Staff support 3-home plan for 2267 Lakeshore Road
To Council, Mon. Apr.20, 6:30
City staff are recommending approval of a Zoning By-law Amendment application by Rosedale Properties to permit three homes to be built at 2267 Lakeshore Road, in place of the single family dwelling that exists there now.
The Community & Corporate Services Committee of council approved the application Tues. March 21, 6:30pm. Recommendations will go to City Council Mon. April 20, 6:30pm for a final decision. Residents can register to speak at either meeting here: Register as a Delegation
Staff have proposed that the property be rezoned from R3.2 to R5 – Exception with the following provisions:
Yard abutting a rear building elevation 6.0 m
Driveway setback from a wall containing
a window of a habitable room 2.0 m minimum
Landscape buffer abutting R1, R2, R3 zones 1.0 m along western property line
Read the staff report here:
Recommendation report regarding a zoning by-law amendment application for 2267 Lakeshore Road. (PB-22-15)
Presentation, showing new layout: FInal layout 2267 lakeshore
My Take: This proposal is a significant improvement over the initial five-home plan, and subsequent four-home plan. I appreciate the developer listening to the concerns of residents and working with city staff to submit a project that is more in keeping with existing lot patterns in the area, reduces the lot coverage and increases setbacks from neighbouring homes.
Read my previous articles about this project:
70+ folks attend discussion of 2267 Lakeshore Road; prefer scaled back development
Revised plans submitted for 4 homes at 2267 Lakeshore
Public meeting on 4-unit development at 2267 Lakeshore Sept. 29
Your Take: Do you support the modified proposal? Leave a comment.
May 1, 2015 @ 1:29 pm
Bran, Good queston. The polcy your refer to s actually n the Plannng Act, and any muncpalty can use t. In short, where there s redevelopment of any knd (ncludng along the waterfront), and that waterfront adds addtonal unts (for example, a sngle famly home becomes 10 townhomes) the Act allows the muncpalty to take 5% of the land for each addtonal unt as “parkland dedcaton.” Or, the cty can take “cash n leu” of land. Oakvlle has chosen to take parkland, and has chosen for waterfront redevelopments to take that land adjacent to the shorelne. Burlngton has chosen to take cash, to purchase or enhance parks throughout the cty.
April 19, 2015 @ 8:58 pm
I beleve that Oakvlle has a polcy of requrng an easement along the waterfront when such property s redeveloped. Why does Burlngton not have a smlar polcy? Ths s a good way to slowly recapture some of our waterfront for publc use.
April 16, 2015 @ 10:54 am
Another ghastly over-bult nghtmare, such as the horror that have been bult on once elegant Robert Street. Two homes would be the maxmum to be n keepng wth a nce neghbourhood that already s sngle home lots. Three homes s smply tacky. We now have several examples south of New Street where two to four homes were jammed on a sngle lot, wth the developer movng out wthn sx months n each case. Leavng supreme uglness behnd. Why not stop ths street vandalsm now? Two lovely homes would add to the area. Three smply denote poor taste and greed.