The regular meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee was held in the Council Chamber, Lobby Level.

Transcription

1 PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE JULY 15, 2014 The regular meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee was held in the Council Chamber, Lobby Level. PRESENT Morgan Lanigan, Chairman Andrew Miller, Vice Chairman Eric Falkjar, Third Executive Anne McShane Derrick Mitchell Dave Drinnan Keith Brideau Philip Hovey Mark Reade, Senior Planner, Growth & Community Development Jeff Cyr, Planner, Growth & Community Development Jody Kliffer, Planner, Growth & Community Development Lynda Lockhart, Recording Secretary, Growth & Community Development REGRETS Jen Parker Given there were a number of residents in attendance with respect to Item 3, the following motion was adopted: It was MOVED and SECONDED that Item 4 for 55 Latimore Lake Road be considered ahead of Item 3 for 11 King William Road. AMcS/DD Item 1: Minutes It was MOVED and SECONDED that the minutes of the June 17, 2014 meeting be approved as amended. EF/PH

2 July 15, 2014 Page: 2 Item 2: Somerset Investments Ltd. 600 Somerset Street Application Type: Section 39 Amendment Jody Kliffer advised the application is to amend the existing Section 39 conditions on the subject site to permit the establishment of a retail store. He indicated there are other businesses operating in the area and the vision of PlanSJ is that the area should transition into a retail corridor. Staff is recommending approval. Mark Hovey of Somerset Investments Ltd. appeared before the Committee and indicated he was in agreement with the recommendations as contained in the staff report. No one else appeared before the Committee. After considering the report, the presentation and discussions, the Committee resolved to adopt the recommendation based on the reasons as outlined in the staff report. It was MOVED and SECONDED that Common Council amend the Section 39 conditions imposed on the March 10, 1986, rezoning of the property located at 600 Somerset Street, also identified as PID Number , by permitting the establishment of a retail store. PH/AM Item 4: City of Saint John 55 Latimore Lake Road Application Type: Rezoning to US Utility and Service Mark Reade advised the application is to rezone a 41 hectare portion of the 141 hectare site from RS-2 One and Two Family Suburban Residential and RS-2M One and Two Family and Mobile Home Suburban Residential to US Utility and Service to permit construction of a Water Treatment Facility. Staff are recommending approval of the rezoning subject to a number of conditions. Dean Price, Project Manager for Clean Safe Drinking Water Project for The City of Saint John appeared before the Committee and indicated he was in favour of the recommendations as contained in the staff report. No one else appeared before the Committee.

3 July 15, 2014 Page: 3 After considering the report, the presentation and discussions the Committee resolved to adopt the recommendation based on the reasons as outlined in the staff report. It was MOVED and SECONDED 1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land having an area of approximately 40.6 hectares, located at 55 Latimore Lake Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No , from RS-2 One and Two Family Suburban Residential and RS-2M One and Two Family and Mobile Home Suburban Residential to US Utility and Service 2. That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of the parcel of land having an area of approximately 40.6 hectares, located at 55 Latimore Lake Road, also identified as being a portion of PID No , be subject to the following conditions: a. The use of the area to be rezoned to US Utility and Service be limited to the use of a water treatment facility and associated structures; b. Any development of the site be in accordance with a detailed site plan and building elevations, to be prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, indicating the location of all buildings, structures, parking areas, driveways, loading areas, signs, exterior lighting, outdoor storage areas, landscaped areas, areas of existing tree retention, other site features, exterior building materials and finishes, and relevant site statistics including lot coverage; c. Any development of the site be in accordance with a detailed landscaping plan, to be prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, indicating the location of all proposed landscaping features, including types of planting materials, on the site; d. That the approved plans mentioned in conditions (b) and (c) above must be attached to the application for a building permit for the development and that no permits, other than site preparation permits, be issued until the Development Officer has approved the Plans; e. The proponent s engineering consultant must submit a detailed site plan indicating the proposed location and width of the driveway access to the City for review and approval. In addition, the proponent s traffic engineering consultant must provide comment on the suitability of any proposed access to the site.

4 July 15, 2014 Page: 4 f. The proponent s engineering consultant must submit a detailed stormwater management plan and design brief for the proposed development to the City for review and approval. g. Any required extension of municipal infrastructure to service this facility is the full responsibility and cost of the proponent to complete. The proponent s engineering consultant must submit detailed engineering drawings for any service extensions to the City for review and approval. Confirmation by the proponent s engineering consultant that this proposal does not exceed the current capacity of the existing systems must be submitted to the City for review and approval. h. Should chlorine gas be utilized at the facility for disinfection, the standard cylinders containing approximately 907 kg be used to mitigate the potential of a large scale leak, which will not trigger a setback from property lines. Should a disinfection approach other than chlorine gas be used, such approach shall be subject to a risk assessment prepared by the proponent and reviewed and approved by planning staff and the City s industrial land use consultant. i. All site improvements shown on the approved plans for the development, except for landscaping, must be completed prior to the opening of the facility, and the landscaping must be completed within one year of the building permit approval. AMcS/EF Item 3: Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. 11 King William Road Application Type: Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning application to permit the development of a light industrial park It was noted that Common Council had received three letters and a petition signed by 56 residents opposed to the application, in addition to three letters of opposition addressed to the Planning Advisory Committee. Jeff Cyr provided an overview of the application via a Power Point presentation indicating the application is for a Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the subject site which is approximately 16 hectares located in close proximity to the Spruce Lake Industrial Park and poses no environmental constraints for development. The subject site was previously approved for a large scale residential development in 2010, since then there has been some deforestation and one single

5 July 15, 2014 Page: 5 family home has been constructed. There are two nearby residential areas, Ocean Westway and Birchwood Place. The applicant is proposing to develop a 15 lot Light Industrial Park to be accessed by a proposed public street which would intersect King William Road. The applicant has proposed a 30 metre treed buffer along the northern portion boundary of the site; in addition they would replant trees in the areas that had been clear cut. It is proposed that the permitted uses of the Light Industrial Zone be limited to uses that are generally contained in a building and do not provide significant nuisances to adjacent properties. Mr. Cyr noted that the Municipal Plan provides direction for the assessment of amendments to the future land use map as outlined in Policy LU-4. Three of the criteria are deemed particularly critical to this application namely; that it is necessary by virtue of a lack of supply of quality land already designated in the Municipal Plan to accommodate the development; that it enhances the community and the quality of life offered to residents of the City; and that it does not negatively impact the use and enjoyment of adjacent lands and neighbourhoods. Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. commissioned two studies which demonstrate due to loss of land in both Spruce Lake and McAllister Industrial Parks, there are significant constraints to the availability of industrial land. Mr. Cyr commented that a public presentation was held on April 28 th and received three letters of opposition one of which contained fifty-six signatures. The notice of the Plan Amendment and Rezoning were advertised in the Telegraph Journal on July 8, 2014 and will be advertised once again on July 29 th. Mr. Cyr indicated there were fifty-four letters were sent out to property owners on June 27 th. In addition the applicant had notified property owners within 100 metres of the subject property through a 2-page mail out in May and responded to neighbours comments and concerns on an individual basis following the mail out. Mr. Cyr summarized that staff are recommending approval of the Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning subject to conditions as outlined in the staff report. Brian Irving, General Manager Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. appeared before the Committee indicating he had reviewed the staff report and all the letters of objections/concerns. He indicated the application is to develop a light industrial park on the subject site and while the area attracted interest because of the potential cost-savings due to its proximity to the highway and its access to existing water and wastewater services, and expressed empathy with the adjacent property owners. Mr. Irving responded the application was as a result of current land constraints which limit Saint John Industrial Parks in fulfilling its mandate of attracting businesses, creating jobs, and increasing the tax base.

6 July 15, 2014 Page: 6 With respect to the concerns expressed in the letters and petition, Mr. Irving indicated that Ocean Westway is a no truck route and did not feel truck traffic would increase. With respect to hours of operation, light industrial park tenants operate during normal business hours 5-6 days per week. Mr. Irving responded to questions from the Committee indicating that a previous attempt to purchase additional lands from the Province of New Brunswick in the Spruce Lake area was unsuccessful. Doug Young of 56 Birchwood Place, Dave O Toole of 51 Birchwood Place, Paul O Donnell of 63 Birchwood Place, Scott Nordstrom of 45 Birchwood Place, Abigail Lomax of 21 Birchwood Place, and Nora Sullivan O Toole of 51 Birchwood Place appeared before the Committee to speak in opposition to the rezoning application expressing concerns respecting noise, truck traffic and road safety, environmental emissions, light emanating from industrial properties and the belief that the subject property is best suited for residential development. Wayne McGaughey of 9 King William Road appeared before the Committee in favour of the application. He expressed support of the proposal stating that Saint John Industrial Parks has a great track record and would provide a quality development. No other persons appeared before the Committee. The Planning Advisory Committee discussed the application at length and expressed concerns with the appropriateness of light industrial development in this location and identified the Highway (Route 1) as being the ideal barrier for industrial development in the Spruce Lake Industrial Park. The Committee raised concerns regarding the inability of SJIP and the Province to reach an agreement on the sale of land in the Spruce Lake Industrial Park and recommended that this sale be further explored prior to a decision that would approve the proposed light industrial park. The Committee also discussed the possibility of Council approving the Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning and recommended additional conditions in event of an approval. After considering the report, the comments made by the applicant and area residents, and the attached letters, the Committee resolved to adopt a motion recommending denial of the application. The Committee adopted two additional motions which provided further recommendations addressing the aforementioned concerns. It was MOVED and SECONDED that the Planning Advisory Committee recommends to Council, denial of the application based on the following reasons:

7 July 15, 2014 Page: 7 i. The proposed land use is not in line with the vision of PlanSJ or the Land Use for that area; ii. The proposal is not sufficiently consistent with the Policy LU-4 which would support a Municipal Plan Amendment; and iii. Overall, Light Industrial (I-1) not being the appropriate use for this property. NAY EF/PH ML It was MOVED and SECONDED In the event that Council approves the application, that they add additional conditions which require a traffic study; increased buffering and density of plantings subject to the approval of the Development Officer; limiting the list of permitted uses to Business Support Service, Contractor Service Household, Distribution Facility, Equipment Sales and Rental, Heavy, Light Industrial Use, Redemption Centre, Research and Development Facility, Sales Centre, Model Home, Self-Storage Facility, Special Industrial Use, Warehouse Facility; limiting access to adjacent lands subject to the approval of the Development Officer and the Chief City Engineer or his designate; and that a covenant be placed on the land to limit the property to light industrial. NAY AMcS/AM PH It was MOVED and SECONDED That alternatives with the Province be urgently explored, particularly any opportunities to purchase land from the Province in the Spruce Lake Industrial Park and that it be considered prior to any decisions on the staff recommendation. NAY DD/KB EF Philip Hovey left the meeting. Item 5: Request for August Special Meeting: Recommendation on Municipal Plan (PlanSJ) Amendments and the final Draft Zoning By-law (ZoneSJ) The Committee reviewed a letter from Stacey Forfar advising that on July 7, 2014 Common Council approved referring the proposed housekeeping amendments to the Municipal Plan (PlanSJ) and the final draft Zoning By-law (ZoneSJ) to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation ahead of the formal Public Hearing scheduled for September 8, 2014.

8 July 15, 2014 Page: 8 Given the nature of this public meeting and the importance of the matter to the community, staff is suggesting that the Planning Advisory Committee set a special meeting date for this item in August, with a holding date closely thereafter should it be needed to ensure due process. It was MOVED and SECONDED that the Planning Advisory Committee schedule a Special Meeting for Wednesday August 20, 2014 to hear from the community and provide a recommendation to Council with respect to the housekeeping amendments for the Municipal Plan (PlanSJ) and the final draft of the Zoning By-law (ZoneSJ) and that Thursday, August 21, 2014 be reserved if needed. Item 6: AMcS/EF Status of Staff s Directives Mark Reade reviewed the recent changes made to the staff directives to include direction from the Committee at the June 17, 2014 meeting. It was MOVED and SECONDED that the report be received and filed. AMcS/AM Item 7: Planning Advisory Committee Rules of Procedure It was suggested as there were two Committee members absent, the report be tabled. It was MOVED and SECONDED that the revisions to the Rules of Procedure be tabled until the August 19, 2014 meeting. NAY EF/AM AMcS There being no further business, the meeting adjourned 8:27 at p.m. Morgan Lanigan Chairman Lynda Lockhart Recording Secretary