MINUTES
Development & Heritage Standing Committee
Monday, September 21, 2020

4) Services – These will be addressed through SPC so not to adversely affect the area/residences. Sanitary, capacity, storm water all to be addressed.

Kevin McCully (resident) was online to provide feedback. Had computer issues. Chair Bortolin asks Mr. McCully to forward any issues/concerns in writing to Clerks and/or Council Members. Councillor Sleiman notes local residents’ concerns regarding heights and especially services. Councillor inquires whether the area experienced flooding. Mr. Winters addresses these concerns and advises what will be required of the applicant through Site Plan Control to mitigate these factors. Councillor Sleiman inquires whether landscaping can be used to address the height concern. Mr. Robinson addresses this concern advising what Mr. McFarlane already expressed regarding a generous setback of 30m, building closer to the road, garage used as buffer and the additional 2 metres to be used for building esthetic purposes.

Member Gyemi inquires whether the garages have solid walls providing a visual block of car lights and noise? Mr. McFarlane confirms they are solid structures. Member Gyemi inquires what the additional 6 feet/2m is required for? Peaked roof? Mr. LeFave (applicant) looking to do a wood truss roof, but are also looking into concrete or steel, depending on costs. Looking to add parapets in order to provide a more residential look over a commercial look and make it esthetically appealing.

Member Gyemi inquires about the 3m setback requirement. Mr. Robinson advises there is no 3m setback requirement for commercial area. Noise Study was required for this application and noise mitigation will be addressed through Site Plan Control.

Councillor Holt inquires about the Cash in Lieu in regarding to trees. Are the requisite number of trees not going to be planted? Mr. Robinson advises there is a number of trees required and if the applicant is unable to plant the required number, a cash in lieu of is required. All to be addressed during Site Plan Control for the Landscaping Plan. Mr. McFarlane advises it is their goal to implement as many trees to the site as is physically possible.

Chair Bortolin, speaking on behalf of the resident (Kevin McCully), inquires about Traffic and entrance to the site. Are there any foreseeable issues regarding getting in and out of the site off Edgar. Mr. Hagan advises the size of the development did not warrant a Traffic Impact Study. In reviewing the application, Traffic saw no issues with the development to the surrounding neighbourhood. Chair advises the resident has noted the power goes out in the neighbourhood often. Would this development put further strain on utilities? Mr. Robinson notes the application was circulated to Enwin and they had no concerns with the proposed development. They will also likely be recirculated during the SPC phase.

Moved by: Member Gymei

Seconded by: Member Moore