Council moved to defer the acceptance of a zoning bylaw amendment and draft plan application for a subdivision on Forbes Estate aiming to add 185 single-dwelling units to Cambridge.
The deferral came after a number of delegations came forward to express concerns for the various staff reports on the agenda Tuesday night.
Along with a presentation by Polocorp Inc., the developer, there were two staff reports recommending council approve a heritage designation for Forbes House located on the property, the relocation of two stone structures and approval of a zoning bylaw amendment and draft plan.
Area residents said the liaison committee consultations didn't achieve full consensus as was being touted by the developer.
"I was part of the liaison committee meetings and it seems to be said the committee members agreed on everything," said Joel Jansen. "That is not true."
He then went on to list his concerns, which were around the proposed exit on Shaw Avenue.
"My one concern is that where the culde sac goes, there's quite a large drop off to the downgrade, is the development going to raise the ground to meet street height?" asked Jansen.
He also had a number of other questions around storm drainage, parking for visitors to the development, and parking for those who would own property with frontage on Guelph Avenue.
"If there are any damages caused by blasting or building, who is going to be responsible for that cost? Am I going to have to go through insurance if there's damage near my house? Who is responsible if my services are cut off? Is there anything on parking? (If) frontage on Guelph Avenue is shortened, and a sidewalk is put in, how are people going to park their vehicles?" said Jansen.
A fellow resident shared his worries.
"Our primary concern is the applicant is proposing a private road to connect onto the end of Shaw Avenue East," Chad Johnson said. "Shaw Avenue East, Henry Miller Road and Milton Avenue are dead-end streets. We have concerns on increased traffic on Shaw Avenue and potentially onto Henry Miller Road and Milton Avenue. It's an extra 364 cars coming onto our street."
He also asked about the impact of the development on the wildlife at Mill Pond.
Johnson's remedy to the exit on Shaw Avenue was a gated emergency exit that he said would separate the existing lower density neighbourhood from the Forbes Estate subdivision.
"There will be private roads in the development, therefore, a gated exit should be sufficient," he said.
Where most delegates were talking of issues, some also spoke in favour of the development.
"We've been looking to downsize and have been looking to buy a house in the Forbes Estate area," said Dennis Beamish. "There seems to be a lot of concerns about the relevance of this proposal as it compares to the immediate community, but there hasn't been much talk about the fact that the Mill Pond area is immediately north of this and is similar to the proposed development. The businesses on Queen Street will receive some advantage and the city will receive more tax dollars from the development."
The other major concerns were around the heritage and cultural significance of the property, especially Forbes House and the two stone structures currently on the lands.
"Any decision to demolish or dismantle the structure should be further evaluated by the city," said Karen Scott Booth, member, Cambridge chapter of Architectural Conservancy of Ontario. "This is not an ideal situation and it is the least desirable approach to conserving significant heritage structures."
Protection does not end with our built heritage, she said, it also includes the retention of the significant collection of the mature trees.
"The loss of this much canopy in one area will have a devastating impact," Scott Booth said. "More than 450 mature trees to be gone in one clear cut, is not responsible."
The Forbes Estate property was never identified as a place to accommodate higher density, she said.
"Not every lot, not every neighbourhood should be intensified. This property should be protected or considered for a much lower density than a greenfield," Scott Booth said, adding, "We're not opposed to development of the Forbes Estate but any development must respond to the city's official plan and the provincial policy statement. We urge council to direct staff continue working with the developer."
After hearing all the feedback from the community, council seemed divided on the issue, with Coun. Mike Devine bringing forward a suggestion that the heritage motion be deferred.
"I don't think we're ready to pass this motion and let me explain to you why," he said. "That tower on the property is a pigeon tower. And I believe this tower is iconic and not just for Ward 1 or Cambridge, but in Waterloo Region and Ontario."
But staff cautioned that the deferral of that motion would also lead to a deferral of the bylaw rezoning and draft plan motion.
Coun. Donna Reid said she was not in favour of a motion at this point in the planning process.
"I think the deferral comes at an awkward time," she said. "We've had many discussions around this and trying to compromise what the community wants. I feel our staff has taken all of the comments into consideration and they've come up with what they believe to be the best course of action for heritage. It's been approved by MHAC (municipal heritage advisory committee). And that's who I want to listen to. I just feel we're going backwards instead of going forward and I prefer to go forward."
However, the number of issues being raised by council members were far too many to push the motions forward. At the end of it all, the zoning amendment and draft plan application were deferred so staff could consult further with the developer around the points brought forward during the meeting.
