Compatibility with surrounding neighbourhood:

The scale, density, height, and total absence of any single family detached units are unacceptable given the surrounding neighbourhood of low-density, single family detached housing forms.  We would draw attention to the OP Special Section (C) “the development will be compatible with surrounding residential uses”.  A sufficient “public good” has not been given to justify the excessive overbuild on this modest 2.6 hectare site.

Excessive surface parking:

The Official Plan in Special Policy Area #1 says that surface parking is to be limited (B.1.8.1.2 (e)). There continues to be an excessive amount of surface parking in the middle of the site. Putting parking underground may require the developer to incur additional costs, but the developer was aware of the OP Special Policy section requirements that has as a primary goal to “minimize the amount of space used for parking cars” at the time they negotiated the land purchase and made the application. 

Lack of pedestrian oriented site layout: 

The vision for Special Policy Area #1 speaks to a development that is “pedestrian oriented” (B.1.8.1.1). However, in SkyDev’s revised plan parking lots and car entrances make it dangerous for pedestrians to access the waterfront through the site, given density and traffic of this proposal.

In their revised site plan, SkyDev has appropriated the expression “fingers to the water” without implementing its intent.

During a “brainstorming meeting” with SkyDev in the summer of 2021, IM proposed that the buildings—which we anticipated would be low-rise buildings—be placed perpendicular to the waterfront and angled to create “fingers to the water”. This would open up view corridors to the water and open up more green space and provide every unit with a front door leading to the waterfront.

In response, SkyDev has placed townhomes facing Fuller and Boucher which block views of the interior of the site and closes off the proposed park space from the rest of the community. This violates the Official Plan principles in D.4.4.3.1  (a)  and (f) which require parks to have as much street frontage as possible and be integrated into the adjacent neighbourhood. To note, the existing surrounding neighbours would not be able to see the park. 

Detailed elevation drawings have not been provided:

Without detailed elevations, showing a colour palette and building materials, how will Council or the public understand what the project will look like when it is built?

• We have not seen views taken from the proposed boardwalk.

• Without details on the grading—to understand how the underground parking is to be accommodated—particularly given the location of a high water table, how will current residents know what the final building heights will look like? Will the grade be raised significantly? If so, by how much? How will this affect the total building heights from current grade at Fuller and Boucher and why is this grade not being matched to existing street grade? How will a change in the grade affect views from the waterside? Will the buildings appear as 4 storeys as promised? Have shadow studies been done so that Meaford residents and particularly current homeowners in the area may understand how the buildings will affect sunlight reaching their properties and the beach?

• Meaford residents who use the beach will want to understand how the beach and public walkways along the waterfront will be affected by the proposed development.

Hotel requirement and using the “H” Provision:

While the community is overwhelmingly opposed to this development, the one element that many see as a “public good” is the promise of an attractive and higher end hotel and spa at the waterfront. To date, SkyDev has not provided details about the hotelier. This information must be forthcoming before approvals are granted. A holding provision (the “H” provision) should be used as per the Special Policy Area # 1 B1.8.1.2 (b) to ensure the hotel is delivered before the residential portion is built.  Hospitality and tourism uses are clearly anticipated, they have been promised by SkyDev, and no residential development should be allowed to proceed until a hotelier is secured and hotel construction begins.