The Public Meeting for this date was called to consider an application submitted by Boxgrove Commercial East Inc. for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit a commercial self-storage warehouse facility at 500 Copper Creek Drive (Ward 7) File PLAN 20-120313.
The Committee Clerk advised that 226 notices of this meeting were mailed to area property owners on October 14, 2020 and that a Public Meeting sign was posted on the subject property on the same date. There were 6 written submissions received in relation to this proposal.
Stephen Corr, Senior Planner, East District, delivered a presentation on the development application, providing an overview of the area context, applicable policy and zoning, outstanding issues to be addressed through the staff review, and next steps in the application process.
Nikolas Papapetrou, SmartCentres, consultant to the applicant, addressed the Committee and delivered a presentation on the development proposal, providing an overview of the area context, conceptual site plan and elevations, and examples of modern self-storage facilities operating in communities of a similar character to that being proposed. Bliss Edwards, SmartStop, consultant to the applicant, was in attendance and provided comments on the business case for the proposed commercial self-storage facility.
Rita Camilleri, resident, addressed the Committee and expressed concerns with the proposal, including those related to the compatibility of the proposed use with the character of the existing residential community, potential impacts to adjacent residential properties resulting from the proposed building height and setbacks, and limited community benefit relative to needed restaurant and retail amenities. It was requested that the applicant consider an alternate location for the proposal within the larger site context.
Robert McKone, resident, addressed the Committee and expressed concerns with the proposal, including those related to the compatibility of the proposed use with the character of the existing residential community and the limited community benefit relative to needed restaurant and retail amenities.
Beatrice Bogart, resident, addressed the Committee and expressed concerns with the proposal, including those related to the compatibility of the proposed use with the character of the existing residential community, potential impacts to adjacent residential properties resulting from the proposed building height and setbacks, and limited community benefit relative to needed restaurant and retail amenities. It was requested that the applicant consider an alternate location for the proposal within the larger site context.
Greg Morris, resident, addressed the Committee and expressed concerns with the proposal, including those related to the compatibility of the proposed use with the character of the existing residential community and limited potential for wide community use relative to needed commercial amenities, community facilities, and employment opportunities. It was requested that the applicant consider an alternate location for the proposal within the larger site context.
Gilbert Tsui, resident, addressed the Committee and expressed concerns with the proposal, including those related to the compatibility of the proposed use with the character of the existing residential community, potential impacts to adjacent residential properties resulting from the proposed building height and setbacks, and limited community benefit relative to needed restaurant and retail amenities.
Nimisha Patel, representative of the Box Grove Connected Residents' Association, addressed the Committee and expressed concerns with the proposal, including those related to the compatibility of the proposed use with the character of the existing residential community, potential impacts to neighbouring residential properties resulting from the proposed building height and setbacks, and limited community benefit relative to needed restaurant and retail amenities. Ms. Patel also made reference to a survey completed by over 300 area residents expressing opposition to the proposal in its current form. It was requested that the applicant explore the feasibility of an alternate location for the proposal within the larger site context, or consider alternate design options to mitigate impacts to the surrounding residential properties.
There was discussion regarding the feasibility of relocating the proposed self-storage facility to an alternate location within the applicant's larger site context. There was also discussion regarding the feasibility of reducing the proposed number of storeys and exploring other potential design elements to achieve a more appropriate building scale relative to the existing surrounding commercial and residential development if the facility is to remain in its present proposed location. The Committee requested that staff and the applicant continue to work with the community to further explore these matters.