MEMORANDUM. Date: May 8, Planning & Development Committee. From: Ilidia Sa Melo, Deputy City Clerk. Re: Items Further to the Agenda May 8, 2018

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "MEMORANDUM. Date: May 8, Planning & Development Committee. From: Ilidia Sa Melo, Deputy City Clerk. Re: Items Further to the Agenda May 8, 2018"

Conrad Homer French
5 years ago
Views:

MEMORANDUM Date: May 8, 2018 To: Planning & Development Committee From: Ilidia Sa Melo, Deputy City Clerk Re: Items Further to the Agenda May 8, 2018 Notes: Item 1, re: Boulevard Appeal Committee

Judy Sauder, re: item 10, North Cambridge Urban Boundary Expansion 2. Dale Buller-Power, re: item 10, North Cambridge Urban Boundary Expansion 3.

1 MEMORANDUM Date: May 8, 2018 To: Planning & Development Committee From: Ilidia Sa Melo, Deputy City Clerk Re: Items Further to the Agenda May 8, 2018 Notes: Item 1, re: Boulevard Appeal Committee Minutes and Item 9, re: 25 Linnwood Avenue Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendments have been removed from the Consent Agenda. Delegations 1. Judy Sauder, re: item 10, North Cambridge Urban Boundary Expansion 2. Dale Buller-Power, re: item 10, North Cambridge Urban Boundary Expansion 3. Christopher Young, re: item 10, North Cambridge Urban Boundary Expansion Correspondence 1. Grainne Aitken, re: item 10, North Cambridge Urban Boundary Expansion PP Mark Kindrachuk, Intermarket Properties, re: item 10, North Cambridge PP. 5-6 Urban Boundary Expansion Ilidia Sa Melo Deputy City Clerk

3 CORRESPONDENCE #1 May 8, 2018 Planning & Development Committee meeting North Cambridge Urban Boundary Expansion. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input into the above. Firstly I wish to say that I support the council staff s recommendation to endorse the proposed new Urban Area boundary as presented at the recent public meeting of the Planning and Works Committee at the Region of Waterloo. At that meeting, I was one of many delegations who spoke in support of the proposal. I also represented a number of my neighbours and fellow Riverbank Drive residents who could not be present. I included some background and images of our street to give some context to the Regional Councillors but I suspect that our street needs no introduction to this Committee. I would like to state that I am very concerned about the fourth recommendation being presented to this Committee, namely that Cambridge Council request the Region of Waterloo to consider long range planning for the remaining lands outside the Urban Area along Riverbank Drive in a comprehensive way through the upcoming Municipal Comprehensive Review. At the Region s Planning and Works meeting last Tuesday, I made a presentation highlighting the many reasons why I do not support further development to the west of Riverbank Drive. I am concerned about the proximity of proposed development to the floodplain of the Grand River and other significant environmental features including woodland and wetland. I am concerned about the impact of increased traffic on Riverbank Drive which is Cambridge s last scenic route. The City s Heritage Master Plan states very clearly that this should be preserved and the East Side Lands Study has included this as a Guiding Principle from the start. I am concerned that development of the lands to the west of Riverbank Drive would necessitate the extension of municipal services which my family and the neighbours that I represent do not wish to connect to. I am concerned that development to the rear of 10 existing residences on Riverbank Drive would be extremely disruptive to me and my neighbours, bringing with it noise, dust and vibration during construction and light and noise pollution upon

4 completion. Not only that, but our privacy would be greatly compromised as the land to the rear is at a much lower elevation than the existing homes. The Planning Rationale Report produced by the consultants WSP gives background to the proposed new urban area boundary and highlights reasons why it is the preferred solution. It also details the many reasons why development west of Riverbank Drive is not. East Side Lands has been a long and expensive process. My fellow residents and I have offered our support for the proposed residential development which will take place directly across the street from our homes. Whilst we do not welcome development coming to our quiet rural pocket of Cambridge, we understand that the Region is growing and greenfield sites are necessary. We hope that we can continue to be engaged in the planning process to ensure that the new community is one that we can live in harmony with and that respects the existing qualities of Riverbank Drive. Subjecting the residents of Riverbank Drive to years of more expensive studies and analysis during the upcoming Municipal Comprehensive Review for the benefit of a few select landowners wishing to develop just doesn t seem right. I would like to see Cambridge City Council following through with its Heritage Master Plan to preserve Riverbank Drive and to that end I propose that the fourth and final recommendation is not accepted by the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide my input. Grainne Aitken

5 CORRESPONDENCE #2 From: Mark Kindrachuk Sent: Monday, May 7, :54 PM To: Elaine Brunn Shaw; Michelle Sergi Cc: Michelle Sergi; SANDY ACCHIONE; James Goodram; Rod Regier; Karl Kiefer; Kathy Padgett; Peter Markine; Tom Galloway Subject: Parcel 2 ONLY in Urban Boundary: MESP Stage 2 Elaine and Michelle: As a follow-up to our discussion at the PIC last week and my vmail message to Elaine from today, we are requesting that our Parcel 2, which is a 2.5 ha lot at the corner of Riverbank Drive and Allendale Road be included in the Urban Boundary as part of the on-going MESP Stage 2 process. We have reduced our request by removing Parcel 1, in addition to removing Parcel 3, from the Urban Boundary request. Our plan is to include Parcel 2 in the Urban Boundary now; and then re-zone in the future for residential uses with rear lane access. We reviewed this plan with the local City councillor (Donna Reid), James Goodram and local residents and they thought it was a very good compromise. This revised plan addresses the key issues: maintain scenic route quality of Riverbank Drive the rear lane lots do not increase traffic on Riverbank Drive Parcel 2 provides a buffer to industrial uses to Riverbank residents Parcel 2 with rear lane lots provides built-in separation to industrial uses by planning for deep lots with garages; as well as a laneway and fence Resolution to this issue now provides certainty to residents and developer

6 Sincerely, Mark Kindrachuk President Intermarket Properties 489 Queen Street East; Suite 201 Toronto, ON M5A 1V1

Re: Draft OPA 320 Recommended Amendments to Various Neighbourhood Policies Statutory Public Meeting to be held on Monday 16 November 2015

Re: Draft OPA 320 Recommended Amendments to Various Neighbourhood Policies Statutory Public Meeting to be held on Monday 16 November 2015 PG8.5.5 ANALOGICA George S. Belza Partner 9 Madeline Road Toronto, Ontario Canada M2N 2S7 T: 416 223 9584 F: 416 223 5665 E: belana@axxent.ca E-Mailed to: pgmc@toronto.ca Wednesday 04 November 2015 Planning