The Owner proposed a number of development restrictions intended to provide buffering and improve the visual screening between existing residential properties to the south and east of the development. (Appendix A) The Owner originally proposed to register these as restrictive covenants on title. A number of these restrictive covenants can actually be incorporated into the site plan. Therefor many of the Owner’s proposed restrictive covenants have been translated into a form that can provide guidance to the Site Plan Control Officer when reviewing an amendment to the existing approved site plan. These are listed in Recommendation II of this report.

Restrictive Covenants:

Some of the residents concerns revolve around the operation of the businesses that will inhabit the development, rather than the uses themselves. The greatest concerns seemed to revolve around hours of operation after midnight, music from a DJ or live band and/or unruly patrons at a restaurant in this development, hours of garbage pickup, and use of the rear doors as a general entrance which would have a negative impact on the residents of the adjoining properties. The residents base this concern on the experience of a similar use in an adjoining strip mall development to the west. The nature of these concerns fall outside of municipal legislative control. Therefore these operational matters cannot be included in a zoning bylaw and cannot be addressed in the site plan control agreement. The Owner has agreed to address these matters by way of Restrictive Covenants registered on title to its property. Council is being advised that the City has no legislative ability to implement or enforce such Restrictive Covenants placed on the Owner’s property title for the benefit of the abutting owners. Restrictive Covenants are a matter between the Owner and its neighbours.

Risk Analysis:

Financial Matters:

Consultations:

Michael Cooke, Manager of Planning Policy/Deputy City Planner

Wira Vendrasco, Deputy City Solicitor

Conclusion:

The additional Personal Service Shop use proposed is likely to have minimal impact on the surrounding area while improving the usability of the site and providing additional neighbourhood focused commercial uses. The prohibited uses are for the benefit of the neighbours. In my opinion this additional use and the prohibited uses are consistent with PPS, conforms to OP and represents good planning.

The Council direction to the Site Plan Control Officer will enable the implementation of buffering and additional screening for abutting properties.