If you couldn’t attend the 1157-1171 North Shore Blvd. Application Neighbourhood Meeting from Jan. 9, here’s what you missed.
Date/Location: Wednesday, Jan. 9 evening at the Art Gallery of Burlington
Attendance: more than 100 people, with standing room only
Site: 1157-1171 North Shore Blvd.
Applicant: Spruce Partners Inc., Amico Properties Inc. and Amica senior lifestyles
City Planner: Lisa Stern,
lisa.stern@burlington.ca, 905-335-7600, ext. 7824
View:
Site and Surrounding Area:
- Adjacent properties are single detached and semi-detached homes, apartments, the QEW and a long-term care facility
- Joseph Brant Hospital is to the east of the site
Planning Application Proposal:
- Current OP and Zoning by-law amendments are sought to permit a senior’s living campus with building heights terraced up to 17 storeys (about 65 m) — buildings will be angled at a 45 degree angular plane towards North Shore, with the lowest height (two storey building) closest to the property line of the neighbouring single and semi detached homes and going five-storeys, nine-storeys, 12-storeys and 17-storeys (excluding a mechanical penthouse on top) towards North Shore
- The development proposes 475 suites of varying levels of care and a total of 220 parking spaces underground (145 for staff and visitor spaces and 75 resident parking)
- Applicant has completed a noise, wind and shadow studies (the shadow study is on p. 27 of the Applicant’s Presentation PDF)
OP Designation:
- Designated Downtown Residential – Medium and/or High Density
- OP amendment proposes increasing density from 185 units per hectare
- Previous-council adopted OP designates the area as Downtown Mid-Rise Resedential, which caps height at 11 storeys or less (adopted OP acts as guideline until approved by Halton Region; current OP is what is enforceable and what the application is planned against)
Zoning By-Law:
- Current zoning: downtown residential – high density
- Application proposes to rezone to get increased density, height and reduce number of parking spaces required.
Questions and Concerns from residents:
- Q: Why are you proposing to more than double the zoning density that currently exists at 185 units per hectare?
- A: Applicant — the current zoning is quite low and outdated, and we’re balancing it with the current OP and newly adopted OP guidelines. We look at density as how that building still fits in terms of setbacks, etc. The current OP doesn’t have a height limit, just density (height is set in zoning)
- Q: What considerations were looked at for neighbouring homes having lighting systems from development shining into their homes?
- A: Applicant — there is a minimum setback of 30 m, that’s building face to building face; lighting will be dealt with at the site detail design stage and we’d ensure light won’t come through into the neighbouring homes.
- Q: What studies were done for visitor consideration and visitor parking?
- A: Applicant — In underground the first group of parking areas closest to the elevators will be reserved for visitor parking. We’ve found visitors don’t tend to come by during rush hours and there will be plenty of space because we expect about 40 per cent of residents won’t have cars, and we’ll be encouraging staff to use transit.
- Q: Has traffic in peak rush times been considered in that area and how hard it will be for police/ambulances to get through?
- A: Applicant — We look at existing conditions and predict changes into 2031, i.e. trips we’re anticipating from the development, etc. We can isolate the impact of traffic through mitigating factors, such as traffic signal timing changes.
- City staff – the city has its traffic impact study that it will be looking at in relation to this application
- Q: Do you anticipate placing a left turn lane for the development on North Shore?
- A: Applicant – we found a left turn lane was warranted
- Q: Resident lives on Bellevue, concerned that cars already park on the street heading towards the hospital, concerned more will be doing so heading to this new development upon completion.
- A: City staff – that’s why it’s so important to get parking right, we don’t want to over provide, but we also don’t want to under provide to reflect demand. We will be looking into the proposed number of parking stalls for this application (also asked residents to document the parking issues on Bellevue and let staff know so it can be put on file).
- Q: Length of time for construction.
- A: City staff – Approximately three years, after approvals.
- Q: Can the height not be capped at 11 storeys? My sight line of the lake will be affected.
- A: We didn’t start with a number in mind. We disagree with the city on what the height maximum on this site should be. We started looking at design parameters, such as setbacks from North Shore, tower separation distances, etc. More height on this site is more appropriate. There is no protection of sight lines in development projects, just protection of sunlight times.
- Concern over which OP this application was using in its development — the crowd was told this application was under the current OP standards and limits, not the adopted OP that is currently under review.
- Q: What costs are we looking at for units?
- A: Applicant — Looking at similar developments by Amica in Stoney Creek, a 1 bedroom sits at about $3,000. Closer to here, it was estimated more around $3,500-$4,000 for 1 bedroom, bigger units costing substantially more. The rent includes, all meals, snacks, activities, social outings, fitness, transportation. We’re not looking to put people in financial duress.
- Q: What’s the schedule for truck for waste removal services?
- A: Applicant – we would schedule those outside of rush hours. (The entrance for that is located north of North Shore Blvd. adjacent to the condos to the east of the site.
- Q: Why was the entrance to site not placed closer to QEW side?
- A: Applicant – We were very limited to where we could place access/entrance.
- Q: Will there be green building features in design?
- A: Applicant – early stages now, but it is something we will be looking at.
Further concerns:
- retaining wall between lowest height of buildings and adjacent single detached homes not high enough, and not enough of a setback.
- Nearby condos will be devalued.
- Some residents have heard that others living on the property of site have been asked to vacate by June, but applicant said they had no current timing of when people would be asked to vacate.
globalnews.ca
