Workshop Summaries

The following workshop summaries (from public meeting held at Paisley Road Public School, June 2005) are found on the http://www.silvercreekdevelopments.com website:

• Table 1
• Table 2
• Table 3
• Table 4
• Table 5
• Table 6

Table 1

This group expressed their ideas on the blank site plan. Below is their summary:

• Big boxes should be taken out of the site plan.
  
• The group fears that the stores would create too much traffic in adjacent communities.
  
• The proposed park, senior's housing and private access from Inkerman St. are reasonable ideas.
  
• Low-income housing should be considered for the site.
  
• A central focal feature could be imagined (eg., St-George's Square)
  
• Car-pooling nodes should be considered.
  
• The park should link to Guelph's public trail system.
  
• Townhouses should be constructed in place of the large format retail at the north-western edge of the site.
  
• Parking for the homes would be located next to the active railroad line.
  
• Buses should be able to penetrate the site, up to the suggested townhouses.
  
• Traffic should be deterred from Alma St., Hearn Ave. and Waterloo Ave.
  

Table 2

No drawings were produced from this table. Participants discussed many elements of the site, but did not always agree:

• There was a general agreement that big boxes should not be built on this site due to traffic impacts.
  
• The group feels that the number of parking spaces shown on the Discussion Plan does not accommodate enough vehicles for the proposed large format retail. The group fears that a parking structure would be required.
  
• Some participants should like to see high density mixed living units above stores that would service people's daily needs.
  
• Green space would surround the high density mixed use development.
  
• Part of the group would prefer to have a warehouse with a field around it to preserve the existing green space.
  
• There is a strong opposition to the Inkerman St. extension. This group feels that the senior's centre is acting as bait so that the community agrees to create a connection.
  
• This Table would have preferred to be consulted by the City Planning Department rather than by a consulting group representing a developer.
  
• Birds, wildflowers, amphibians and reptiles are important to the community.
  
• Stormwater management should respect the principles of conservation development.
  

Table 3

• This group is first concerned about traffic. It is already unsafe for children to walk to school. The situation has slightly improved since the community began using crossing guards, but additional traffic would not be acceptable.
  
• If commercial uses are built on the Lafarge site, this group wants small scale commercial uses with offices (eg., dentists and doctors).
  
• This group questioned adding any kind of development while Guelph has reached its maximum water consumption level. How can a large commercial development be built if houses cannot?
  
• A splash pad and soccer fields would be desirable uses.
  
• Table 3 does not want big boxes.
  

Table 4

Only one person from this group stayed until the end of the evening to present the Table's findings:

• Some participants suggested keeping the land as a park.
  
• Access from Inkerman St. should be avoided for fear of excessive traffic through the residential community.
  
• If the big boxes must be built, the group suggests aligning them with the Hanlon Pkwy. This group thinks that the Discussion Plan shows the buildings too close to the residential homes to the west of the site.
  
• A few particpants think that in order to keep the Howitt Creek Drainage Channel, the right-of-way would need to be respected. The group suggested that the consulting group speak with the Grand River Conservation Authority.
  

Table 5

This group did not mark the blank site plan as they felt the examples that were presented tonight were coming from the developer and did not represent what the community wants. They would like to begin with a clean slate.

• The group is concerned with the community's traffic patterns. Four children have already been hit by vehicles.
  
• Big boxes are not usually reached by foot. The average transaction is over $100.
  
• This table is concerned that the only access point shown in the Discussion Plan is not feasible. This group is concerned that adding an emergency access from Hanlon Pkwy. goes against the Ministry's goal of reducing access points on the parkway.
  
• Lighting pollution and overspill is also a concern for the adjacent neighbourhoods.
  
• If the area north of the Howitt Creek Drainage Channel becomes a park, who will pay for the maintenance?
  
• The group mentioned Port Moody as a desirable precedent for the site.
  
• This Table is not opposed to keeping the land industrial. These uses would pay better wages than commercial uses.
  

Table 6

This group presented a "Leave As Is" plan.

• If the site was to change, the group suggested having playing fields (i.e., soccer) to the south of Silvercreek Pkwy.
  
• The rest of the site could be designed as a park with paths and picnic areas.
  
• The group also thinks the site could accommodate residential development on 50 percent of the site. Participants do understand the compaction/contamination issues. The table thinks that a potential strategy would be to build homes without a basement.
  
• The group does not want big boxes on this site.