Mayor’s Task Force – Street Steering Committee1
October 8, 2002 Minutes
TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
MAYOR’S TASK FORCE
FOR THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN DOWNTOWN SOUTH END
MINUTES
STREET STEERING COMMITTEE
Corporate Offices, Town Mall, 2nd Floor, Committee Room
Tuesday, October 8, 2002
7:30 p.m.
Present:Ken Webster, Chair Richard Lucas
Irene Hurley Eugene Heath
Michael Graves Peter Fung, Manager of Engineering
Bonnie McGlynn
(S. Molnar, R. Miggens & D. Morris arrived at 8:50 p.m. after a meeting in Council Chambers).
Absent:Irv Horton, Mayor, Lynn Buchner, John Gilvesy
Town Council at its September 23, 2002 meeting, adopted the project in principal, subject to review of the allotted parking spaces, traffic flow, landscaping and financing, and requested a report be brought forward to Council at its October 15th meeting. The Chair, Ken Webster called a meeting to discuss the 5 concept drawings Town staff had prepared to address additional parking. The Minutes of the September 16, 2002 meeting were distributed.
South End Site Plan Parking Re-Design Discussion
I. Hurley asked to address the Committee prior to the Chair calling the meeting to order to determine if they felt her presence was a conflict. I. Hurley stated the Hurley’s family corporation had looked at several sites before relocating their Sears business in the south end for the following reasons:
- this was their home town, wanted to remain downtown and continue a family business
-wanted to try to keep Town’s traditional heritage theme outside the building while keeping within Sears guidelines
-because it was an odd shaped property, spent great deal of time on a site plan, working with engineering, coming up with a parking plan customers, added green space, wanted some detailing with flair that looked inviting, not just concrete and asphalt
-on January 27, 2002, Town Council approved the original concept and report by County Planner P. Michiels
-Hurley had given the Consultant this site plan and it was where the basic shape and concept for the parkette design came from.
I Hurley stated her family corporation was reluctant to make a lot of changes to the site plan they originally agreed to. She further stated that as part of Task Force she had been very dedicated, not missed a meeting, and was very involved with what the Committee was doing. I. Hurley clarified that she was willing to make some concessions, but not all of them. She stated she wants to work in conjunction with the Task Force and Town for something beneficial for all. She stated if the Committee felt her presence during the remainder of the meeting was a conflict, she would agree to leave. I. Hurley had a copy of the approved site plan design for comparison.
K. Webster stated he wanted to see what could be worked out from the concepts P. Fung had provided. He felt they should be discussed in I. Hurley’s presence as she had reasons why certain changes should or should not be made. The Committee agreed she should remain at the meeting.
I. Hurley stated at last meeting Council, passed a resolution for staff to work with the Task Force to work on a report for the parking. P. Fung provided 5 concepts for review (number 1 being the concept presented to Council). Each Committee member received a set of the 5 concepts. I. Hurley stated she believed Concept 5 with some exceptions was the best proposal.
M. Graves questioned if Concept 5 allowed for two-way traffic at the entranceway. P. Fung confirmed Concept 5 was finalized that morning but some measurements and some parking stalls may still require revision.
I. Hurley stated that Concept 3 showed parking spots directly in front of the double glass door entrance of the store. This proposal meant cars would be parked right in front of the entrance doors. (In fact, some cars are doing this now and often park too close and the doors cannot be opened easily). She indicated that awnings (that come out ten feet) would be reinstalled over the entrance and on the showroom window. Vans and trucks will not be able to park in these locations because of their height.
M. Graves stated that overall he was not that unhappy with Concept 5. He stated P. Fung had done a good job of pushing the parkette back and keeping some of the curbing. M. Graves stated to him, it was obvious that cars should not be parked in front of the glass door entranceway. M. Graves also felt there should be a sidewalk near the entranceway.
I. Hurley stated her preference was a compromise. If we cannot have Concept 1, she preferred Concept 5. She suggested leaving parking spaces 4 through 9, take out spaces 1, 2, and 3, bring back the entranceway a bit, and put in landscaping and some sidewalk. She believed this would allow more green space on the parkette curve and would provide 23 parking spaces (eliminating 3 in front of store and gaining 1 in the radius of the park). This would gain 4 additional parking spots from the original concept Council observed that had 19 parking spaces.
M. Graves stated he did not believe Concept 2 or Concept 3 could actually get all those parking spaces in them. He believed parking by the door was dangerous.
P. Fung confirmed the requirement was for one handicapped parking space for the first 10 parking spaces, therefore on Concept 5 only one handicapped space is required (not 2 as shown). He clarified there has to be a 7 metre clearance between the two parking aisles.
I. Hurley indicated if we go with Concept 5, and remove parking spaces 1 to 3, green space can be added in front of the building and the parkette could be moved further down. She stated as a Committee we want to complete our objectives, and the park is important, it will be there a long time, and is a focal point. She believed the Committee should address the value of the park rather than just the parking issue and should keep the bigger picture in mind. I. Hurley stated she would be happy to put up signs on her property indicating the additional municipal parking locations.
K. Webster stated he felt if the Committee changed it too much, they might run into a roadblock like at the last Council meeting. K. Webster summarized there must be 7 metres between the parking aisles, Irene’s suggested landscaping changes of removing number 1, 2 and 3 parking spaces and turning it into a landscape area could increase the width of the traffic lanes and provide 4 additional parking spaces in Concept 5.
I. Hurley stated her suggested revisions to Concept 5 would also allow for more distance from the stoplight to the entranceway.
E. Heath stated that Council’s intent for purchasing the gas station was for more parking.
M. Graves suggested if I. Hurley’s proposed changes to Concept 5 were accepted and if the parkette radius was moved forward, it would allow for the walkway to have a better angle and more direct route through the parkette. P. Fung agreed the configuration/ angle of the pathway could be changed or adjusted.
I. Hurley stated this corner was the gateway / entranceway to Town, and a focal point. The parkette could be used for commemorative plaques, flagpoles, the Town Christmas tree, etc. She believed the Committee should justify the existence of the park, and stress this is not just a parking issue.
M. Graves stated that years from now this was one of those projects it would be said we had the foresight to do something special at this important corner. Tillsonburg is known for its wide main street and this kind of focal point on a main corner, if is passed up, may be regretted for many generations to come. This is a legacy item, not just about parking. We should try to accomplish this while it is Town property. In Concept 5, we will have increased the parking numbers in the area, which was our overall goal.
I. Hurley questioned whether a written report should be presented by the Committee. She did not want to see the green space sacrificed for asphalt.
B. McGlynn felt Irene should be spokesperson. K. Webster stated this might pose a problem as her property is involved. E. Heath agreed something in writing should go before Council. R. Lucas stated he always thought this location should be more than a parking lot and agreed with everyone on the revisions. R. Lucas stated from Council’s view, parking is always a problem. He believed the concept meets all the requirements of esthetics, beauty and parking.
M. Graves stated the new concept had raised the parking numbers from 19 to 23. It was noted there are also 23 parking spaces to the south of the Sears building.
B. McGlynn asked whether the pathway could be changed (the path appears skinny and curved on an odd angle). I. Hurley stated the original intent was for a secondary route leading to the entranceway of the parking area. M. Graves agreed the pathway should be left in the same location but should go straight across to match the other side. It would be a more direct route and have a better appearance.
M. Graves suggested a Councillor should present the Task Force presentation. Ken Webster offered to do the presentation. E. Heath suggested asking S. Lund whether a member of the Committee should make the presentation or if the Director of Operations should speak on the Committee’s behalf.
After general discussion in support of Concept 5 with revisions, the Street Steering Committee determined the following in support of this decision:
-adding four parking spaces, from 19 to 23 while maintaining the integrity of the green space.
-gateway to Town, focal point
-opportunity for a legacy area, years from now, had the foresight to provide something on the corner that the Town and residents can enjoy for generations
- location for flagpoles, sound system, commemorative plaques, Christmas tree, Sons and Daughters of
Tillsonburg plaques, etc.
-traditionally main four corners of Tillsonburg, site of first stoplight in Town, heart of the Town
- in keeping with the Town’s traditional heritage theme
- a parkette should look inviting, this focal point should not just be concrete and asphalt
- original concept was based on official Site Plan approval in January 2002
- maintains a greater distance from the stop sign to the entranceway
-previous number of parking spaces in the south end was non-existent, now we have established 23 parking spaces on the south side, plus the proposed 23 on the north side
-the Committee is still working on additional municipal parking for the proposed south end development
S. Molnar, D. Morris, and R. Miggens joined the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
D. Morris clarified that at the last Council meeting, staff were given direction to look at other alternatives for parking spaces, which was at 19 spaces. D. Morris was advised the Committee’s proposal was now at 23, and had gone up 4 spaces. K. Webster stated that with 23 parking spaces we could still maintain the integrity of the parkette.
S. Molnar requested D. Morris explain Council’s position, that this was now a staff issue, and the Town was currently dealing with Sears.
D. Morris stated from Council’s perspective they wanted to know if there were any gains by reducing the parkette. The other issue was whether angled or straight on parking in front of Sears would allow for more spaces. Council was informed that I. Hurley must be consulted because this deviated from her site plan. Ultimately a plan to gain more parking spaces must be brought back to Council.
R. Miggens stated that if Council were to take another look at it, the issue was if there were 29 versus 23 parking spaces, with 23 parking spaces, we get the parkette. With 29 parking spaces, there would be very small park. He believed Council would see the advantage of having this park over a few of parking spaces.
M. Graves stated that the 29 parking space concept raised safety issues, and the park would be diminished. He believed the 23 parking space plan most closely resembled the agreed upon site plan agreement, it was safer and the park would not be diminished.
K. Webster indicated that I. Hurley had been agreeable to the Committees discussions and believed Council should try to go along with it.
D. Morris stated there would be a staff report to Council, which would include the Minutes of this meeting. He stated that all the 5 concept plans should be presented to Council and the Committee should present how they came to their decision. D. Morris will briefly orally review the process the Committee went through with Council and they will be presented with the Minutes.
D. Morris stated should the project be approved by Council that some underground work may be done this year and that the balance would be done in the spring.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.”