THOSE PRESENT:
ALSO PRESENT:
1. Invocation
2. Approval of Minutes - March 3, 1997
3. Approval of the Order of Business and Approval of Additions and Deletions
4. Business Arising Out of the Minutes
4.1 Status Sheet Items5. Motions of Reconsideration
6. Motions of Rescission
7. Consideration of Deferred Business
8. Public Hearings
8.1 Case 7374 - Clayton Park Business Campus Development Agreement Application9. Correspondence, Petitions and Delegations
10. Reports
11. Motions
12. Added Items
12.1 Snow Removal from Sidewalks13. Notices of Motion
14. Public Participation
15. Next Meeting
16. Adjournment
1. INVOCATION
The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with an Invocation. The meeting was held at 2750 Dutch Village Road.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MARCH 3, 1997
MOVED by Councillors Adams and Walker to approve the Minutes of meeting held on March 3, 1997 as circulated. MOTION PUT AND PASSED.
3. APPROVAL OF THE ORDER OF BUSINESS AND APPROVAL OF ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS
Councillor Walker: Snow Removal from Sidewalks
MOVED by Councillors Adams and Hanson to approve the Order of Business as amended. MOTION PUT AND PASSED.
4. BUSINESS ARISING OUT OF THE MINUTES
4.1 Status Sheet Items
4.1.1 Traffic, Street Lighting, Sidewalks - Lacewood Drive/Business Park
Carry over to the next meeting.
5. MOTIONS OF RECONSIDERATION - None
6. MOTIONS OF RESCISSION - None
7. CONSIDERATION OF DEFERRED BUSINESS - None
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.1 Case 7374 - Clayton Park Business Campus Development Agreement
Application
A Staff Report dated March 14, 1997 was before Community Council. Paul Morgan, Planner, by way of a plan of the Business Campus indicated the lands owned by Clayton Developments/the Shaw Group for a Stage I Development Agreement requiring approval in principle to the design concept plans. He outlined the policy provisions to allow consideration of the Business Campus introduced by the former City of Halifax in 1992. Park Drive was now known as Lacewood Extension. There was a Parkland Drive running north/south. He outlined the proposed allocation of uses which allows for a mix of commercial/office related uses. There were no indications of difficulties with regard to servicing; however, there had been concern expressed from Transportation Services as they would have preferred to have all traffic entering off Parkland Drive as services were already installed to allow for signalization whereas a non-signalized intersection would create concern with left-hand turning traffic. It was recognized that the former City of Halifax had already granted approval for the intersection and the driveways in previously approved agreements with Clayton Developments. It was anticipated that Clayton Developments would request cost sharing on Parkland Drive to be oversized to allow for development on either side; however, it was recognized and acknowledged that the cost sharing policy of HRM was under review and that any decision for cost sharing would be at the sole discretion of the Municipality and in accordance with the cost sharing policy, whatever that might be, at the time Stage II Development Agreement comes before Community Council. Any cost sharing also has to be approved by Regional Council under the HRM Act. It was the position of staff that what was being proposed under the agreement with the concept, schematics and design guidelines achieve the objectives in the Planning Strategy and the recommendation of staff that the draft Development Agreement be approved.
There were no questions from Community Council.
Speakers in Favour
Mr. Mike Willett, Vice-President Development, Clayton Developments provided background information on the proposal which began in 1986 and what had transpired since 1992 to the present time in an effort to bring forward a marketable sustainable concept which would be an asset to Mainland North and HRM. He noted that BC-9 and BC-10 were transitional properties at the extremities of the present concept plan and were seen as a mixture of office buildings and residential. With regard to left hand turns, turning lanes were put in place; visual sight distances were adequate and the road was very flat. He explained what has been going on in Clayton Park West with regard to residential development since 1992. Most of the major infrastructure has been dealt with but because Lacewood itself, although fully serviced, was not connected to sanitary sewer, it affected the serviceability. Further, he provided information on green space provisions.
There were no questions from Community Council.
Mr. Dan Goodspeed, Kassner Goodspeed Associates, Architects provided information on the strategies used to establish a suburban character, range of uses in a unified setting, achievement of high standard of building and street scape design and integration of new development with the existing vegetation and topography.
On a question from Councillor Walker as to whether or not development would be focused on both sides of Lacewood Drive, Mr. Goodspeed advised they hoped to focus on both sides; however, it would be market driven.
Councillor Stone having referred to landscaping and vegetation, asked if it was intended to fill in with new vegetation/shrubbery in areas that were largely rock. In reply, Mr. Goodspeed advised that the intent was to try to feature the outcrops but there would be new material planted in combination.
Councillor Hanson asked if the developer was satisfied with fire and police service over the time it would take to complete the project. He suggested consideration should be given to having a mini fire/police station in the area as growth continues. In reply, Mr. Willett noted that buildings would be built with sprinkler systems and there would be security measures throughout the development.
Speaker in Opposition
Mr. Gerard Walsh, Chairman, Bayview Road Residents Association advised that the residents were not in favour of the proposal, at least at this time as Bayview Road was synonymous with traffic problems in Clayton Park. He acknowledged that there was some mention in the Staff Report about potential traffic problems on Lacewood Drive but there was no mention of the far-reaching effects of traffic generated by the retail aspect of the proposal and the hotel. He provided information on traffic problems on Bayview Road, particularly on Saturdays. Since last October, residents from Flamingo Drive and Bayview Road area have been involved in a traffic calming project and were working with staff to bring a proposal to Council; however, he was requesting that approval not be given to the application until a comprehensive traffic management plan has been put in place for Bayview Road in particular and preferably for Bayview Road/Flamingo Drive.
There were no questions from Community Council.
Rebuttal by Applicant
Mr. Dick Miller, Vice-President, Clayton Developments advised that while his company recognized the problems associated with traffic on Bayview, Lacewood Drive was now complete and the majority of traffic generated in the Business Campus area would be oriented in an exit mode towards the Bicentennial and heavier loads would probably be on the Dunbrack/Lacewood Extension and the 102. HRM was attempting to come to grips with Bayview Drive concerns and whether or not the application tonight goes ahead or not, solutions would be forthcoming. He did not think the development in question tonight would add significantly to the Bayview Road problem.
Mr. Miller went on to provide further information on the project and the economic benefits it would bring to the area to allow competitiveness with other regions outside HRM. He asked for support from Community Council.
Councillor Walker referred to time frames involved in certain aspects of the development. Mr. Miller, in reply, advised regarding certain areas but it depended on the market. Further, Councillor Walker asked the status of the market at this time to which Mr. Miller responded there was an indication of a positive stand in market conditions. The time frame for total development would be in the area of eight to ten years, with a substantial investment in infrastructure.
Decision by Community Council
Councillor Walker referred to traffic calming and the fact that there was an upcoming meeting with regard to this. He hoped the Bayview Road/Flamingo Drive issue could be resolved soon with support from Community Council.
Councillor Stone pointed out that even the one speaker in opposition had acknowledged that this was a good proposal and it would be unfortunate to delay because there was an opportunity, not only for construction jobs, but also for employment and long term benefits to the community and region. Regardless of what happens with Bayview, he did not think it should be a factor in dealing with the application.
Councillor Hanson stated he supported the application. The developer has worked on the project for a long time.
Councillor Adams stated he also supported the application but, with regard to Bayview Road, Community Council should indicate that it does support traffic calming for the Bayview Road/Flamingo Drive area and that it should be expedited as soon as possible.
MOVED by Councillors Hanson and Adams:
1. That the Stage I Development Agreement presented as Attachment I to the Staff Report dated March 14, 1997 be approved, and
2. That the applicant be given one hundred and twenty (120) days to sign the Development Agreement from the date of approval by Community Council, or the date of any other approvals required to sign the agreement as the case may be, unless an extension thereof is granted by Community Council at the request of the applicant; otherwise, this approval will be void and obligations arising hereunder shall be at an end.
MOTION PUT AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOVED by Councillors Walker and Adams that when the traffic calming policy is brought forward, Community Council support the recommendations from staff.
Councillor Stone pointed out that the recommendations were not known at this time; therefore, he would not be able to support the recommendations until he was in receipt of the pertinent information.
MOTION PUT AND PASSED 3-1.
9. CORRESPONDENCE, PETITIONS AND DELEGATIONS - None
10. REPORTS - None
11. MOTIONS - None
12. ADDED ITEMS
12.1 Snow Removal from Sidewalks
Councillor Walker requested that for the next meeting a Staff Report be made available on snow removal from sidewalks which would include the following information: 1) will sidewalks be plowed in the former City of Halifax, as is done in Dartmouth, Bedford and the County; 2) a review of the present process of issuing of green cards, to giving a fine ending with the municipality clearing property and whether or not this structure should be re-vamped as he had five properties which are not being addressed and the 24 hours is creating havoc. The whole process needs to be looked at. He requested that staff attend the meeting to discuss the report.
Community Council agreed that the request should be forwarded to Regional Operations and Police Department.
13. NOTICES OF MOTION - None
14. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Mr. Joe Burgoyne, Ketch Harbour requested that a flashing amber light be installed at the entrance to his community which, if required, could be activated from the church after church services. He provided background information to support his request which was a safety issue for the community.
Councillor Adams explained that there has been selective enforcement by the RCMP; however, he supported the request and suggested that the speed limit could be reduced as well. He requested that a letter be sent to Department of Transportation in this regard and that Department of Transportation be asked to look at all possibilities to help alleviate the situation.
Mr. Ron Grantham, Fairview referred to the proposed organic composting carts and stated he wished to point out some grave concerns he had with regard to them. He asked, during the summer months when it was hot, where did residents wash out the carts; the only place he could see was to wash them in the gutters resulting in the waste going into the ocean. He suggested that heavy duty colored bags could be provided in the summer, tied securely and left for pickup. Another consideration was if someone went on vacation for an extended period of time, who would take the cart to the roadway. As this was a health concern, he requested that Community Council consider the impact on the environment.
The Chair acknowledged Mr. Grantham's concerns and advised he understood there was information on the solid waste receptacles that has not yet gone out to the public but hopefully would be circulated in the near future. In the meantime, he agreed that Mr. Grantham's concerns would be part of the discussion and Solid Waste Division would be requested to contact him to provide information.
15. NEXT MEETING - Monday, May 5, 1997
16. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Sandra M. Shute
Assistant Municipal Clerk
