The Public Meeting this date was to consider applications submitted by 8111 Kennedy Markham Inc. for an Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment to the redevelopment of the subject lands with a multi-building mixed-use development, as shown on the conceptual Comprehensive Block Plan at 8111 Kennedy Rd.
The Committee Clerk advised that 751 notices were mailed on August 17, 2022 and a Public Meeting sign was posted on August 9, 2022. There were no written submissions received regarding this proposal.
Stephen Lue, Acting Director, Planning & Urban Design, introduced the item.
Sabrina Bordone, Manager, Development, Central District, gave a presentation regarding the proposal, the location, surrounding uses and outstanding issues.
David Charezenko, Bousfields Inc. provided a presentation on the proposed development.
Staff confirmed that properties within a 200 metre radius of the subject lands were included in the notice circulation.
The following deputations were made on the proposed development:
- J Lin expressed concern that the proposed development will impact his livelihood, and that it will greatly impact residents already living in the community. Mr. Lin noted that proposed development will overcrowd the schools and questioned if the residents have been consulted on the proposal. Mr. Lin encouraged Council to deny the applications.
- Sheng Huang spoke in opposition of the proposed development, expressing the following concerns: its height and density; the impact it will have on traffic congestion; it will block the sunlight; and that most of the community is not aware of the project or its possible implications on the community.
- Shihao Zhong spoke in opposition to the proposed development, expressing concern that the proposed development is not a reasonable plan. Mr. Zhong encouraged Council to deny the applications.
- Dan Hu spoke in opposition to the proposed development, expressing concern regarding the additional population it will bring to the area due to its high density, and the impacts to further overcrowding of local schools.
- Summer Wang spoke in opposition of the proposed development, expressing the following concerns: that it will cause traffic congestion due to its high density; that there are no plans to expand the surrounding road network to address the additional density; that it will overcrowd the GO trains when it is already challenging to get a seat; that it does not include enough parking for future residents; that the proposed development will only be served by the Kennedy bus; and that there is no land available for a future school site when the existing elementary school in this area is already overcrowded. Ms. Wang suggested that the developer should think about the existing community when planning this development proposal.
- Peter Miasek, representing the Unionville Residents Association (URA), spoke in support of all of the eighteen matters identified by staff in their report. Mr. Miasek advised that of the eighteen matters the following were of greatest concern to the URA: the mismatch between the development proposal and the Markham Centre Secondary Plan Update Study; the need for the proposed development to include more mixed uses, such as a daycare, retail, and/or office space; the need for the proposed development to include the appropriate amount of parkland dedication and/or cash-in-lieu of parkland; the need for the proposed development to include affordable housing to meet Markham’s affordable housing goals; the need to be in alignment with Markham’s other policy goals, such as creating complete communities and its net zero goals; the shadow impact of the proposed development; the impact the proposed development will have on traffic and whether the existing road network can handle the added density; and that there are too many parking spaces being included in the proposed development . Mr. Miasek questioned why so much time and energy is being put into the proposal if there is no intention to build the proposed development in near future.
- Xun Wang expressed concern that the height and density of the proposed development is much greater than what is permitted in the City’s 2014 Official Plan. Mr. Wang suggested that aggressive development proposals such as this should be screened prior to being presented to the public and that they should not be permitted.
- Toa (Tom) Han provide a brief history of the development of the South Unionville community. Mr. Han expressed the following concerns regarding the proposed development: it does not align with the Markham Centre Secondary Plan Update; it does not include enough mixed uses, such as retail, or office space; that the area does not have enough parkland to support the proposal; and that the school system cannot handle the added density.
- Rheed Zhao, resident residing in condominium across the street, spoke in opposition to the proposed development, expressing the following concerns regarding the proposed development: the height and density of the proposal; and that the proposal will reduce his enjoyment of retirement life;
- Shuang Liu expressed concern that the proposed development will further overcrowd the schools and that the proposal includes no plans for new schools. Ms. Liu asked Council to think about the children in this community and their futures.
- John Michael Lee, resident residing in condominium across the street, spoke in opposition of the proposed development, suggesting the proposal would be detrimental to the community for the following reasons: it does not fit with the character of the community; it will worsen traffic congestion; it will put strain on the Unionville GO trains; it will open the door for other high density proposals to proceed in this area if approved. Mr. Lee suggest that Council should consider the long-term impacts of the proposed development on the community, and that Markham’s growth does not need to be at the expense of the existing residents.
- Chris Sauer expressed concern that the public meeting sign was only visible to people driving along Helen Avenue and that the communication regarding the proposed development was not adequate given the scale of the proposal. Mr. Sauer suggested that there were many more residents that would have come out to speak in opposition to the proposed development if they were aware of the proposal. Mr. Sauer suggested the proposed development should comply with what is permitted on the subject lands under the City’s current plans and policies. Mr. Sauer expressed concern that that the proposed development does not include enough outdoor amenity space and encouraged City staff to look at other municipalities’ outdoor amenity standards.
- Grace Luk expressed concern that proposed development will strain the education system, as the local elementary school already has several portables. Ms. Luk was also concerned how the proposed development would impact traffic, the local road network, and hospitals.
- Shu Heng Zheng expressed the following concerns regarding the proposed development: the number of people the proposal will bring to the community; that there are not enough elementary or high schools in the area to support the proposal; that the community needs more roads and highways, expanded GO train service, a community centre and library, and more parks to support this type of development; that the notification was not adequately provided for the scale of the proposed development; and that the notification should be circulated in Chinese, French, and English. Ms. Zheng suggested that the proposed development would be devastating to the community if built.
- Yan Li spoke in opposition of the proposed development, expressing the following concerns: it does not have enough parking; it will create traffic congestion; the education system cannot handle the added density; and that there is not enough parks in the area to support the development. Ms. Li suggested that this type of development proposal should not be contemplated.
- Theresa Lee registered to speak, but withdrew her request.
The Committee provided the following feedback on the proposed development:
- Questioned how the City can advocate for another elementary school east of Kennedy Road;
- Noted that another hospital, library, and community centre may be needed in the future to address all of the added density;
- Suggested the proposed development should include more jobs to replace the high paying jobs are being eliminated;
- Discussed how the Province funds new hospitals and schools;
- Noted that York Region has an approved environmental assessment to widen Kennedy Road between 14th Avenue and Highway 7, and that the pedestrian and cycling facilities will be improved with the widening of the road;
- Noted that Metrolinx has plans to improve the service of the Unionville GO trains by making the trains electric;
- Suggested that in order for Markham to grow successfully new communities cannot rely on the automobile, rather they need to be designed differently to include smaller community spaces that residents can walk to;
- Noted that land needs to better utilized to support density, such as having multi-level schools combined with community centres and libraries;
- Suggested that proposed development has too much parking;
- Expressed concern that the Applicant does not plan on building the proposed development in the near future.
Ms. Bordone provided an overview of the sign provisions for Statutory Public Meetings. Ms. Bordone advised that she had viewed the location of the public meeting sign once there was a complaint, and found that the sign was visible from most angles. Ms. Bordone also noted that the Applicant agreed to move the sign when informed of the residents’ concerns with respect to the signs visibility.
Mr. Lue advised that the Markham Centre Secondary Plan Update proposes several new elementary school sites to be located within the Markham Centre Area. Mr. Lue noted that the School Boards have advised that the existing high schools can accommodate the growth in the Markham Centre area at this time, and that a new school is not warranted. Mr. Lue advised that staff are working with the landowners to ensure that a sense of place is created in this area.
Mr. Charezenko clarified that BMW currently has a five year lease with the Applicant, and that there is a clause in the lease providing them with the right to extend the lease for another 5 years.
The Committee thanked the residents for their feedback and advised that no decisions were being made at tonight’s meeting regarding the proposed development.