August 27, 2013, at 4:09 PM

Original link

The Council meets in Regular Session in the Council Chambers this day at 4:09 PM.

I.   DISCLOSURES

OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

Councillor M. Brown discloses a pecuniary interest in clause 13 of the 18th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee and the related Bill No. 382, having to do with an application by the City of London relating to Day Care Centres in schools, by indicating that he is employed by the Thames Valley District School Board.  Councillor M. Brown further discloses a pecuniary interest in clause 2 of the 22nd Report of the Corporate Services Committee, having to do with Sherwood Forest Public School, by indicating that he is employed by the Thames Valley District School Board.  Councillor M. Brown further discloses a pecuniary interest in clause C-1 of the Confidential Appendix to the 22nd Report of the Corporate Services Committee, having to do with a matter pertaining to the purpose of instructions and directions to officers and employees of the Corporation pertaining to a proposed acquisition of land; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose; reports or advice or recommendations of officers and employees of the Corporation pertaining to a proposed acquisition of land; commercial and financial information supplied in confidence pertaining to the proposed acquisition the disclosure of which  could reasonably be expected to, prejudice significantly the competitive position or interfere significantly with the contractual or other negotiations of the Corporation, result in similar information no longer being supplied to the Corporation where it is in the public interest that similar information continue to be so supplied, and result in undue loss or gain to any person, group, committee or financial institution or agency; commercial, information relating to the proposed acquisition that belongs to the Corporation that has monetary value or potential monetary value; information concerning the proposed acquisition whose disclosure could reasonably be expected to prejudice the economic interests of the Corporation or its competitive position; information concerning the proposed acquisition whose disclosure could reasonably be expected to be injurious to the financial interests of the Corporation; and instructions to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the Corporation concerning the proposed acquisition, by indicating that he is employed by the Thames Valley District School Board.

Councillor J.P. Bryant discloses a pecuniary interest in clause 18 of the 18th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee, having to do with the application by the City of London with respect to secondary dwelling units, by indicating that her house contains a secondary dwelling unit.

Councillor B. Polhill discloses a pecuniary interest in clause 16 of the 18th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee, having to do with the application by the City of London relating to the Veterans Memorial Parkway, by indicating that the roadway expansion goes past the front door of his business.

Councillor N. Branscombe discloses a pecuniary interest in clause 16 of the 18th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee, having to do with the application by the City of London relating to the Veterans Memorial Parkway, by indicating that her spouse owns and operates a business at Oxford Street/Veterans Memorial Parkway.

II.   REVIEW OF

CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED IN PUBLIC

III.   ADDED

REPORTS

IV.   COMMITTEE

OF THE WHOLE, IN CAMERA

MOTION FOR IN CAMERA SESSION

Moved by Councillor D. Brown

Seconded by Councillor P. Hubert

Approve that Council rise and go into Committee of the Whole in camera, for the purpose of considering the following:

V.   RECOGNITIONS

1.   Councillor D. Brown

  • Enquiry - 425 Wharncliffe Road South

Councillor D. Brown enquired as to how the methadone clinic being operated at 425 Wharncliffe Road South can do so without fulfilling zoning and licensing requirements.  The Development & Compliance Services staff and the City Solicitor were requested to report back to the Planning and Environment Committee as to what actions, if any, that could be taken to ensure that both the conditions of zoning approval and licensing requirements are met.

2.   City Clerk - 2nd

and 3rd Reports of the 2013 Council Compensation Review Task Force

That the 2nd and 3rd Reports of the 2013 Council Compensation Review Task Force, from its meetings held on July 26, 2013 and August 7, 2013 BE RECEIVED.

VI.   CONFIRMATION

AND SIGNING OF THE MINUTES OF THE THIRTEENTH MEETING HELD ON JULY 30, 2013

Moved by Councillor P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by Councillor D. Brown

Approve the Minutes of the 13th Meeting held on July 30, 2013.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

VII.   COMMUNICATIONS

AND PETITIONS

Moved by Councillor D. Brown

Seconded by Councillor P. Hubert

Approve referral of the following communications for consideration with the noted clauses:

3.   Managing Director,

Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer - Strategic Change in Delivery of Development Charge Exemptions and Incentives Policies

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, the following actions be taken with respect to Development Charge (DC) Exemptions Policy for the 2014 Development Charges Study:   a)         the following Development Charge exemptions outlined in the current Development Charges By-law BE MAINTAINED for the 2014 Development Charges By-law:               i)          all mandatory statutory DC exemptions:   A.         expansions of existing industrial buildings to the extent reflected in the Development Charges Act (generally up to 50%); B.         municipal and school board buildings; and, C.        construction of additional dwelling units, as prescribed in the DC Act regulations.               ii)         a parking building or structure;               iii)         a bona fide non-residential farm building;   iv)        a structure that does not have municipal water and sanitary facilities and that is intended for seasonal use only;   v)         a temporary garden suite installed in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act, as amended; and, vi)        an air supported structure or arch framed structure clad with fabric-type material, temporary in nature, the purpose of which is to provide indoor facilities for recreational and sports activities owned and operated by a non-profit organization for public use;   it being noted that the above exemptions maintain existing City policy, and are for uses that have no perceptible impact on growth infrastructure requirements;   b)         the City Planner BE DIRECTED to prepare or amend Community Improvement Plans (CIPs), listed in order of priority, for the following forms and areas of development to provide the basis for providing grants to individuals for a portion of, or all of, development charges paid:   i)          existing exemptions/grants/discounts to be provided for in CIPs effective on the effective date of the 2014 Development Charges By-law (no later than August 4, 2014):   A.         residential units, Downtown Area, Old East Village Area, and SoHo Area; B.         new industrial buildings and expansions not exempt by statute, city-wide; and, C.        hospitals, universities, places of worship/cemeteries and not-for-profit organizations that are exempt from taxation by the Assessment Act, city-wide (currently 50% of CSRF rate exempted).   ii)         new grant to be considered for adoption in a CIP following Council adoption of the 2014 Development Charges By-law:   A.         small businesses/minor commercial expansion, city-wide;   it being noted that the staff report dated August 26, 2013 outlines the implementation plan for bringing forward these CIPs for Council consideration, including input opportunities from interested stakeholders;   it being further noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee heard the attached presentation from P. Christiaans, Director, Development Finance, with respect to this matter.

4.   Managing Director,

Planning and City Planner - ReThink London Discussion Papers - What We’ve Heard

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the report dated August 26, 2013 with respect to public feedback regarding the ReThink London discussion papers BE RECEIVED; it being noted that the Corporate Services Committee heard the attached presentation from G. Barrett, Manager III, Land Use Planning Policy, with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

VIII.   MOTIONS OF WHICH

NOTICE IS GIVEN

IX.   REPORTS

Moved by Councillor B. Polhill

Approve clauses 1 to 22, excluding clauses 4, 13,16 and 18.

5.   Ontario Lottery and

Gaming Corporation (OLG) - Broader Plan for Gaming within Municipalities

That the delegation from P. Pellizzari, Executive Director of Policy and Social Responsibility, J. Pastore, Director of Municipal and Community Relations and T. Bitonti, Senior Manager of Media Relations, Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation, with respect to the OLG’s broader plan for gaming within municipalities, and the Municipal Council resolution adopted at its meeting held on June 11, 2013 with respect to this matter, BE RECEIVED.

6.   Project Proposal

for the Pottersburg Brownfield

Recommendation:  That the attached presentation from B. Welton, Principal Consultant, ACE Partnerships Inc., with respect to the Pottersburg Brownfield project proposal, BE FORWARDED to the Civic Administration for further review and possible advancement.

7.   Municipality

Contribution Agreement - Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation

Recommendation:  That the following actions be taken with respect to a Municipality Contribution Agreement:   a)         the by-law appended to the staff report dated August 26, 2013 BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on August 27, 2013, to:   i)      approve the Municipal Contribution Agreement (Schedule A) and;   ii)     authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute an amended Municipality Contribution Agreement between the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (OLG) and the City of London, with respect to casino revenue; and,   b)         the City Manager BE DIRECTED to identify a designated staff liaison between the Western Fair District, the OLG and the City of London.

Moved by Councillor J.L. Baechler

Approve clauses 1 to 4, inclusive.

8.   Contract Award:

York Street/Richmond Street and York Street/Talbot Street Traffic Signal Rebuilds Single Source and Irregular Bid (Tender No. T13-71)

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the following actions be taken with respect to awarding the York Street/Richmond Street and York Street/Talbot Street Traffic Signal Rebuilds:   a)         the bid submitted by CRU Solutions Inc., 180 Whiting Street, Unit B, Ingersoll, N5C 3B5, at its submitted tendered price of $378,994.00 (excluding HST) for the York Street/Richmond Street and York Street/Talbot Street traffic signal rebuilds BE ACCEPTED; it being noted that the bid submitted by CRU Solutions Inc. was the only complete bid received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements in all areas;   b)         the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report appended to the staff report dated August 19, 2013;   c)         the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;   d)         the approval given herein BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract or issuing a purchase order for the material to be supplied and the work to be done relating to this project (Tender 13-71); and,   e)         the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations.  (2013-L04)

9.   Greenway Wastewater

Treatment Plant Rotating Drum Thickner Engineering Project No. ES5084-11

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the following actions be taken with respect to the additional engineering fees for the Greenway Wastewater Treatment Rotating Drum Thickener Project:   a)         the engineering fees for R.V. Anderson Associates Limited BE INCREASED by $68,436.50 which includes a 10% contingency and excludes HST, in accordance with the estimate, on file, to carry out additional engineering design and contract administration, based upon the Fee Guideline for Professional Engineering Services, 2006, recommended by the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers, and in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;  it being noted that a change in project scope is required to address building deficiencies and to custom design an operating system which will enable savings of $150,000 in construction costs;   b)         the financing for the engineering fees BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report appended to the staff report dated August 19, 2013;   c)         the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;   d)         the approvals given herein BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract or issuing a purchase order for the work to be done relating to this project; and,   e)         the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations.  (2013-L04)

10.   Gore Road Bridge

Replacement Detailed Deign and Tendering Appointment of Consulting Engineer

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Roads and Transportation, the following actions be taken with respect to the appointment of a Consulting Engineer for the Gore Road Bridge (4-BR-15) Replacement Project (TS1214):   a)         Dillon Consulting Limited, 130 Dufferin Avenue, London, On, N6A 5R2, BE APPOINTED Consulting Engineers for the detailed design and tendering for the Gore Road Bridge Replacement Project at an upset amount of $378,037.00 (excluding H.S.T.); it being noted that this firm has provided a proposal for consultant engineering services, in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy and based upon the fee Guideline for Professional Engineering Services, recommended by the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers;   b)         the financing for this project BE APPROVED in accordance with the Sources of Financing Report appended to the staff report dated August 19, 2013;   c)         the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;   d)         the approvals given herein BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract with the Consultant for the work; and,   e)         the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations.  (2013-A05)

11.   Highbury Avenue

over CN Rail Bridge Rehabilitation Detailed Design and Tendering-Appointment of Consulting Engineer

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Roads and Transportation, the following actions be taken with respect to the appointment of a Consulting Engineer for the Highbury Avenue over CN Rail Bridge (4-BR-09) Rehabilitation Project (TS1763-12):   a)         Stantec Consulting Ltd., 600-170 Queens Avenue, London, On, N6A 5J7,  BE APPOINTED Consulting Engineers for the detailed design and tendering of the Highbury Avenue Bridge Rehabilitation Project at an upset amount of $134,692.00 (excluding H.S.T.); it being noted that this firm has provided a proposal for consultant engineering services, in accordance with Section 15.2 (d) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy and based upon the fee Guideline for Professional Engineering Services, recommended by the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers;   b)         the financing for this project BE APPROVED in accordance with the Sources of Financing Report appended to the staff report dated August 19, 2013;   c)         the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;   d)         the approvals given herein BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract with the Consultant for the work; and,   e)         the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations.  (2013-A05)

12.   Amendments to the

Traffic and Parking By-law.

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated August 19, 2013 BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on August 27, 2013 for the purpose of amending the Traffic and Parking By-law (P.S. 111).  (2013-C01)

14.   Property located at

1166 Hamilton Road

That, on the recommendation of the Manager, Development Services and Planning Liaison, the following actions be taken with respect to the site plan approval application for an apartment building by JLC Homes Ltd., relating to the property located at 1166 Hamilton Road:   a)         the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that there were no issues raised at the public participation meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee with respect to the application for site plan approval; and,   b)         the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council supports the site plan application for a four storey apartment building with 23 units.    (2013-D11)

15.   Veterans Memorial

Parkway South Extension (OZ-8195)

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of the City of London, relating to amendments to the City’s Official Plan and Zoning By-law for the Veterans Memorial Parkway South Extension:   a)         the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated August 20, 2013, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on August 27, 2013, to amend Schedule “C” Transportation Corridors, of the Official Plan to add “Freeway” to an extension of the Veterans Memorial Parkway from Highway 401 to Wilton Grove Road to implement the recommendations of the Veterans Memorial Parkway Extension and Highway 401 Interchange Improvements Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR); and,   b)         the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated August 20, 2013, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on August 27, 2013, to amend Section 4.21 Road Allowance Requirements – Specific Roads of Zoning By-law Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan as amended in part a), above), to add Veterans Memorial Parkway as a “Freeway” with a 30m limit of allowance (measured from the centerline) in Section 4.21 Road Allowance Requirements – Specific Roads of the Z.-1 Zoning By-law;   it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public  participation meeting associated with this matter.   (2013-D14A)

17.   Property located at

982 Gainsborough Road (Z-8178)

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of Highland Communities Ltd., relating to the property located at 982 Gainsborough Road:   a)         the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated August 20, 2013, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on August 27, 2013 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Holding Business District Commercial (h-17BDC1/BDC2) Zone, which provides for and regulates a mix of retail, restaurant, neighbourhood facility, office and residential uses located along pedestrian-oriented business districts in older parts of the City and an Urban Reserve (UR3) Zone which permits existing dwellings, agricultural uses (except for mushroom farms, commercial greenhouses livestock facilities and manure storage facilities), conservation lands, managed woodlot, wayside pit, passive recreation use, kennels, private outdoor recreation clubs, riding stables and a Holding Urban Reserve (h-2UR3) Zone, which permits the same range of uses as the UR3 zone subject to a holding provision which requires the submission of an Environmental Impact Study or Subject Lands Status Report to determine the extent to which development may be permitted TO a Holding Business District Commercial (h-11h-17BDC1/BDC2) Zone and a Holding Residential R9 Special Provision (h-5h-11h-17*R9-7()H50) Zone, to permit apartment buildings, lodging house class 2, senior citizens apartment buildings, handicapped persons apartment buildings and continuum-of-care facilities up to a maximum height of 50m (15 storeys) and a density of 150 units per hectare; a special provision is recommended to allow for the reduction of the easterly side yard to 12m and a maximum projection into the required yard for apartment balconies to a maximum of 3m; the use of three holding provisions is required in order to ensure that access and sanitary servicing concerns are addressed before the development of the site and that the site plan will be reviewed through a public process;   b)         the Site Plan Approval Authority, BE REQUESTED to address the following items through the site plan approval process:   i)              ensure pedestrian paths are situated to maximize their direct and continuous connection with pedestrian paths in the commercially zoned portion of the site to the north; ii)             detail the design of the ‘hard landscape space’ north of the podium component to create a ‘forecourt’ shared space linking  the lobby entrance with the service road through the use of continuous paving treatments and landscaped features positioned to delineate vehicular and pedestrian pathways;   iii)            position the lobby entrance, a public art installation, or significant landscape element to create a view terminus, visible from Gainsborough Road, aligned with the internal road connecting the residential portion of the site with Gainsborough Road; iv)           minimize surface parking and ensure all parking visible from the ‘service road’ is screened to emphasize the pedestrian quality in the north part of the residentially zoned portion of the site; v)            ensure siting and construction of the apartment buildings is consistent with the conceptual site plan and elevations/renderings included as Appendix “B”; vi)           the Owner shall grant a municipal easement of an appropriate size and alignment, consistent with the rear lane concept identified in the Hyde Park Community Plan, for public access across this site, all to the satisfaction of the City; and, vii)          minimize the potential impacts of the underground parking entrance, garbage facilities, lighting and other potential impacts on neighbouring properties;   c)         the request to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1 to change the zoning of the subject property FROM an Urban Reserve (UR3) Zone and a Holding Urban Reserve (h-2UR3) Zone, which permits existing dwellings, agricultural uses except for mushroom farms, commercial greenhouses livestock facilities and manure storage facilities, conservation lands, managed woodlot, wayside pit, passive recreation use, kennels, private outdoor recreation clubs and riding stables TO a Holding Residential R9 Special Provision (R9-7()*H50) Zone, to permit apartment buildings, lodging house class 2, senior citizens apartment buildings, handicapped persons apartment buildings and continuum-of-care facilities with a special provision to allow for the reduction of the easterly side yard to maximum of 12m and maximum projection for the apartment’s balconies into the required yards to a maximum of 3m BE REFUSED for the following reasons:   i)             the City of London’s Transportation Department has concerns about the proposed access to this site in relation to the proximity of the intersection of Gainsborough Road and Coronation Drive and is requesting a holding provision until the submitted Transportation Impact Analysis is updated to address this matter; and, ii)            the City of London’s Wastewater and Drainage Engineering Division also has concerns regarding how the south portion of the property will be serviced as the future servicing for the subject site is have not been built in and will be located over adjacent lands to the east which is not owned by the applicant;   it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received the following communications with respect to this matter:   -                     a communication dated August 12, 2013 from C. Creighton, Land Use Planner, Upper Thames River Conservation Authority; and, -                     a communication dated August 19, 2013 from K. & M. Johnson, 1108-1035 Coronation Drive;   it being pointed out that at the public participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals made oral submissions in connection therewith:   -                     M. Pease, IBI Group, on behalf of the applicant – see attached presentation. -                     Shelly McKeen, 1009-1030 Coronation Drive – advising that it appears that there have been no negotiations through the City for the undeveloped land owned by other land owners; expressing concern with a development of this size, on a property of this size, which she believes is approximately 6.5 acres; indicating that it is within the guidelines; however it seems like a huge development on a small piece of land; advising that they see traffic problems on Hyde Park Road now; reiterating that the north part of Hyde Park Road will not be completed until 2015; indicating that there is a proposal for land use change at the corner of Coronation Drive and South Carriage Way; noting that she has not read the reports on this proposal; indicating that if the land use change proposal is to go ahead there will be a bigger influx of traffic; advising that she would really like to see the City consider the traffic in the north end; advising that Gainsborough Road and Hyde Park Road are very busy now; indicating that they cannot access Hyde Park Road from South Carriage Road easily on the weekdays from 7:00 AM to approximately 9:00 AM; advising that there is no stop light and there are no cross walks; indicating that there is a park for public use to the west but she cannot access the park without putting her life at risk trying to cross the street; advising that she has asked the City before to install traffic lights and/or a crosswalk; indicating that she does not see anything being presented immediately; advising that Hyde Park does have an Official Plan; indicating that the housing is currently low and medium density; indicating that she lives in a high rise and she understands high rise development and sees how the City clusters high rises so she understands how this proposal will start a cluster of high rises in the Hyde Park area; advising that she really wants the City to think about the transportation and the access for the public now; indicating that she understands that the people residing on South Carriage Way are upset with the traffic going through their subdivisions. -                     Dan Foster, 509-1030 Coronation Drive – indicating that he recently moved to London from Ottawa; indicating that, after seeing the development in Ottawa, there is a message for City of London Planners; advising that the message is that, in that taking the individual zoning requests on a case by case basis, they all make sense; advising that they all incrementally add a little bit of traffic; indicating that there are safety issues that need to be addressed now; noting that Hyde Park Road will be developed by 2015; advising that there is no stop light on South Carriage Road; indicating that he does not see how people move around in this subdivision; noting as an example, that to the west of their building, Tricar had originally received zoning to build a building complimentary to their building; advising that there is a woodlot, from their point of view, right where Coronation Drive stops; indicating that there are turkeys and deer in the woodlot even though it has not been deemed significant; enquiring as to when the City advises them of what the plan is for Coronation Drive; hearing nothing about making South Carriage Drive safer today; advising that every time he tries to get out of the laneway, he takes his life into his hands; advising that it is an accident waiting to happen; indicating that this is all hours of the day, not just 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM; indicating that if he was a resident living in the rest of the subdivision, he would wonder why, when the residents of 1030 Coronation Drive want to come west, they come through their subdivision; indicating that that seems like a pretty poor plan; noting that there are traffic calming measures in that subdivision, including a traffic circle; advising that there are all kinds of kids running through there; admitting that he does not feel comfortable driving through the subdivision or even going out Wonderland Road South, towards the University; advising that if he takes Coronation Drive out, he has a 10 minute wait and he is taking his life into his hands; indicating that the site plan makes sense by putting the building in the back of the lot; advising that the residents at 1030 Coronation Drive should have some input into the detailed planning of the services; indicating that the applicant has done a good job angling the apartments so that the people living there will have unobstructed views all the time but they have obstructed their views and he lives on that side of the building; understanding the density issues, but he does not want to have to listen to all the noise of people moving in and out of the units and garbage collection; indicating that the applicant needs to do a better job of setting garbage collection on the other side so that it lines up with the commercial nature which is in and out anyway; noting that, if the garbage collection area is moved, the applicant would not have to worry about a berm; and requesting that the staff figure out what they doing with Coronation Drive and make that raceway complete. -                     Donna Szpakowski, Chair, Hyde Park Business Association – expressing support for the zoning amendment from Urban Reserve to High Density as this property was already identified as being high density in the 1999 Hyde Park Community Plan; noting that this supports the Hyde Park Community Plan, which was created with over 600 residents involved; indicating that the Hyde Park Community Plan speaks to increasing the residential population in the Hyde Park hamlet, which supports the growth and sustenance of local businesses in the area; expressing support for the holding provisions that Councillor M. Brown will be putting forward tonight as they pertains to the commencement of construction for these lands; hoping that a holding provision will be added for the 2014-2015 Hyde Park Road widening and its impact on residents, businesses, vehicles, pedestrians and safety, along with existing road safety concerns that they have attempted to lobby for; advising that, at this time, Hyde Park Road does not have the infrastructure to logistically or safely sustain traffic due to construction or increased residential counts until the Hyde Park Road widening has been completed and there is a loop that takes people off of Hyde Park Road and Gainsborough Road; expressing agreement with the comments made by Mr. D. Foster that the community is very involved in how access is gained, how noise is handled and such large additions to their community; indicating that Hyde Park’s character and vision was built into the Community Plan and the Hyde Park Business Association maintains that the hamlet of Hyde Park, which they envision as east and west along Gainsborough Road would be compromised by more than three high rises with the lands to be designated high density now or in the future within the hamlet; and advising that what they are asking is that if they have to have three high rises, that for the sake of the hamlet and for the sake of the visioning of the Hyde Park area that it be limited just to three. -                     Apple Dobbin, 976 Gainsborough Road – expressing concern with the volume of traffic on Hyde Park Road and Gainsborough Road as both roads are very busy now; indicating that, if a new road is going to be added for the two new apartment buildings, it is going to make things much worse; indicating that, if they only have to make turns out and in, it is going to be very troubling to a lot of people; advising that the traffic situation is one that is very essential and has to be looked at very carefully and essentially for all the people who live around that little area; enquiring as to where the road is being installed; and reiterating that the roads are very dangerous for the traffic along Gainsborough Road and Hyde Park Side Road.   -                     Michelle Doornbosch, Zelinka Priamo Ltd., on behalf of Marquis Holdings Inc. – indicating that the dental office is located directly west of the subject site; advising that the building was constructed in 2006; wanting to ensure that the long-term viability of their property is maintained; indicating that, with all the traffic comments that have been made, there has been no mention of the existing entrance into the dental office; indicating that the applicant’s presentation outlines a blocked in entrance to the property directly to the west of the dental office; noting that this is not entirely accurate as the applicant shows the building on the property line; advising that the entrance to the dental office is directly adjacent to the proposed entrance at Gainsborough Road; advising that there is no mention in the staff report or the traffic impact analysis as to how that is to be handled; advising that she met with the developer last week to  outline their concerns; noting that she has not seen any updated plans as to how that is to be addressed; indicating that she does support the h-11 and the h-5 holding provisions to ensure that access can be addressed and this is a public site plan process; advising that she wants to ensure that their clients concerns are addressed through the process; indicating that they looked at the development agreement for the property from 2006; noting that there is provision in it for joint access, but there is no provision to require the existing entrance to close; reiterating that their biggest concern is that the two entrances cannot function as they are shown on the plan; hoping that some revisions can be made so that there are no impacts from this proposed development on the existing traffic patterns to that entrance.    (2013-D14A)

19.   Proposed

Stoneycreek Pathway

The S. Evoy, 29 Stoneycreek Crescent, BE GRANTED delegation status at the September 24, 2013 Planning and Environment Committee meeting with respect to the proposed Stoneycreek Pathway.  (2013-R04)

20.   Tricar Subdivision

(Phase 2) - 39T-11504

That C. Linton, Norquay Sunningdale Land Corp. BE DENIED delegation status at a future Planning and Environment Committee meeting with respect to the Tricar Subdivision, Phase 2, as there is an existing policy and process in place with respect to this matter.

21.   Near-Campus

Neighbourhood Amendments (Z-8218)

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner and the Managing Director, Development and Compliance Services & Chief Building Official, the following actions be taken with respect to city-wide Zoning By-law and minor variance applications relating to Near-Campus Neighbourhood amendments:   a)            the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner BE DIRECTED to prepare Zoning By-law amendments to:   i)          amend Section 2 of the Zoning By-law to modify the Parking Area definition to exclude Private Garages from the parking area calculation; ii)         amend Section 4.19. of the Zoning By-law to require that Private Garages located in the rear yard are to be regulated as accessory uses as set out in Subsection 4.1 of the Zoning By-law when a Private Garage is an accessory structure; and, iii)         amend Section 5.3 and Table 5.3 of the Zoning By-law Z.-1 to permit 1.2m interior side yard depths for all Residential R1-1 to R1-5 and R1-12 to R1-13 variations while requiring that one side yard depth be a minimum of 3.0m where no private garage is attached to the dwelling;   b)         a special meeting of the Planning and Environment meeting be convened on Monday, September 16, 2013 at 3:00 PM for the purpose of holding a public participation meeting in connection with the proposed Zoning By-law amendment referred to in clause a), above; and,   c)         the actions taken by Civic Administration to initiate Minor Variance applications for various lots zoned Residential R1-1 to R1-5 and R1-12 to R1-13 to seek relief from the regulations of the Zoning By-law pertaining to the interior side yard depth BE ENDORSED.   (2013-D14A)

22.   Property located at

13 Blackfriars Street

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the report dated August 20, 2013, relating to the property located at 13 Blackfriars Street BE RECEIVED. (2013-L01/R01)

13.   The Great Lakes

Sewage Report Card 2013

That the Civic Works Committee received a presentation from the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer and the Director, Water and Wastewater, with respect to the Great Lakes Sewage Report Card 2013 prepared by Ecojustice; it being noted that the Civic Works Committee was advised that while the Report Card is a tool to assist with identifying issues with wastewater management, it did not clearly reflect both the positive improvements completed by the City of London nor future improvements planned by the City of London with respect to this matter.

Moved by Councillor J.B. Swan

Approve clauses 1 to 7, inclusive.

16.   Veterans Memorial

Parkway (Z-8194)

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with respect to the application of the City of London for amendments to the City’s Zoning By-law for the Veterans Memorial Parkway, the following actions be taken:   a)            the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated August 20, 2013, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on August 27, 2013, to amend Section 4.21 Road Allowance Requirements – Specific Roads of Zoning By-law Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to add, amend, delete various streets in Section 4.21 Road Allowance Requirements – Specific Roads of Z.-1 Zoning By-law; and,   b)            the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to  report back on how to address the portion of the secondary collector identified through the auto mall property, north to Cuddy Court;   it being pointed out that at the public participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals made oral submissions in connection therewith:   -                    Terry McSpadden, 2257 Trafalgar Street – indicating that this has been the family home since 1955 when it was built; advising that it is the first home to the west of Veterans Memorial Parkway (VMP), on the south side of Trafalgar Street, on the north side of the 3M office building; advising that he understands that the engineering detail is not complete or barely started on the proposed fly over, Trafalgar Street over the VMP for that intersection and that will quite profoundly affect their outlook from the front of their home; expressing concern with noise; advising that when the home was built in 1955, Trafalgar Street was a gravel road and it was a country setting; noting that there was nothing in that area at all but as the city has grown and annexations have occurred, the home is in a situation now far different from when it was built; expressing concern that, now that the VMP has gone from an expressway to a freeway, from the original Highway 100, which was basically a country road, to one of noise; noting that the noise, especially through the evening, is incredibly loud, particularly in motorcycle season; realizing that there has been a lot of discussion about berming along the VMP for the people that live between Trafalgar Street and Admiral Drive; noting that they already have a berm that is probably 15 feet high; further noting that they have nothing; advising that it is so loud at times that they have to stop talking if they are in their backyard; expressing concern with egress from the property; noting that they have no details on this yet as to what might happen and they are often told that this is a 30 to 50 year plan but it seems as if things are moving along much more quickly than anticipated; noting that they are hoping to be kept advised of the process as it goes along; advising that they have been in contact with the Planner; advising that they see their concerns as a diminishment of their family property which is of importance to them because their plans took into account the increasing value of their property and perhaps different uses in the future; advising that, as the city has progressed and enveloped them, the options that they had anticipated some time ago seem to be disappearing; advising that what they would like to do is to continue their conversations with the Planner to see if there is some relief that they can obtain through rezoning or subdivision of their lands, as they own over half an acre of property; expressing appreciation to the Committee for the opportunity to express his concerns; indicating that they are very happy with the roundabout that was installed at Hale Street and Trafalgar Street; advising that the homes on the northeast quadrant of the roundabout have a concrete wall in front of them that is probably 50 to 100 feet in front of their homes and is a barrier which prevents them from having outlook from their property; indicating that, in their case, between a piece of their land being taken away for a right turn lane onto the VMP and the city boundary being 15 to 20 feet in front of their front porch, they anticipate a wall, if you look at where the fly over has to start and where it has to go to, that will meet or exceed the height of the homes at Hale Street and Trafalgar Street; and indicating that they are really concerned at their retirement age on the impact on their retirement resources.   -                     Michelle Doornbosch, Zelinka Priamo Limited – advising that the plan before the Committee shows the addition of a secondary collector that cuts through the recently approved auto mall, in the subdivision plan that has been approved; advising that three of the dealerships are under construction; indicating that the design of the subdivision does not allow for that collector road to go through; indicating that they are going on record advising that that is a concern and there is no opportunity to connect that road through the subdivision; and noting that it would have to be located further west of the subdivision lands.   (2013-D14A)

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

18.   Secondary Dwelling

Units (OZ-8053)

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, with respect to the application of the City of London, for an Official Plan Amendment to amend existing policies, relating to secondary dwelling units and for a Zoning By-law Amendment to introduce regulations related to secondary dwelling units, the following actions be taken:   a)         a public participation meeting BE HELD at the Planning and Environment Committee on September 24, 2013, with respect to the proposed amendments; and,   b)         the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment BE INTRODUCED at a future meeting of the Municipal Council;   it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received the attached communication, dated August 20, 2013, from B. Lansink, 507 Colborne Street, with respect to this matter; it being pointed out that there were no oral submissions made at the public  participation meeting associated with this matter.    (2013-D14A)

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor B. Armstrong

Approve clauses 1 to 10, inclusive.

X.   DEFERRED

MATTERS

XI.   ENQUIRIES

XII.   EMERGENT

MOTIONS

Moved by Councillor B. Polhill

Seconded by Councillor S. Orser

Approve that pursuant to section 19.2 of the Council Procedure By-law, leave be given for the introduction of an emergent motion with respect to a report back regarding the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Dalmagarry Road and Fanshawe Park Road West.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor M. Brown

Seconded by Councillor P. Hubert

Approve that the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back, at a Special Meeting of the Civic Works Committee, to be held prior to the September 17, 2013 meeting of Municipal Council, to treat this as a priority and provide all available options for the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Dalmagarry Road and Fanshawe Park Road West, as soon as possible, within the 2013 construction year.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor N. Branscombe

Approve progress on the in camera items as noted in the motion to go in camera.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

XIII.   BY-LAWS

BY-LAWS TO BE READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME:

Moved by Councillor H.L. Usher

Seconded by Councillor D. Brown

Approve First Reading of Bill No.s 357 to 388, including the revised Bill No. 366 and excluding Bill No.s 382 and 384.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor B. Polhill

Seconded by Councillor D. Brown

Approve Second Reading of Bill No.s 357 to 388, including the revised Bill No. 366 and excluding Bill No.s 382 and 384.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor B. Polhill

Seconded by Councillor H.L. Usher

Approve Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No.s 357 to 388, including the revised Bill No. 366 and excluding Bill No.s 382 and 384.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor D. Brown

Seconded by Councillor H.L. Usher

Approve First Reading of Bill No. 382.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor B. Polhill

Seconded by Councillor D. Brown

Approve Second Reading of Bill No. 382.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor B. Polhill

Seconded by Councillor P. Van Meerbergen

Approve Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No. 382.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor D. Brown

Seconded by Councillor P. Hubert

Approve First Reading of Bill No. 384.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor D. Brown

Seconded by Councillor P. Van Meerbergen

Approve Second Reading of Bill No. 384.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor D. Brown

Seconded by Councillor J.B. Swan

Approve Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No. 384.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor D. Brown

Seconded by Councillor P. Van Meerbergen

Approve First Reading of Bill No. 389.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor D. Brown

Seconded by Councillor P. Van Meerbergen

Approve Second Reading of Bill No. 389.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

Moved by Councillor B. Polhill

Seconded by Councillor D. Brown

Approve Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No. 389.

Motion Passed

Motion Passed

XIV.   ADJOURNMENT