Dec. 8, 2005.
REPORT TO WHRA
1) C3 ZONING CHANGE
The WHRA report to address the C3
issue has been sent to Planning.
Councilors, Fred and Cathy have been given a copy and asked to support
the recommended changes. The covering
letter to Planning from John Macdonald of WHRA is on our Web; the Residents
report prepared by Hart Jannson is posted, as well. The Planning Consultant’s report has been sent to Jim Brophy, Bill
Boughner and John Macdonald has a spare copy for any interested member to read.
Next Step is for Planning to make
a formal recommendation to Council and Coucil to consider the report when it
appears on the agenda.
2) YEAR END MEETING WITH WARD 2 COUNCILORS
Bill Boughner and John Macdonald met
with Fred Oliver and Cathy Duddeck on Tuesday, Dec. 6. John had prepared a letter to say if we
didn’t get reasonable and appropriate action on our needs for Park improvements
and Lakeshore needs of Lamp lighting, seasonal decorations, trees and wide
sidewalks, that the WHRA was going to change the strategy from work with, to
activists. This is consistent with the
discussion we had at the A.G.M.
However, Cathy pleased us tremendously
with a long and excellent report on the progress of the Kerr Village B.I.A.
-
Kerr Village BIA
encompassing Lakeshore to Maurice, North to Speers and west to Woody.
-
Many strong
members representing Moldenhauer, Peter Natchucks, Fish Bones, Mike Jasnick,
Rose Colella (Palladio’s daughter)
-
Have spent a
year on constitution.
-
Fred just
chaired their first AGM.
-
Opening an
office in 2nd floor above Stoneys.
Kerr Village BIA is now duly constituted
and is aggressively going after flower barrels, etc. Town greenhouses saying they’ll have to ramp
up (understandably). But this means BIA
has entered an agreement with the Town for maintenance on a 60/40 basis (same
as East side).
They want to do Lantern lamps as East side
and this is something BIA has to pay for and the Town and Hydro install. They want to buy the Christmas season lights
as well.
Both West River and West Harbour have now
requested a seat on the Streetscape committee.
Apparently, BIA is not as enamoured with
trees if they are going to block signage, (Understandable). Cathy said “No problem”. We just get them high enough so the branches
start above the signs. Do I ever like
that! We will work on getting a seat on
the Streetscape committee, so we can encourage Lamps, seasonal decorations,
trees and street layout.
In my opinion, Lakeshore needs to be like
Kerr and East Lakeshore, ie:
-
a single East
and West traffic lane.
-
A mid turning
lane
-
Row of parking
on each side
-
Sidewalk width
to accommodate trees, benches, trash cans, etc and minimum 12 foot width of
sidewalk as it is in East side.
Next
Steps
(1) Bill Boughner to set up meeting with Matas and
Moldenhauer to discuss streetscapes.
Shouldn’t we plan to do the model street scape as each development goes
up? Ie. Width of side walk, tree sizes and lamps.
(2) Bill will pursue BIA committee membership.
PARKS
We are in receipt of two letters from Town
Controller and one from Corporate Services Commissioner to tell us of the
acceptable applications of Development Charges (DC’s).
But, I don’t wish to play these games. The fact is that the West Harbour area is
currently a boom area for development, ie. Growing and therefore deserving of
DC’s. It is as big a development as any
one of the Greenspace developments. It
will add dollars to the Town coffers in the form of DC’s money in lieu of
parks, intensification, higher property values and West Harbour therefore
requires and deserves appropriate attention from the Town.
Our parks’ needs have been documented and forwarded
to Chris Marks et al.
Cathy reported to us that mid 2006, the
PARKS and OPEN SPACES, RECREATION, CULTURAL and LIBRARY MASTER PLAN will be
ready. That is the time for WHRA to
make sure we are getting what the area needs for Parks.
We will receive a copy and there will be
public forums for our comments and a Planning Committee.
I understand that as long as we get what
we need in the Master Plan that the money will be there in due course (from
whichever fund it comes.)
Cathy recommended that we invite Peter
Cheately for a walkabout, “so he can see the issue through our eyes.”
OFFICIAL
PLAN
Official Plan Review is underway and has
just begun. It is a long process. There will be a traveling road show.
NORTH
LAKESHORE CORNER BRANT
MATA’S
DEVELOPMENT.
Bill Boughner and John Macdonald met with
Planning for a full morning to discuss and a full evening to discuss with Matas
and Rockcliffe. An evening for the
concerned residences was set up at Matas” showroom to hear and act on all
concerns.
It is the writer’s opinion that the
proposed has been well negotiated by Planning and Developer and a good piece of
development is proposed.
John
Macdonald
V.P.
WHRA
cc. WHRA Web Site - via
Carol Gilbert
WHRA Executive - via
Carol Gilbert
Fred Oliver
Cathy Duddeck
West Harbour Residents Association
c/o John Macdonald
123
Burnet St.,
Oakville, Ont., L6K 1B9
December 13, 2005.
cc.
Jim Brophy – Pres. WHRA
Bill Boughner – VP WHRA
Carol Gilbert – Sec. WHRA
WHRA
Exec.
WHRA web site
Anne Mulvale - Mayor
Fred
Oliver - Councilor
Cathy Duddeck - Councilor
Mr. Allan Ramsey
Senior Planner
Community Planning
P.O.Box 310
1225 Trafalgar Rd.
Oakville, Ont. L6J 5A6
Dear Allan:
Persuant to our numerous discussions over a
couple of years on this matter, I enclose the WHRA Report prepared by Hart
Jannson and under separate cover, the Gregg Daly Report which WHRA commissioned
on the C3 question. (Five copies of Daly
Report sent Dec.7)
Before we begin, I’d like to thank you for
your patience and for all the meetings we have had. Basically we at WHRA have had to get up to
speed on Zoning/Planning issues.
Historical Perspective
Some twenty to thirty years ago, West
Harbour was still a Commercial area with Residential. The zoning was changed to Residential for
Burnet and south, to C3R for Lakeshore
and a C3 transition zone was predicted for the block between. This made perfectly good sense at the time
because it was the way East Oakville had evolved.
Fast forward to 2005/2006 and we can see
that the prediction made for the transition zone just didn’t materialize. Other than Wilson st., every street,
forsythe, Chisholm, Kerr, Brant, and Brock has gone 100% Residential. Why then would we keep the prospect of
commercial usage open on these streets?
1)
Because we have
to protect the rights of Wilson St. commercial activity. The alternative solution is addressed in the
Walker Knott Report.
2)
Because a change
would impose a 10 foot buffer requirement onto the C3R owners. This too, has a solution which is in the
Walker Knott Report.
3)
Because you said
that there were no registered complaints from the C3 zoning. There are several reasons for this (a) you
register only those complaints which violate bylaws; (b) we are Canadians, we don’t complain about
neighbours; and (c) since it’s virtually
all Residential, there is no commercial activity anyway to complain about.
However, let me give you my own
experience. I used to live at 101 Burnet
St (corner of Kerr.) (I’m now at 123
Burnet St.) The house north of 101
Burnet, on Kerr, contained a home of a family therapist. His clients always parked illegally on Kerr
in front of his or at the side of my house.
I rarely ever parked at the side because parking created a traffic
hazard due to visibility at the busy Kerr/Burnet intersection.
I had to bag leaves because I couldn’t put
them at the curb due to the parking. I
had to reshovel snow banks which were pushed into my driveway entrance by the
clients. I was made uncomfortable by all
the people going by me, as I did my work outside, with low cast eyes, wanting
to retain their privacy. It was
unsuitable business activity for a pure residential area where parking was not
adequate and people are not prepared to walk, even from the Beer store parking
lot, 100 feet away. Did I complain? Never.
Would you have logged it? Yes,
because there was a parking infraction every day.
The fact that our C3 residents and/or R4
residents backing onto C3, have not complained is not an issue. The issue is: What complaints would we have
if someone in C3 (other than Wilson) wanted to open a commercial establishment,
that would not be in keeping within the character of the now 100% residential
neighbourhood? We would all be spending
wasted dollars at OMB. What is the
point? Why dangle the prospect of
Commercial in a Residential area?
You have asked us to answer all the
questions and objections associated with changing C3 to R7 for Forsythe,
Chisholm, Kerr, Brant and Brock. We have
done that. We have, with great expense,
had a professional Planner provide the solution. Changing this zoning is very important to
us. We request that you take this seriously
and recommend such a change to Council.
Thank you for your support in this
matter. Please contact me if further
information is required.
Yours very truly,
J.K.Macdonald
V.P. WHRA.