my primary point is, uh, my primary concern is the proposed private lane access by Truro Circle. The plan proposes of to funnel traffic from 12 highdensity units onto a quiet residential circle that currently only has two to three available parking spots with no viable visitor visitor or overflow parking in the site plan. This will create immediate gridlock and block fire routes that are already being blocked. I strongly urge the committee to restrict all primary vehicle access to Mayfield Road. Trudo Circle cannot absorb any more traffic and the parking demands of this intensification without creating severe safety hazards for emergency vehicles. My second point is around road width, snow removal and safety. The proposed internal road is far too narrow to support safe two-way traffic, proper winter maintenance. Currently, snow plows only perform a single pass on Trouer Circle, often leaving the street narrow and difficult to navigate. Introducing 12 additional housing units by a common element lane will exaborate this. Private snow will likely be pushed onto the public circle, further obstructing our limited parking and marking the street impossible during peak winter months. If the proposed road cannot accommodate dedicates snow and safe clearance, this density is simply too high for the site. Green space and backyard. That's my next point. The requested floor space index of 0.09 is nearly double the typical density of this neighborhood. This leaves almost no room for permeable soft landscaping or functional backyards. I'm requesting the city require the builder to provide green space and backyard depths that are comparable to the existing detached homes in in our row. We're trading a functional mature canopy for decorative plants that will never re uh reach their full maturity and they will have insufficient soil volume to ever reach that maturity. This is not an equivalent trade and represents a net loss of our environmental targets. Moving on, furthermore, this proposal directly conflicts with ongoing community improvements. uh around five of us have some um some sort of request with city's forestry department to plant additional trees because there's a significant amount of uh city space that does not have a lot of coverage. One of the requests is COPI-3869009. I'm requesting that the environmental services and city forestry be directed to proceed with these plantings in the current open space rather than allowing the developer to break into the circle at this specific location. We should be expanding art canopy on public land and not destroy destroying established healthy trees to make way for an oversized private lane. In closing, the application must be revised to address its technical failures, including the current lack of access any accessible parking spaces. I request a reduction to a maximum FSI of 065 and a height restriction of 9.5 m. Most importantly, please protect the character and safety of our street by moving the access to Mayfield Road and supporting our local reforestation efforts. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much for your delegation. Uh next is Summer. Welcome, sir. You have five minutes. Good evening, chair and members of council. Uh my name is Summer Pabra and I reside in Turo Circle. Uh I would like to read my concerns now. The development proposes access through Trudo Circle, a small residential street that is not designed to accommodate the traffic generated by a tense subdivision. The addition of multiple homes will inevitably increase vehicle traffic, creating congestion and raising sea safety concerns for residents, particularly children and families living in the area. Most residents are young families with small children who regularly play outside and in the quiet corner of Turo Circle. exactly where the increased traffic and new development is proposed. As a parent of two young children, I already take extra precautions to ensure my children's safety. When the when they play outside, I put I put up yellow caution signs to alert drivers and slow down traffic in our neighborhood. Even with the current level of traffic, this is necessary. With a significant increase in vehicles, I am deeply concerned that these measures will no longer be enough and the risk to our children will increase substantially. Construction of the subdivision is also expected to cause prolonged disruption through heavy truck traffic, dust, noise, and road road obstructions negatively affecting the quality of life for nearby residents. Thank you. Thank you very much for your delegation. Uh, next was Terillo who there was an audio recording I believe. Hi, my name is Tara Gil of Bmpton. My objection is in regards to city file oz 20250047. Truro Circle already has too many people parking on both sides of the street. The majority of homes have basement suites that are being rented out to occupants with multiple vehicles. Due to the lack of parking space, people are parking on both sides of the street at all times throughout the day and night. Despite our concerns to the city, parking enforcement does not rectify the issue. This despite multiple complaints to the city. If this zoning is approved, it will amplify the ongoing parking issue as in likelihood the future homeowners will be making basement suites as well. This will heavily increase the ongoing parking issue we are sub being subjected to on a daily basis. My other concern is that the street traffic will significantly increase as drivers neglect to respect the speed limit as it is. For example, a child has already been hit by a vehicle, which should not ever happen in any community. In reality, people drive too fast down the street. And with kids darting out between parked cars, it has already led to too many close calls, which is extremely concerning. In closing, it is a bad idea in having the proposed driveway off Tru Circle. It is appropriate if the existing driveway is off Mayfield Road if the development is approved. Thank you for hearing me out. Okay, thanks for the delegation. Anybody else? Uh, say quick word, ask any questions. Now's the time if you'd like to come down. Seeing none, uh, happy to remove receipt of the application and the delegations and also the correspondence. And again to residents, um, residents that are listed as delegations, you'll automatically get uh, correspondence emails uh letting you know when it'll be coming back. If you have any questions, please submit them to Marina. If you would like any um uh information back also uh do that as well. You also have two really good counselors for your area. So, councelor Bar myself are happy to uh communicate with with uh anything coming forward. Um with that, uh it's been moved. All in favor? Thanks. Um, the kids are going home now or Yes. Okay. There's a few people that are leaving. I'll give a couple minutes to let them uh to let them leave quietly uh before we get into our next uh next Okay, next item is 6.7 uh from Kent Epcon Group, Bmpton New Life Community Church. Uh Michelle is Hello, Michelle. Come on up and take it away. Good evening, chair, vice chair, members of committee, members of the public, and my city colleagues. My name is Michelle Hoy and I'm the planner assigned to process and review the subject application. The purpose of this public meeting is to provide information to the public and seek feedback on the application filed by Kanddevcon group on behalf of Bmpton New Life Community Church. Next slide, please. The subject property is located in Ward 8 and is legally described as 9281 Goreway Drive. The site is located east of Goreway Drive and north of Queen Street East. Next slide, please. This map shows an overview of the subject site within the property and the surrounding land uses. To the north is a place of worship, which is Noon Life Community Church, and beyond which is a convenience store and mid-rise residential uses. To the south is a three-story uh long-term care home. To the east is a storm water management pond. Um and beyond which are mid-rise residential apartments. Um and to the west is Goreway Drive and commercial plazas. Next slide, please. The subject property is currently vacant with some portions of the land currently being used for parking and the adjacent institutional uses. Next slide, please. A site visit was conducted on February 11th, 2026. And the above photos represent the current site conditions. As you can see, there's viewpoints from Goreway Drive and looking into the subject property. Next slide, please. Uh here are just a few more photos from the site visit representing the current conditions. Uh next slide, please. Next. Thank you. Uh the proposed official plan and zoning bylaw amendment is to facilitate a highdensity mixeduse development consisting of four towers ranging from 16 to 20 stories. The proposed development includes 649 residential apartment units with 65 being affordable and ground floor office and commercial uses. There's one level of underground parking proposed with a total of 442 parking spaces. The net site area is just roughly under8 hectares and the forest space index is 6.32. Additionally, there is a proposed commercial and amenities on site. The proposed primary access is via an existing internal street from Gway Drive and the secondary access connection through the adjacent property to the south. Next slide, please. Uh this slide just reflects uh some of the architectural renderings for the proposed development. Next slide please. This slide reflects the building elevation for the proposed development. Next slide please. Prior to finalizing recommendations and advancing the associated final report to council, this development application will be further evaluated against the document shown on this slide. Next slide, please. The subject lands are designated residential and open space in the city of Bmpton's official plan which permits a full range of residential types from single detached homes to high-rise apartments. It is also includes complimentary uses in which commercial and institutional lands are permitted. An amendment to the official plan is required to facilitate the development. Next slide please. On June 6, 2024, the Bmpton plan came into effect for those policies and sections under appeal. The subject site is designated community areas in uh the city structure and neighborhoods in uh the designations. Please note that that schedule two of the Bmpton plan is currently under appeal. Next slide, please. As stated earlier, the subject lands are designated residential and open space within schedule A of 2006 Bmpton official plan. And the applicant is proposing to redesate the subject lands from open space to facilitate the proposed high-rise mixuse development. Next slide, please. The subject lands are designated as institutional in the Goreway Drive corridor secondary plan. This designation permits the following uses. Examples include a religious institutions, youth centers, conference centers, schools, and accessory purposes. An amendment to the secondary plan is required. Next slide, please. As stated earlier, the subject lands are within the Gway Drive secondary plan and the current institutional land use designation does not permit mixeduse development and has a maximum building height of three stories. An amendment to the secondary plan is proposed to redesate the subject lands from institutional to special policy area X. The special policy area which shall be developed for the highdensity mixeduse uh development and for the commercial uses. An amendment to the secondary plan is required to facilitate the mixeduse development and increase the density. Next slide please. The subject lands are zoned institutional one special section 1589. Land use permissions include institutional uses such as schools, place of worships or day nursery. Some noninstitutional uses include parks and playgrounds and supportive housing types. An amendment to the zoning bylaw is required to facilitate the proposed development with the subjects uh specific site requirements. Next slide, please. The applicant proposes to amend the zoning bylaw from the current institutional spection section 1589 designation to residential apartment A with special section. The apartment the amendment to the zoning bylaw also proposes sight specific requirements as mentioned in the slide to allow for the proposed building design on the subject lands. Next slide please. This slide shows a rendering of the proposal and at this time city staff have identified the following preliminary issues and considerations with respect uh to the proposed development. The first one being compatibility of the proposed development with the host neighborhood including but not limited to the built form massing scale tower separation distances and potential wind and shadow impacts. Um, another being the alignment with the ramp plans designations, um, as well as the vision of the neighborhood. Um, another, um, key issue is the increased vehicular traffic on Goreway Drive and the last being the appropriate provision of a mix of housing. Next slide, please. Staff are hosting a statutory public meeting this evening to share information of the proposed amendment uh to the official plan and zoning bylaw on the subject site and provide an opportunity for members of the public to share their opinions. The following steps will include reviewing the files and bring a recommendation report to council. Staff will also follow up with members of the public and other stakeholders who have spoken, written in, or advised of interest in monitoring this proposal. Next slide, please. For more information on the development proposal, the applicant submission materials are available publicly online through the city BMPON's portal. Um, please just type in the file number in the application file which is in this case OS20250050. Next slide, please. This public meeting presentation will be available online as part of the planning and development committee meeting minutes. The final recommendation report will be posted on the city's PDC meeting agenda in advance of a future meeting. And for any questions or comments about this development application, please contact myself, my manager or the applicant, Maria Jones from Kandavcon Group, who is representing the owner of Bmpton New Life Community Church. The corresponding contact information is show on the screen. This concludes my presentation and thank you and have a good night. Thank you. And uh we have one online delegation by Andre. Yeah. Thank you. Uh good evening members of council and thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Andre Vilante and I'm a resident of Ward 8 of this proposed development. I want to focus I'm here to speak in opposition to the proposed development or amendment uh at 9281 Goreway Drive. I want to focus on one core issue in addition to the important ones that have already been presented by the planner and in the correspondences for this item which included environmental concerns with the conservation area there and the character of this area. increased traffic for an already busy road, compatibility with height of the buildings compared to the lower density midrises that are there currently, among many others. But what I want to take the time this evening and bring attention to are two unadressed specifics. The first is the proposed conversion of institutional land and what's been stated. This site is currently designated for institutional use as has been uh just recently stated by Michelle under the official plan. That designation exists for a reason. Institutional lands are not interchangeable with other land uses. They are a limited and essential resource that support, as we saw, schools, community services, in some cases, healthcare facilities, and other long-term public needs. In practice, once institutional land is converted, it is very difficult to replace within established communities such as ours here. Planning policy requires that the conversion of institutional land be supported by clear justification and that standard has not been demonstrated in the materials that have been provided or at least that are publicly available. In this case, there has been no clear demonstration, at least in my opinion, that this land is no longer needed for institutional purposes nor that this area has surplus institutional capacity to suddenly cut some out. In fact, the opposite is more likely true. This corridor is growing and has been growing in recent years with recent residential developments contributing to an increasing population in the area. And as that growth continues, demand for institutional services will increase, not decrease. Approving this conversion would be premature and not aligned with the long-term needs of this community. My second concern is precedent. If this application is approved, it sets a clear precedent that institutional lands can be converted to highdensity residential uses without a demonstrated need or justification. Over time, that erodess land that was set aside for essential public services and introduces uncertainty into future planning decisions. Planning works best when it's consistent and predictable, and I don't feel that that's been uh addressed here. This proposal has been described as an opportunity for intensification for homes, for housing. However, appropriate intensification still needs to align with established land use designations and more importantly long-term planning objectives. Similarly, good planning is not simply about delivering development and building homes and highdensity areas in this case, but about ensuring that development occurs in the right location and it's supported by clear and complete justification. To be clear, I'm not arguing against development in this ward or in Bmpton in general. It's an argument for the right development in the right place aligned with the city's own planning framework. At this time, I don't believe that those standards have been met. Given the long-term implications of converting institutional land, I would also encourage that sufficient time and opportunity be provided for meaningful community input before any final decision is made besides just this one occurrence. I would respectfully ask that council not approve the amendment at this time as the application has not met the threshold required to justify the permanent conversion of this institutional land and that a more comprehensive and clearly demonstrated needs analysis be completed before any redesignation is considered. Thank you so much for your time and consideration to this matter. Thank you very much for your delegation. Um are there anybody is there anybody else that would like to come down and delegate on this item? Seeing none, uh, council power, you move receipt of the item and the delegation in correspondence. All in favor? That carries. 6.9 is the application amend official plan and zoning bylaw uh, 3288 Countryside Drive. Ryan's coming down to provide the staff. presentation or we have one delegation or Ellis is coming down. Sorry, Ellis. Welcome. Take it away. Good evening, chair, vice chair, members of the committee, members of the public, and city staff colleagues. My name is Alice Lewis, and I am a planner tasked with reviewing and processing application number Oz 20250037. The purpose of this public meeting is to provide information to the public and seek feedback about the application that was fought by GeForce urban planners and consultants on behalf of gender as segment. Next slide, please. The subject property is located in W 10 at 3288 Countryside Drive. The subject site is located on the north side of Countryside Drive, west of north of Goreway Drive. Next slide, please. This slide provides information regarding the surrounding land uses. To the north is a storm water management pond, Mount Royal Park, and existing institutional uses. To the south is existing single detached houses along Countryside Drive. To the west is existing single detach houses and open space. Further west is a commercial plaza located at Countryside Drive and Airport Road. To the east is existing single detach houses, storm water mansion ponds, and open space. Further east is a commercial plaza located at Countryside Drive and Goreway Drive. Next slide, please. This slide provides information regarding the subject land at a broader scale displaying additional surrounding uses and development. Next slide, please. A site visit was conducted on Tuesday, February 17th, and you can see various attributes on this slide. Next slide, please. The development application was submitted to propose an official plan amendment and zoning bylaw amendment that would facilitate the construction of a two-story commercial plaza which will contain 14 retail retail units on the first floor while the second floor will contain four small office units located near the intersection of landscape drive and countryside drive. Some further details surrounding the this application include a lot area area of 7,047 square meters, building lot coverage of just over 2,000 square meters, total goals for area of 2,396 square meters, a building height of two stories, minimum front yard setback of 3 m, lot depth of 110 m, lot width of 66 m, and in regard to the parking supply, there will be 113 vehicular surface parking spaces, four of which will be accessible in two loading spaces. Next slide, please. Prior to finalizing a recommendation to council, the application will be further evaluated against the document shown on this slide. The next slide, please. The official plan designates the subject property as residential as per schedule A general land use designations. The residential designation permits a full range of dwelling types, complimentary uses, institutional uses, and public use designations, and an amendment to the official plan will not be required to facilitate this development. Next slide, please. The subject site is designated neighborhood within schedule two designations of the Bmpton plan. An amendment to the Bmpton plan will not be required to facilitate the proposed development. Next slide, please. The subject property is designated executive residential within the bales of Castlemore secondary plan. Residential uses associated with with this designation include single detached housing types that utilize locationational and natural attributes of the area and an amendment to the secondary plan is required to permit the proposed development. Next slide please. The subject site is zone residential real estate 2. Permitted uses in the residential real estate 2 zone include but are not limited to single detached dwellings, supportive housing residence type one and purposes accessory to other permitted uses. A zoning by a zoning bylaw amendment is required to facilitate the commercial development. Next slide, please. The applicant plans to amend the secondary plan to redesate the subject site from executive residential to service commercial within the bails of Castlemore secondary plan. A summary of the proposed regulations has been included on this slide. Next slide, please. The applicant plans to amend the zoning bylaw to reszone the subject site from residential real estate 2 to service commercial. A bylaw amendment has been provided for the city's review. A summary of the proposed regulations has have been included on this slide. Next slide, please. Staff have noted some key considerations and issues. I listed here. Land use and build form with respect to appropriateness of the build form and landscaping adjacent to the neighboring residential community and suitability of lot dimensions. Construction impacts that will be monitored include ensuring the redevelopment potential of neighboring lands that are located within proximity are not unreasonably impacted by the proposed development. And as noted on this on this slide, construction impacts will be monitored throughout the development. Next slide, please. staff are holding a st statutory public meeting to share information regarding the official plan amendment and zoning bylaw amendment to give the public the opportunity to share concerns, perspectives, and opinions regarding this application. Staff will continue to review the application prior to preparing a recommendation report for council. Staff will follow up with residents who have spoken, written, or advised monitoring of the application as it moves forward. Next slide, please. The development application can be accessed by the public through brand Plan online. Through the Brown Plan website, community members can click search for an application, type in the associated file number for this application will be Oz20250037. The final recommendation report will be also posted on the PDC website in advance of the next of the meeting. Next slide, please. This presentation will be made available to you shortly after the meeting has concluded. Once again, my name is Ellis Lewis and my contact information is posted on the screen here along with the applicant Manny Shan from G Force Urban Planners and Consultants who's representing SGender Sagna. If any questions, if you have any questions, please contact myself or the applicant. Next slide, please. This concludes my presentation. Thank you and have a good evening. Great job. Thanks, Alison. Uh, we have Ryan Coho. Ryan, welcome. Rain, you have five minutes. Thank you. Um, good evening to everybody, committee members. Thank you, Ellis, for the presentation. Um I'm here presenting on behalf of uh the life of Levane Association and all my other community members. Um we have a petition of 350 signatures at the moment. Um and that is a low density uh area. Uh we the whole community is against this plan and the official amendment of the zoning bylaw. Um can I go to the next slide please? Uh so 113 parking spaces, two stories commercial building uh does not really fit into the aesthetics of our neighborhood. Uh next slide please. So the reasons for um our for why we're against this is uh we're very supportive of uh community growth and the specific proposal represents a highly cost ccentric commercial highdensity model of development. Uh that will negatively impact our neighborhood safety uh the environment. the kids traveling back and forth walking on the street to get to the school and uh a lot of the neighbors that are using the ponds that abut this uh com commercial planned commercial development. So um it will negatively affect the quality of life of all um people around there. The traffic congestion uh the 113 parking spaces uh indicates an expectation of hundreds of daily vehicle trips into this community. Uh it is a low density single uh family dwelling all over and some really beautiful houses there. The massive influx of traffic into that area is not something that uh the community really wants. Uh the curbs, it's a two-lane road uh going into landscape. The curbs would have to be cut to get vehicles to go in and with uh heavy commercial delivery trucks, etc., it wouldn't be acceptable within the uh community. Next slide, please. I'm going to shorten it a little bit more. Uh the 350 signatures come from uh over 200 households within that area and uh we would be happy to work with the developer to actually create something that goes with the neighborhood and rather than have 350 signatures against it, we'd rather have something 350 signatures for it. Um so um that's why the whole community is against it and we're willing to work with the developer. So the next slide please. I think uh I'm going to wrap up. We uh fully urge the planning committee to re reject this proposal and in its current form. Um and uh we are looking for something with a smaller parking footprint uh and onestory commercial development and happy to work with the developer to actually get to that. Uh if the uh planning committee needs the petition with the signatures and people's names and numbers, they can contact me and I'm more than happy to hand that over as long as it uh maintains the privacy of it. Thank you. Thank you very much for your delegation. Anybody else like to come down and delegate on this item? Please come. There's two people there. So, yep. We're going to have staff going to come over. You're going to record your name in the book over there. Um but the first one down if you can go ahead and start stating for the record and then hit the book after. Hi, my name is I'm a resident of Lvane and I'm opposed of this construction completely. It will create congestion. We do have a plaza uh on the other corner of Airport Road in Mayfield with a lot of vacant properties there where business are try struggling there. So there's no need to put commercial uh an area there. I like to propose to reject that and put something that else that can be used properly, not a plaza. We don't need construction. We don't need traffic jams. We don't need chaos. We would like something aesthetic, a park, anything else but that. Thank you very much for your delegation. If anybody else would like to come down and speak, please come on down. You can form a line and uh write your name in the book and or after your delegation, please state your name for the record. My name is Rif Perves and thank you for allowing us to share our opinions. The plaza's entrance and exit off of Countryside is not viable. It's already a very crowded street and cars will be waiting many, many minutes just to be able to turn on to countryside. The plaza entrance onto landscape is very dangerous. It is almost touching the park's walkway entrance as it is. It's like a twocar distance when a car is coming off getting onto landscape and you are having people walking out of that parkway and you have only two cars like from me to that security guard. How will people be able to walk out of the parkway? I don't understand how this is even a possibility. how we are even looking at having an entrance right beside a parkway. On top of that, it's already been mentioned that landscape is already only a twocar uh width. So, when you have one car going this way, one going the other, where do you have the possibility for cars to come in and out? There is no room. I would hope that someone can come out there, walk there, stand there for the day and take a look at this area, not just look at it on paper. It looks really big on paper. It is not a big area. It is very dangerous. I have had to myself get off that parkway, walk away from the park and wait a good two, three minutes just to be able to cross that street. And that is a place where you're going with children. and children are not the quickest to cross. Please think about this carefully. This is not a good area for an entrance. It is very dangerous and if there are any fatalities and any accidents there, it will be because of the cause of the city of Bmpton. Please be ready to bear the grunt of that. It is very, very dangerous. This is a fully residential street. Like I'm saying, there's only two car widths over there. You will not be able to have anyone parking on the street anymore. And as it is, the people on that street are having a hard time having their friends come over or park to be able to go to their homes with a plaza in front of them. The only thing they'll be able to do is have everyone parking in the plaza, which is not really not really nice. But anyway, we already have a lot of frustration right now when we are going on countryside trying to turn left onto landscape. You have to wait for at least two, three, four lights. And by the time your light or your turn comes, you normally have to wait for the yellow light before you can turn left. So what happens when you're turn waiting for two or three lights and you get a yellow light and you're turning left? You are going to be going very very quickly. Why? Because you've been already waiting a long time and now you're trying to turn left and you're fighting traffic. So once you're going over there and you only have another five or six car spaces and you have someone else who's been waiting on the other side trying to get out onto that same street, what are you going to have? A lot of accidents. A lot of accidents. Okay. On top of that, I'd like to just say that we paid a lot of extra premium for these homes to make them estate homes, to make them nice areas. I think it's nice if we can do something to create a nice atmosphere and let our taxes go to what we've been paying the taxes for, keeping it in a nice area. As one of the other ladies already said, there is a plaza very, very close. If you look at the 1.5 kilo kilometer radius, we already have four plazas in the area. And when you have all residential homes, no highrises, thank God, no big condos, you really do not need four plazas in 1.5 kilometers. Now you'll be making the fifth. It does not make any sense. The only one who's gaining from this would be the land owner, not the residents in the area, not the city of Bmpton. I would hope with all of these permits coming up that the city of Bmpton will start really really thinking hard about how you're going to be reszoning everything because as you have less and less land available for reszoning, I hope you're more and more picky on how you reszone it. Thank you so much. Thank you very much for your delegation. Uh next, please please state your name for the record. Hi, my name is John Zagala. I live on 58 Louvane Drive. Okay. So, um um I'm opposed to this project. Um and and a lot of my neighbors have articulated their concerns about, you know, safety, traffic, potential kids getting run over. It's a really high traffic area and there's a lot of kids that live on the other side of the countryside that go to Mount Royal public school, which is basically they would have to cross that that that area to go to school. and by having like a another, you know, a public parking lot there for for the plaza, there there's a there's an increased risk I feel of kids getting run over, right? But um besides that um the one thing I'd like to add that my my neighbors haven't articulated yet is you know about 18 months ago the um the consultants met with the neighborhood online like they had a um it was an online meeting with about gez about 200 people uh to present this plaza and we overwhelmingly opposed this this project for the exact same reasons we're articulating tonight. Um, we looked at the plans. It looks like nothing's been addressed really. We had the same concerns that, you know, um, today that we had back then and a lot of it had to do with, you know, the intent of of the plaza that the intent of the project, um, the the amount of cars in the parking lot, that sort of deal. None of that, it looks like, you know, none of that's been addressed, right? So, if we were against it then and it was an overwhelming number of us that were against it, um I don't see that changing right now. I'm one of the one of the 350 signatures on on Ryan's um petition. I imagine there's much more than that to be honest. So, yeah, that's it. Thank you. Thank you so much for your delegation. Uh so, again, if you've come and delegated uh you've signed your name in the book, um you'll get information as that information comes out. you'll be notified uh when that report is coming and also if you've sent correspondents so you can see the list of of corresponding uh people that have sent that uh you will be also be notice notified if you want any additional information or if you've forgotten something and like oh I should have asked that question or I should have put that into record you can contact Ellis again I'll give you his home phone number call anytime day or night he is a great guy as well so uh he's happy to take your calls. Um the area counselors are also fantastic. Uh counselor, deputy mayor saying you have a deputy mayor in your area. So that's uh carries a lot of weight and councelor tour is wonderful as well. Uh with that councelor Tour, is there anybody else that'd like to come down? Last chance. See none. Um councelor to tour will move receipt and receipt of the delegations and the correspondence. All in favor? That carries. We still have quorum, right? Perfect. Uh the next item, that's it for statuto public meetings. That's it for statuto public meetings. Fantastic. We are on to the item 7.1, which was a stat meeting that uh was adjourned. Happy to move it. Councelor Powers move that. All in favor? That carries. Item 7.2 is an application of an official plan GLM uh partners Forest Side Estates to facilitate the purpose development of an 18story residential apartment building consisting of 132 dwelling units and two levels of underground parking at 8840 the Gore Road W 8. There any speakers? Councelor Power. Thank you, Mr. Sure. Um just a couple questions for staff. The region has flagged a couple of uh like waste management FR FSR TIS um those types of issues. How is that going to affect this if we approve it? Yep. Through the chair. Uh thanks for the question. So the applicant actually recently resubmitted submission materials to the city about uh two weeks or so ago. So those are with the region. uh spoke with the region on Friday. They've now cleared the functional servicing report. They've also cleared the waste management plan. The only item that remains outstanding that's going to be um incorporated within the holding provision is the requirement for traffic impact study. And when do you think that's coming through? Do you have any idea timeline? No definitive timeline yet. It'll be incorporated in the holding bylaw uh in the zoning. So the zoning won't come into effect until the TIS is submitted and satisfactory to the region. And next question is schoolboard capacity. I know in that area of W 8, especially in the primary schools, there's a massive amount of children that get bus all the way to Ward 7 because we don't have enough schools in that area. School board is saying that we wouldn't have enough capacity and they're over capacity at this time. Sorry, through the chair. At this point, the school boards have just identified the standard conditions to include um within the development approval itself, but we can follow up with them as well to determine if there's any capacity constraints. So, right now they've got 1,600 enrolled with a capacity of 1500 at Castlebrook. And then Ambrosic which is a Catholic school they have 1500 enrolled and 1,200 capacity. Sorry. Oh, so the both So both schools in the area are currently over and they're the only two secondary schools for that entire area. Is it safe to say we have nothing to do with that other than the fact that we can stomp our feet and say you're over capacity through the chair through to you to councelor power if the school board hasn't raised any red flags or the school board planning and capacities beyond uh municipal jurisdiction at this time is can the schools can I guess Mr. Uh council pro um can the school board come back later and say oh we needed we need land. Is there land in the area that's set aside for school board anywhere close to this? Seeing none. Okay. This was this a formally school lot? No. No. We're just saying that it's it currently it's it's over over uh capacity the areas the school. Um, where's the closest empty empty empty lot or school? Is there any? There isn't. And councelor Power, I'm sorry and I I started asking questions over you, but we also have a delegation and I apologize for that. But you continue and then we're going to bring Marshall Smith from KM Planning. Sure. I just I I guess the question to staff is if we have some of these challenges and have not yet satisfied the application, shouldn't we Do you even think about this through Mr. Chairman? Just just to provide maybe some um context for what we do see through some applications and what we understand through our discussions with the school boards. We we understand that uh the demand for uh students from given areas and residential areas in and around uh any particular school site changes over time and that there's it's really some cyclical demand. While there is perhaps some higher level of demand which leads to some need for temporary classrooms and portables on sites uh for a certain amount of time. Uh over the course of time the level of demand changes. But where it is that a school board sees a particular issue and a concern relating to what is proposed relative to what they perceive the impact to be on their sites, they'll note those as particular concerns for us. I remember that they had in some instances in the past. Here, as Alex notes, they've identified the particular needs for an expected number of students and how it is over their current capacity to some degree. uh but they haven't noted any particular concerns. What I might deduce from that is there's maybe some cyclical nature here. Uh there might be some increase now like I'm saying which might change over time but staff can't maybe um sort of presume some of these things. What we have to do is rely on their comments. They they haven't noted any concern in that way at this point. Okay. And then the final question I have the intersection at Gorn atmar was it ever analyzed. Do we know was it ever part of the traffic study because that's where the congestion is going to happen? Yeah, through the chair that would be incorporating the traffic study. And just for context, this lot here was actually approved through a previous plan of subdivision. It was originally approved as of right for eight stories for residential. Um this just increased to that previous approval. um that was allotted for the site. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much, counselor. Uh we have um Marshall Smith, KM Planning Partners, Inc. on behalf of the applicant to come on down and delegate. You have five minutes. Evening, Mr. Chair, members of committee. Thanks, uh for having me this evening. Just hope that I can go through a couple of slides here. I'll do it very quickly and we have a full agenda tonight. So again, it's uh applications for official plan and zoning bylaw amendment and uh Marshall Smith KLM here on behalf of the owner at Royal Pine Homes and uh Forest Hide Estates. Next slide. So this map shows kind of what's in the area as far as uh parks and schools. I know we've had a bit of a conversation about schools here. Maybe I'll focus on that very quickly. When those comments come through from school boards, uh they do identify for us if there are any issues uh with current capacity. But they also do have standard conditions that say if there are capacity issues at the schools that are closest to you or your preferred schools that they would be busing those students to other schools that do have capacity. So there is a solution of backs stop that school board brings forward. I guess also add to that just by saying the school board remains somebody that's circulated or an agency that circulated on the applications going forward. So we will have after this application as it was mentioned a hold removal application and we'll also have a site plan application and so that's where more detailed refinements get made to the plan and those agencies have an opportunity to comment again. Um, so again, I I think it was mentioned that this site was already designated for an apartment building up to eight stories under the existing secondary plan that predated the 2023 Bmpton plan that went through and the amendments to the MTSA for this area. This is within the Gore MTSA, so it's intended for intensification. Next slide, please. So, here's that MTSA plan. uh shows that this site is intended for an increase in height and density up to 12 stories. Now, in an analysis of what's going on in the broader area and considering the street that this has frontage onto, other applications in the area, I guess, namely the neighboring application for a 15-story building, which is midblock, this site being on the immediate corner, makes sense that it would have a little bit more height than that block for uh I guess good street presence and uh undulation and height and decreasing height from the corner. Next slide. This just shows generally where the building is cited on the site. Follows all of the city of Bmpton's general urban design protocols. Making sure that the tower has more than 12 1.5 meters from from that north property line there. Uh ensuring that you would get 25 meters separation between this building, the potential neighboring building to the north. And then it actually has also been contemplated in other development to the east which has a a private road that's been constructed and uh by the same developer and was meant to provide access into this site. I guess something else that I'll say is that you know acknowledging that the Gore Road is a regional arterial road. The uh circulation network has been situated along the north extent of the property which would permit for um you know any potential shared access that might come about through negotiation discussion with that neighboring land owner. Next slide. This shows the landscape plan uh where the amenity space would be located where the surface parking would be located. Should also mention the majority of parking is below ground within two levels of uh underground parking. Um but this generally illustrates that you'd get a a green interface with public spaces and other surrounding properties. Next slide. General concept of what the building could like on the left. That's the the north elevation. So, if you were uh uh adjacent to that property to the north, which also has uh high-rise building planned, and then the east elevation, which would front the Gore Road. And this is still being refined. There's a lot of room for uh uh I guess additional details to be added in articulation of the building, different elements, penetration of the windows and materiality. Next slide. That was really all I had. A big list of studies has been submitted to you. U we have reviewed those studies with your staff and as you've heard um we have gone a very good distance in having those studies reviewed, vetted by the municipality, the region and other agencies including the school board. Thank you. Thanks Mark. Okay. Uh councelor Power, you have questions of the delegation? No. Thanks, Marshall. You have questions of the report that's before us? Yeah, I I'd still like to go through the report a bit more and then speak more with the residents on this. So, um I'm not satisfied with a lot of the stuff that's in this. Um the school board problem is a big issue, especially in that Sorry, I didn't know. No, no, no. Go, go, go. Um, but the schoolboard issue is a big issue and there's a lot of students that will be bust and I I hate having students on a bus for a half hour, 45 minutes to get to the other side of town. So, if I could, sir, I'd like to defer it. Okay, you can't. You spoke to it. You spoke to it already. Deputy Mayor Singh, you're on the board. Oh, that's a great idea. Thanks, C. Deputy Mayor Singh. Uh, deferred to and for what? Give me a reason rationale. Consultation. Further consultation. Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. Further consultation and then come back to a future planning meeting. Do we can we have a date for that? Are you okay? Next planning. Okay. So, nextish planning. We have two that are moving close together. We have one that there's happen. There's things that are going on in planning meetings. So, we're moving stuff around a little bit, but it'll come back within 30 days. If I could through the through the chair, uh just knowing if if there's not only discussions with the school board, but that might then fundamentally change the plan, which would trigger discussions with the applicant. So, if I could suggest staff be afforded the time to bring this back before the last planning meeting in May. Before the last planning meeting in May. Yeah. Okay. Yep. Perfect. Okay. Thank you. Move deferral. All in favor? That carries our next I'm on the board, Mr. Chair. I'm on the board. Oh, I apologize. Councelor Forini, go ahead. Yeah. Just quickly about the school board. How do we deal with this one? There is no school board. The province took over. Speaking to the deferral, Council Forini. Yeah. Okay. Well, he asked the question about the school board. Speaking to the deferral. The deferral. There is no school board. Get more information. Sorry. The deferral is non-debatable. Do you want to hold your It's too late. Well, I was up before my my hand was up beforeh Deputy Mayor. Was he on before Deputy Mayor Zing? Let's say yes. Okay. Okay. That's okay. Before you came on, Council Forini, you have the floor. Yeah. I just was asking a question to staff. I know we need something back from the school board, but how do we do this if the province took over the school board and you know the school trustee school board has nothing to do with anything no more? That's all I want us to find out and I don't think we there's that's rhetorical question. There's nobody here that can answer that. Thank you. Counc deferral. All in favor carries. Next item is 7.3 which is application amend official plan zoning bylaw blackthorn development corp. We do have some delegations but I only see three people online. Is there anybody here to delegate on this item? There are. You're here. One, two, three, four. Okay, let's go down the list. Jesumar, come on down. And then Rena Patel is next. Go ahead. Thank you, council. Uh, my name is Jes Kumarati and I live in the area where uh this project is being proposed. Uh I want to focus on one central issue. This application asks council to take a very significant lip without sufficient certainity without sufficient justification and without sufficient protection for the existing community. The planning rational relies on broad policies not the local reality. Meaning the provincial growth policies, housing targets, general intensification goals, all these are broad high level directives. They are meant to guide growth not to justify any scale of development at any given location. Uh what is missing is here is very clear and convincing explanation of why this specific site which is surrounded by low-rise homes and designated for commercial and employment use is appropriate for three high-rise buildings in such a small area. Planning must be context sensitive. In this case the context is not being respected. It's overridden. The proposal depends on too many assumptions. The application depends on multiple future conditions aligning perfectly like intersection upgrades that are not yet in place. Coordination with external land owners, there is no explanation on that. Surrounding developments that may or may not proceed as expected as things may change. Infrastructure capacity that is assumed rather than clearly demonstrated. Each of these introduces uncertaintity. But once this project is approved and built, the impact of this development is going to be permanent for the local residents. Good planning is not based on best case scenarios. It should be based on readiness, coordination and certainity. Now concerns about school planning and transparency. I also want to address the input from the PDSB on this issue. There is a serious concern that the project projected number of students from this development is significantly underestimated. Bmpton has one of the largest household sizes in Canada, averaging about 3.6 people per home compared to roughly 2.4 in Toronto and three in Missaga. Nearly half of households in Bmpton have four or more house members and over a quarterly houses have five or more. Now this reflects a community with larger family oriented households and therefore more children per unit when applied to development of 332 unit 333 units particularly one that includes a substantial number of two and threebedroom units. Standard planning metrics indicate well over 130 students could be generated now potentially even more in given plans context. So this raises a fundamental question. What assumptions were used to conclude that the impact of schools will be minimal? If these if those assumptions do not reflect Bmpton's reality, then the impact on local school is being underestimated today only to become a problem after approval in the form of overcrowding. This is not a minor oversight. It is a significant planning risk. Now loss of employment lands without a broader strategy. The current designation allows for commercial and employment use. The proposal removes that opportunity and replaces with the residential density. Individually this may seem reasonable but cumulatively it raises a large question. The scale feels driven by maximization not a fit. When you look at this proposal, three towers, maximum height, high density, it gives the impression that the site is being pushed to an absolute limits. The question is not simply can this fit on this page. The question is does this belong here. So in closing, I would like to request all uh council members please be considerate given the situation that now o rights are gone gone from the residents. We highly rely on your decision expertise. So kindly think all these things and school board decision like Pat raise uh you know it may come back. Mhm. We don't know that may be temporary or you know it may be it may come back with some other uh body. So this issue is going to remain schools going to remain an issue and these kids in the school is the big issue. So I would really request all of you to please consider this and uh reject this proposal in in the current format. Thank you for your Thank you. Thank you all counselor to give me a chance to speak. Um again as Jesh Tibati says uh school is a big issue. The kids don't have enough room to sit in the school. uh last month last month January and February my two kids goes to Castle's public school they didn't go outside to play whole two months kids cannot go outside to play why the question because the win the snow all on the grass and where the portables are and um also on the parking lot. So the staff has to park their car inside the property. So kids play area they park the car in kids play area. So the gentleman over here it says they're going to build uh extra portable. There is no space to build the extra portable also. We try everything. Finally we went to uh we met to MP last month he only allow eight people to uh meet. If you allow more it could be flooded over there with the parents because it's a issue issue the kids is issue. If we think other issue we can solve with that but kids is the issue. Please think about that. This is the school. The second thing recreation center. Last Monday past Monday uh they open uh for uh skating and swimming. I forget two hours later when I open everything is full booked. So do we have recreation center extra for the kids? No. Do we have school for the kids? No. Do we have a park for the kids? No. What kind of infrastructure we are looking for? My question is that's only thank you so much. Thank you for your delegation. Uh dash welcome. Hi good evening everyone. So I strongly oppose this proposal because I have eight points and I think I will elaborate more. So first of all infra infrastructure and school capacity the first issue. The second issue is traffic congestion and door safety. The third one is emergency access and public safety in that area. Loss of green space and environmental impact. Incompatibility with existing neighborhood character. The sixth number is servicing and infrastructure capacity. The seventh one is lack of supporting community amenities. And the last one is precedent for future overdevelopment. So the first thing is very important is infrastructure and school capacity. Local school are already operating at or near capacity. The addition of approximately 303 330 residential residential unit will will place further strain on the education system with no clear provision or plan for expand school infrastructure or accommodation. The second thing is traffic congestion and road safety. Clarkway drive and surrounding road network have limited capacity to uh safely accommodate increased traffic volumes. The addition of several hundred vehicle is likely to result in congestion, longer travel time and increased vehicle emissions. Additionally, the absence of adequate pedestrian infrastructure combined with reliance on a limited access point creates serious safety concerns particularly for children and family in that area and emergency access and public safety. The proposal appears to rely heavily on a single point of access. This raise this raises significant concern regarding emergency response time and evocation safety. In the event of a fire or medical emergency, limited ingress and aggress could pose a serious risk to residents at and first responders. loss of green space and environmental impact. The development provides minimum green space and does not appear to include meaningful parkland dedications. Increased density without adequate green infrastructure negatively impact air quality, urban heat, strong water management and overall community well-being. The fifth one is incompat incompatibility with existing neighborhood character. The proposed building heights and density are not consistent with existing low-rise character or the surrounding area. The introduction of high-rise towers will result in adverse impacts such as shadowing, wind effect, noise and reduce privacy for nearby residents. Servicing and infrastructure capacity. There are concern regarding whether existing municipal services including water, wastewater and storm water system have the capacity to support this level of in intensification without upgrades. Insufficient service servicing could lead to long-term infrastructure strain lack of supporting community amenities. As Reynold already already mentioned, a development of the scale should be accomp accompanied by appropriate community amenities such as park recreational facilities and community services. The absence of these elements place places additional pressure on existing facility that are already limited. Precedent for future overdevelopment. Approval of this proposal may set an undesirable precedent for similar high density developments in the in that area gradually eroding the established planning vision and character of the community. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your delegation. Uh VJ, welcome VJ. Uh thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak. Uh respected counselors and planning and development staff. Uh I am writing to strongly oppose the proposed construction of a multi-story building oz 20240039 located near 9379 Clarkway Drive, Bmpton. The above proposed project along with the previously approved OZS 2022009 located at 9445 Clarkway Drive raises several serial serious concern for the residents and the surrounding area. First one is traffic and safety issue. The construction of a three high-rise building in addition to previously approved project Oz 2022009 along with the highway and side by side close to each other will significantly increase the vehicle movement creating traffic congestion and increasing the risk of accident as we are already having traffic problem and accidents on Highway 50. Number two is parking problem. The project may not provide adequate parking facilities which could lead to vehicle being parked on the roadside streets and sidewalks on the highways obstructing traffic. The third one is infrastructure strain. The current water supply gas supply seed system and electric city infrastructure in the area may not be sufficient to support high density multi-story development. It will create a significant energy demand that could lead to a higher energy cost during present condition of energy crisis and inflation. The fourth one is environmental concern. The project could result in a loss of green space, increase pollution and negative impacts on the local environment. The fifth one is impact on the nearby resident. The building may block sunlight and ventilation for nearby homes and reduce the privacy for residents in the surrounding neighborhoods because the nearby housing residents do have occasional gathering, swimming pools and parties in their backyard. The sixth one is uh fire and emergency safety. High-rise building require proper fire safety infrastructure and adequate access for emergency vehicle which may not be available in the current road layout. It will be extremely difficult for emergency vehicle to park. If the entire area is full of vehicle parked because of the two approaching construction side by side in the close proximity of OZ S20 20240039 and OZ S20 20220009. The seventh is the zoning and planning compliance. It should be verified whether the proposed building complies with the local zoning regulation and height restriction for this area. The eighth is a public consultation. Local residents were not properly consulted regarding this development and their concern should be considered before granting approval. And the ninth one is educational institutions. There is not enough schooling infrastructure to support the future education need. The current cashmore school does not have enough space to accommodate all the student. In the view of above concern, I respectfully request the planning authority to review this project carefully and reconsider the granting permission for the proposed multi-story construction. A detailed traffic, environmental and infrastructure impact assessment should be conducted before any approval is given. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Thank you very much for your delegation. Uh Santosh online. Do you have Santosh? No. Okay. Uh Lanteli. No red one. I'm preach. was on phone. He was listed, right? He was listened. Yeah. Okay. Hang. The last name Dave. So that was somebody that was here earlier. Their last name Frank Noel. Number 14, Shank. Good evening, council. I'm here. Hey, go ahead. Thank you. Uh uh am I allowed to share my screen if that is okay? Let me share my screen. Can No, no. No. Um I had Okay. Uh good evening honorable city council and everyone. Uh thank you for providing an opportunity to speak um here. I'm the resident of Bmpton who is directly impacted by the proposed new development of these condos and thus uh zoning by amendment. Um I'd like to bring your attention to some of the aspects u I think u one of the key uh thing that is not directly visible but we look the plan from just technical perspective. I humbly urge the elected representatives of this city council to hear our pledge as impacted residents not just from the point of uh meeting the planning committee's objectives and provincial standards uh but from a from a human perspective by being in the shoes of the residents of the community living there. So it is my sincere hope that uh uh the council being our elected leaders and community representatives of this city with powers uh will have will understand our concerns and help the residents live a good life around that neighborhood. Um I think I had I shared an image with the city uh staff uh uh just before the meeting started. So if that can be brought up uh that would be great. If not I'll just speak. So u I think many of the previous delegates have already expressed various concerns. Um um I had a picture that depicted an aerial view of uh uh the entire area. Uh which which is shared with the city staff uh in the email. Um I think that picture spoke thousand words. Uh then I would like to where I I had I had wished to show the aerial view of the neighborhood with some key legends around it. So I think existing one of the key uh uh problems that we perceive uh as the biggest threat to the residents uh is right now and that needs to be addressed immediately uh with the proposed development is impacting our children's uh uh directly as indicated in the final report by CD's planning committee. The neighborhood has only two public schools on the west and north uh on which both PDSB and different Catholic boards have expressed uh serious concerns on the limitation of available seats to accommodate the increased number of kids uh because of this new development. Uh it's also proposed that some of the kids might have to travel and use bus to outside zone schools. uh this will cause serious constraints on schooling and safety of the kids for the newly developed units as well as for the children from existing residential homes around that neighborhood. So imagine this entire stretch being surrounded by vehicles traveling at high speeds posing security threats to small children who need to either walk or have their parents drive to schools because most of the schools in and around that neighborhood are are walkable schools. I would want I would not want to send my kid walking to the school during those situations. So yeah, in closing, I would like to oppose this proposed amendment zoning bylaw and thus this new development. Uh city should hear the grievance of residents and help them to live in their home versus leaving their homes. Thank you for Thank you so much for uh this time and uh hearing my delegation. Thank you. Thank you very much for your delegation. Um one last delegation is uh Sachin do I have Suchin online? Nope. Okay, that concludes the delegations. There's no correspondence. The application is here before us to application to amend the Nope, that's not the right one. Amend official plan and zoning bylaw. um been moved by deputy mayor. Any speakers? Seeing none, all in favor? That carries. Next item is item 7.4 application amended zoning bylaw temporary use bylaw uh to facilitate the development of the industrial warehouse building with accessory truck trailer storage. Application also proposes to permit the parking and storage of oversized motor vehicles and trailers for a temporary period. 10590 Highway 50. Any questions? Seeing none, then move. Deputy mayor. You move that. All in favor? That carries. Oh, there was a delegation on that uh design on behalf of the applicant. Well, you don't get to delegate anymore. You just approve your application. You good with that? Are they here? They're not here. Uh 75 76 76 was done uh was removed. 8.1 8.1 is Bram West uh staff report and we have a delegation Patrick Pearson from Glen Schnar and Associates. So, we'll bring up the delegation first and my plan is to um kick this down given the I've heard a couple a few issues. I'm going to kick this down the road a little bit and we'll see if we can resolve some of them. But I do want to hear what you have to say in particular about the employment lands, right? That's okay. Go ahead. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. My name is Patrick Pearson. I'm a land use planner with Glen Art Associates. Um, as you guys are maybe aware that we represent various land owners within the block 40-5 landowner group and we've been heavily involved within the uh secondary plan review process up till up until now. I guess just first off um I want to say thanks to staff. We've had a number of meetings, conversations and uh intended community meetings and uh open houses and um I'm I'm hopeful that we can sort of resolve some of our issues and I just want to say thanks for including us in all the consultation till date to date. Um, so yeah, I guess we've read the staff report and uh we have a few concerns. Um, I guess the first one I want to discuss is the employment forecast. So we we reviewed the technical memo from Watson Consulting which provided an analysis of the uh employment land needs assessment in the secondary plan area. Um, the prelim preliminary analysis identified that there was a need for additional employment lines within the uh secondary plan area. However, we I guess sort of disagree with the methodology that was used at the time um were outlined in their analysis. So, in their report, they uh excluded the Maple Lodge Farms land holdings, which is a large land holdings within the secondary plan area that's currently designated as employment. Um so, that wasn't included in their overall supply calculation, which obviously impacts the findings. Um, we were told this was done because Maple Lodge Farms identified that they uh did not have a immediate need or intent to develop or sell lands. Um, so we're we're of the opinion that the employment supply should obviously be um based on current land use designations and their currently designated employment um as well as developability and they are vacant developable lands, portions of them anyways um and not just the stated intent of one single land owner. Um so we we we suspect that if these lands were included in the analysis, it would have changed the findings. Um much of which included expansion of employment lands beyond the existing employment area and it impacts a number of our clients sites as you can see on the site um or on the figure on the screen. So with that being said, we would recommend that staff uh go back and work with Watson to um sort of refine their final report. I know there's a report coming forward uh with updates to their memo. Um so we would recommend that staff work with them and request that the Maple Lodge Farms is uh land holdings are included in their final analysis. And uh I guess another item and we've spoken to this before and delegated to this item as well. Um there are a number of properties primarily the ones highlighted on the screen those are the land owners we represent. um that those lines uh those sites rather currently benefit from residential land use permissions in the in effect secondary plan. Um you can see on the screen that some of them are not uh are being proposed for employment uses as well as a special employment overlay. Um these owners purchased the lands with the understanding that they would benefit from the in effect residential permissions. Um we don't think that these land owners and other land owners in the area should bear the consequences of uh a single land owner's decision to develop or not to develop. Um so with that being said, we recommend that the committee respect the existing residential permissions that are provided within the in effect secondary plan primarily with respect to the uh lands that are shown on the screen. Um the committee will also notice that the recommendation report from staff had two land use concept plans. one was the recommended land use concept plan which is shown on the screen and then there was an alternative land use concept plan. So from what I understand um the main uh difference between the two plans anyways is there are some lines south of Eton Road that in the recommended plan are shown as uh employment can we flip to the next figure please? And this is the alternative land use plan. Um you can see the lands south of EMamilton. They're highlighted sort of in the yellow color with a employment overlay. Um so the alternative plan respects the existing residential land use permissions and we represent the the property owner highlighted in site number four there. So we recommend that the committee um support this alternative plan. Um there is an employment overlay that is shown on these plans which the intent was to sort of address some of the initial findings of the Watson report. Um so they're looking for additional areas to expand these employment uses and these and from what I understand the intent of these uh policy overlays is to um look for sort of sight specific or um alternate ways to try to find compatible land uses with a mixture of residential and employment. Um but again we these clients purchased the sites in invested in the city with the understanding that they had residential permission. So we would recommend so and and I get the employment portion of it um the residential purchasing when um I'm not sure I understand that one or the other one about um wanting to to build residential regardless of anybody else around them. Happy to unpack that u further down the road. Don't want want to make it very clear, we're not in the business of of making people more money than they than they have. And if if that's where you're going with that, then none of none of our business nor do we care. Um, but the fact is, I think we're specifically around the employment lands and you look at what we're doing, what's happening with Stalantis today. Did we ever think Stalantis was going to be anything other than a than a Kreser dealership? No. But that's the world we live in right now. Maple Edge Farms, fantastic employer, fantastic business, May family, fantastic individuals. Don't want them to go anywhere. Very happy uh with them. But you never know what's going to happen. And I think you're you're right to the to the fact that we want to make sure that um the employment lands are all captured employment lands and using those numbers is something especially that we should be we should be we should be doing. So, that's why I'm referring it. We're deferring it back to to staff. Um, there was two other reasons. Do you want me to mention them now? Might as well mention them publicly. Um, the other reason was the west end and I spoke to councelor Keenan. Uh, west end of um, sorry, east side of Missaga Road. Um, the land going up making it work live, continuing to make Thank you for your delegation. Sure. No. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. And happy to receive your delegation. Sure. I was just going to say we're not looking to, you know, impact Maple Lodge farms either. We're just wanting to make sure that those designated employment lands are included in sort of announcement and I think we agree with that and I'm not sure what happened, but we'll we'll get to that. Okay. So, thank you for your delegation. Um, so the other one the one the lands east of Missaga Road making those just like the ones that were built uh south of that that were currently already built live work. uh through through the chair it's my understanding that uh there's a desire from the land owners to ensure compatibility of of live work and speaking with staff that is the eventuality but perhaps uh referring or deferring this back to staff we can make that more clear to the to the owner and work with the owner to ensure that the right instruments are there. Okay. And then the so the lands targeted and see what we can do in working with the with the land owners as well. Um The other thing is Shannon and I and I I'll let you jump in. Um we have some sensitive uses on the south side of Embleton right now. Currently, let's let me let us not pick an area, but we have um you know, we have a woman shelter. Uh we have um some other sensitive areas in there. I think that's something that we should talk about, too. making sure that they're protected, making sure that they rent, but we need to be the ones to come to say, "Hey, these people need to be protected." So, what can we do there? Maybe if that's a conversation as well we can have. Jane, you want to jump in? Are you good? I'll speak to one thing. Uh the chair, um there's a couple things that you mentioned, especially uh for the lands on the east side of Missaga Road. I just wanted to address that fact quickly. So we are doing a citywide employment study to reconcile the provincial changes in the definition for areas of employment and that's something that we factor into too in that Watson analysis. So they don't consider it as you know and we'll take that back. We'll continue working with the the landowners group there in 40-5. Um but as part of that overall work we will be looking at the area on the east side of Missaga Road and that's going to be really what we'll implement through Graham West secondary plan review. So we we know that uh there was um some correspondence on that fact and so we've we've heard that before and we've communicated to them before too through meetings that uh we will be reconciling that through that more larger scale process that's citywide. Great. And Shannon, who's doing that work? That work is done by Hempson Consult. Hempson is currently doing that and that's based off of what the province says is a job because what the province says is a job and what I say is a job is two different things. So I want to make sure that we identify yeah job is a job is a job. people work at a supermarket and they they have two jobs right now too. So that qualifies for us anyways. You know, it's a different world than where it was back then where a job was considered to be in a bank or in an office or something to that effect, but it's different here today. For me, a job is a job is a job. Thank you. Deferring this to a future date to have it come back. No timeline. Let's just work. Let's just work. get it done and get it back. Happy with that. Is that okay? Okay, perfect. Happy to receive the delegation and the correspondence and the report is referred. Thank you very much. All in favor? Carries. That's all the correspondence. The CIP went into consent, right? Y active went into consent correspondence. Freeman went to consent. 10.1 uh Heritage went into consent. Um as members of regional council will know, there's a really big item on the uh agenda on Thursday, the water and wastewater infrastructure plan and update. Um not to get into this too much unless any members would like to ask any questions. Um but even in that we have infrastructure projects that are currently um being done at the region appeal and yet there was a little bit of a hiccup on one of the appendices that it showed a west side of Heritage Heights as a long-term where we consider it to be midterm especially since that the pipe is going in the ground like construction is is I believe is starting for that work so in long term term 2031 certainly doesn't make sense. 2034, sorry. Um so 2028, 2033 is more of that midterm that um we certainly agree with. We've had public meetings already for the west side of Heritage Road. We've had we have precinct and draft plans that are imminent. Um and so that we certainly need those that to be um uh added to the region's uh report. Uh so the motion is here before you um if you're all good to take it as read unless you would like me to read it out but we need to get this to the region for them to add it to the report. Um that's the big thing and I know that it's not going to council. It's planning committees recommendation that this code of region regional council need uh and I'm happy to hopefully get everybody's support uh for that. Anybody like me to read it out? See, nobody will be taken as red. Happy to move it. All in favor? That carries. And you're sending that to the region, right? Yeah. Does it say that it shall be done? Okay. All right. Perfect. Um, there's no general correspondence counselor question period. Any members of council have any questions? Anything related on the agenda here today? Seeing none, public question period. Any members of public like to come down ask any questions about anything that was related to the agenda? Anybody online? Seeing none. Um, no closed session. German been moved by council that our next regular scheduled meeting is Monday, April 13th. Maybe we might be moving that. I think all in favor carries. Have a great night, everybody.

Full Transcript