WBR is a near-exclusively residential street. These 30 new housing units will bring more residents and more cars. That's in addition to the hundreds of new residents at the new property at 214. WBR is not a commercial artery. It is not a freeway. It is not a highway. It is not an arterial, despite being classified as such by the City. These efforts to increase densification in the area, while commendable, MUST be accompanied by traffic calming. WBR was classified as an arterial BEFORE the crosstown arterial was built. The road NEEDS to be re-classified immediately so traffic calming measures can be implemented. My question: WHEN WILL THE CITY START ITS TRAFFIC STUDY ON WBR?

What kinds of questions were you looking for? Every question asked was answered with "we were unaware" or "we need the Land Use Report to answer"... What's the point of looking for questions when you dont have the ability to answer? What kinds of questions should we be asking that you CAN answer?

Prior to any approval-in-principle being considered, will the applicant be required to demonstrate that the development, as illustrated in the site plan, is able to comply with the limiting distance requirements contained in the National Building Code of Canada? If it can’t, then this exercise will be moot. Limiting distances regulate minimum distances required between buildings, even on the same property, which takes into account building height and length, number of floors, type of wall construction, window sizes, etc. to ensure a fire in one building doesn’t cause a fire in an adjacent building. The site plan, at face value, suggests there could be insurmountable challenges with what is proposed, or alternatively negative impacts on the basic economic viability of the project as a whole.

On behalf of my parents (who live close by on Waterford Bridge Road): In the request to rezone Residential 1 (R1) Zone to the Apartment 1 (A1) Zone for the subject property, how will traffic density and flows on Waterford Bridge Road (WBR) be considered? Traffic calming has over the last number of years has been implemented on Old Topsail and Southside Road. This, along with the growth of the western end of the City and Mount Pearl, has made WBR an incredibly busy road. WBR was not designed for this level of traffic. In the area where the proposed rezoning will take place there are narrow sections (without sidewalks on one side) close by. Moreover, the section of WBR in front of the proposed rezoning is quite narrow. There will be an increased risk of accidents given a higher density of traffic in the area with the proposed rezoning. Without a turning lane and/or some other traffic calming measure put in place this risk increases. While there is acknowledgement that the rezoning is consistent with the City's strategy around higher density housing, the risk of accidents and even more traffic on a street not designed for it leads to a number of questions of how the proponent intends to mitigate this risk? Thank you for allowing this ability to engage. Grace and Rick Cooper, Waterford Bridge Road.

Very familiar with area ,lived close for 25 yrs ,and in this home many times,very surprised when told it was being moved back to put in a circular driveway ,now I know the true reason ,planning to build 3 condos ,was this declared when he got permission to move existing home back,feel strongly this is wrong ,was council aware of this