HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 7, 2018C<ty „! P1CKE RiNG
Planning & Development
Committee Agenda
Monday, May 7, 2018
Council Chambers
7:00 pm
Chair: Councillor Butt
Anything highlighted denotes an attachment or link. By clicking
the links on the agenda page, you can jump directly to that
section of the agenda. To manoeuver back to the agenda page
use the Ctrl + Home keys simultaneously, or use the "bookmark"
icon to the left of your screen to navigate from one report to the
next.
For information related to accessibility requirements please contact:
Linda Roberts
905.420.4660 extension 2928
Iroberts@pickering.ca
DICKERING
Planning & Development
Committee Agenda
May 7, 2018
Council Chambers - 7:00 pm
Chair: Councillor Butt
(I) Part 'A'
Information Reports Pages
Subject: Information Report No. 06-18
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/17
Brock Dersan Developments Inc.
Southwest Corner of Brock Road and Dersan Street
2540 and 2550 Brock Road
1-15
(II) Part 'B'
Planning & Development Reports
1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 11-18
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/16
R. & S. Cross
Part of Lot 3, Plan 12, Now Part 1. Plan 40R-5734
4993 Brock Road
Recommendation
16-51
1. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/16, submitted by R. & S.
Cross to facilitate a. residential building containing two separate dwelling
units on lands municipally known as 4993 Brock Road, be approved, and
that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment as set out in Appendix! to Report
PLN 11-18 be forwarded to Council for enactment;
2. That Council endorse the recommendations of the Heritage Pickering
Advisory Committee to include the property municipally known as 4993
Brock Road on the City of Pickering Municipal Heritage Register as.a non-
designated property of cultural heritage value or interest, under Section 27
of the Ontario Heritage Act; and,
For information related to accessibility requirements please contact:
Linda Roberts
905.420.4660 extension 2928
Iroberts@pickerinq.ca
(Ly
DICKERING
Planning & Development
Committee Agenda
May 7, 2018
Council Chambers - 7:00 pm
Chair: Councillor Butt
3. That the proposal to construct an addition to the existing building and
create two separate dwelling units on lands municipally known as 4993
Brock Road, be subject to Site Plan Approval.
Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 13-18
Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP -2016-04
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/16
702153 Ontario Limited
Part Block M, Plan 418 and Block 25, 40M-1366
527 Gillmoss Road
Recommendation
52-82
1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP -2016-04, submitted by
702153 Ontario Limited, on lands being Part Block M, Plan 418 and Block
25, 40M-1366, to establish a residential plan of subdivision consisting of
11 lots for detached dwellings, a block for an Open Space Reserve, and a
public road as shown on Attachment #3 to Report PLN 13-18, and the
implementing conditions of approval, as set out in Appendix I, be
endorsed;
2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/16, submitted by 702153
Ontario Limited, to implement the Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2016-04, on
lands being Part Block M, Plan 418, and Block 25, 40M-1366 be approved,
and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment as set out in Appendix II to
Report PLN 13-18 be forwarded to Council for enactment; and
3. That an exception to the Rosebank Neighbourhood Development
Guidelines — Precinct No. 3, to allow for minimum lot frontage of 10.5
metres and minimum lot depths of 27.0 metres for single detached
dwelling to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2016-04, be endorsed
as set out in Appendix III.
3. Director, City Development & CBO Report PLN 14-18
Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP -2017-04
Draft Plan of Condominium Application CP -2017-02
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 07/17
Madison Brock Limited
West Side of Brock Road, south of Dersan Street
2480 and 2510 Brock Road
83-115
DICKERING
Planning & Development
Committee Agenda
May 7, 2018
Council Chambers - 7:00 pm
Chair: Councillor Butt
Recommendation
1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP -2017-04, submitted by
Madison Brock Limited, on lands located on the west side of Brock Road,
south of Dersan Street, to establish 2 blocks for residential development,
an arterial road and a local road, as shown on Attachment #3 to Report
PLN 14-18, be approved and the implementing conditions of approval, as
set out in Appendix I, be endorsed; and
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 07/17, submitted by
Madison Brock Limited, to implement the Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -
2017 -04 and to facilitate a residential condominium development, be
approved, the zoning provisions contained in Appendix II to Report PLN
14-18 be endorsed, and that staff be authorized to finalize and forward an
implementing Zoning By-law to Council for enactment.
(111) Other Business
(IV) Adjournment
Lily
DICKERING
Information Report to
Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: 06-18
Date: May 7, 2018
From: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Chief Planner
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/17
Brock Dersan Developments Inc.
Southwest corner of Brock Road and Dersan Street
(2540 and 2550 Brock Road)
1. Purpose of this Report
The purpose of this report is to provide preliminary information regarding a Zoning By-law
Amendment application, submitted by Brock Dersan Developments Inc. to facilitate a
residential condominium development. This report contains general information on the
applicable Official Plan and other related policies, and identifies matters raised to date.
This report is intended to assist members of the public and other interested stakeholders to
understand the proposal. The Planning & Development Committee will hear public
delegations on the application, ask questions of clarification, and identify any planning
issues. This report is for information and no decision on this application is being made at
this time. Staff will bring forward a recommendation report for consideration by the
Planning & Development Committee upon completion of a comprehensive evaluation of the
proposal.
2. Property Location and Description
The subject lands are located at the southwest corner of Brock Road and Dersan Street
within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The subject
lands comprise three properties, having a combined area of approximately 2.54 hectares,
with approximately 143 metres of frontage along Brock Road and approximately
195 metres of frontage along Dersan Street (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #2). The
northwest corner of the property includes a hydro easement in favour of Hydro One. The
property is currently occupied by a temporary sales office trailer and the. remaining lands
are vacant with clusters of trees that are proposed to be removed to accommodate the
development.
Surrounding land uses include:
North: Across Dersan Street, vacant lands currently used for the temporary parking
of tractor trailer and a municipal pumping station, and further north is the
Devi Mandir
East: Across Brock Road, Duffin Meadows Cemetery and Pistritto's Farms Market
Information Report No. 06-18 Page 2
South: Vacant lands for which the City has received complete applications, submitted by
Madison Brock Limited, for a residential condominium development consisting of
various stacked dwellings and street townhouses
West: Across Four Seasons Lane (future north -south local road), vacant lands for which
the City has received complete applications, submitted by 9004827 Canada Inc.
(Stonepay), for a residential condominium development consisting of various
stacked dwellings and back-to-back townhouses
3. Applicant's Proposal
The applicant has submitted a Zoning By-law Amendment application to facilitate a
residential condominium development containing 411 units., The proposal includes:
• 2 apartment buildings having maximum building heights of 12 and 14 -storeys containing
a total of 176 apartment units
• 224 back-to-back stacked townhouse units
• 11 3 -storey townhouse units
The development is proposed to be constructed in two phases. The first phase includes
the back-to-back stacked townhouse units and the three-storey townhouses. The second
phase of the development includes the two apartment buildings along Brock Road. A
centrally located private open space area is proposed to serve the development. The
private open space area is connected to an internal pedestrian pathway network that also
provides connections to Brock Road, Dersan Street and Four Seasons Lane (see Submitted
Conceptual Site Plan and Submitted Conceptual Rendering, Attachments #3 and #4).
The applicant proposes to utilize the Bonus Zoning provisions of the City's Official Plan to
increase the maximum permitted density beyond what is allowed by the Official Plan, from
140 units per net hectare to 162 units per net hectare, in exchange for the provision of a
community benefit under Section 37 of the Planning Act.
Vehicular access to the development will be provided from Dersan Street and from Four
Seasons Lane (future north -south local road). Two levels of underground parking are
proposed for residents and surface visitor parking spaces are located throughout site and
within the property constrained, by a Hydro One easement. In support of the proposal, the
applicant is requesting the following resident and visitor parking ratios be utilized.
Housing Type
Proposed Parking Ratio and
Location
Number of
Units
Minimum Number
of Parking Spaces
proposed
Back -back -stacked
Townhouses
1.25 resident spaces per unit
(located within the
underground parking structure)
224
280
Apartments
0.8 resident spaces per unit
(located within the
underground parking structure)
176
141
Information Report No. 06-18
Page 3
Housing Type
Proposed Parking Ratio and
Location
Number of
Units
Minimum Number
of Parking Spaces
proposed
Street Townhouses
(no internal garage)
1.75 resident spaces per unit
(one space on the driveway
and a minimum of one space
within the underground parking
structure)
11
19
Total Minimum Resident Parking Based on Proposed Parking Ratios
440
Notwithstanding the above -noted proposed parking ratios and the minimum number of
parking spaces proposed to be provided on-site to support the development, the concept
plan illustrates a total of 580 parking spaces (500 spaces for residents and 80 spaces for
visitors)
The development will be subject to site plan approval.
4. Policy Framework
4.1 Durham Regional Official Plan
The subject lands are designated as "Living Areas" with a "Regional Corridor" overlay in the
Durham Regional Official Plan. Lands within this designation are predominately intended
for housing purposes. In addition, limited office development and limited retailing of goods
and services, in appropriate locations, as components of mixed use developments, are
permitted. In the consideration of development proposals, regard shall be had to achieving
a compact urban form, including intensive residential, office, retail and service, and mixed
uses along arterial roads, in conjunction with present and potential transit facilities.
Regional Corridors shall be planned and developed in accordance with the underlying land
use designation, as higher density mixed-use areas, supporting higher order transit
services and pedestrian oriented design. Regional Corridors are intended to support an
overall, long-term density target of at least 60 residential units per gross hectare and a
floor -space index of 2.5, with a wide variety of building forms, generally mid -rise in height,
with some higher buildings, as detailed in municipal official plans.
Proposed Parking Ratio and
Location
Total
Proposed
Number of
Units
Number of
Parking Spaces
Visitor Parking
0.15 spaces per unit
(located above ground)
411
62
Notwithstanding the above -noted proposed parking ratios and the minimum number of
parking spaces proposed to be provided on-site to support the development, the concept
plan illustrates a total of 580 parking spaces (500 spaces for residents and 80 spaces for
visitors)
The development will be subject to site plan approval.
4. Policy Framework
4.1 Durham Regional Official Plan
The subject lands are designated as "Living Areas" with a "Regional Corridor" overlay in the
Durham Regional Official Plan. Lands within this designation are predominately intended
for housing purposes. In addition, limited office development and limited retailing of goods
and services, in appropriate locations, as components of mixed use developments, are
permitted. In the consideration of development proposals, regard shall be had to achieving
a compact urban form, including intensive residential, office, retail and service, and mixed
uses along arterial roads, in conjunction with present and potential transit facilities.
Regional Corridors shall be planned and developed in accordance with the underlying land
use designation, as higher density mixed-use areas, supporting higher order transit
services and pedestrian oriented design. Regional Corridors are intended to support an
overall, long-term density target of at least 60 residential units per gross hectare and a
floor -space index of 2.5, with a wide variety of building forms, generally mid -rise in height,
with some higher buildings, as detailed in municipal official plans.
Information Report No. 06-18 Page 4
The application for a proposed high density development confirms to the Region of Durham
Official Plan given the site is situated on a Regional Corridor and Transit Spine, which can
support the proposed uses within close proximity to transit and active transportation.
Matters related to design and technical matters will be reviewed further.
4.2 Pickering Official Plan
The subject lands are located within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood and are designated
"Mixed Use Areas — Mixed Corridors". Mixed Use Areas are recognized as lands that have
or are intended to have the widest variety of uses and highest levels of activity in the City.
The Mixed Corridors designation is intended primarily for residential, retail, community,
cultural and recreational uses at a scale serving the community.
Minimum and maximum residential densities are established for Mixed Corridors. The
permitted density range for lands within this designation is over 30 units and up to and
including 140 units per net hectare. The following table outlines the maximum permissible
and proposed density for the development.
To facilitate the proposal, the applicant is requesting an increase in the maximum permitted
density by 22 units per net hectare, which results in an additional 55 units beyond the
maximum permitted density within the City's Official Plan.
The applicant's proposal will be reviewed in detail for conformity with the policies of the
City's Official Plan.
4.3 Bonus Zoning Policies
Section 37 of the Planning Act authorizes municipalities with appropriate Official Plan
provisions to pass zoning by-laws for increases in height or density beyond what is
permitted by the zoning by-law, in return for the provision by the applicant of community
benefits. The City's Official Plan contains such policy provisions which permit City Council
to pass by-laws that grant an increase in height of a building or an increase in density not
exceeding 25 percent of the density permitted by the Official Plan providing:
4
Units per Net
Hectare
Resulting total number
of units
Maximum permitted density by the
City's Official Plan
140 units/ha
356 units
Proposed Maximum Density
162 units/ha
411 units
Difference between maximum
permitted density and proposed
density
additional
22 units/ha
additional
55 units
To facilitate the proposal, the applicant is requesting an increase in the maximum permitted
density by 22 units per net hectare, which results in an additional 55 units beyond the
maximum permitted density within the City's Official Plan.
The applicant's proposal will be reviewed in detail for conformity with the policies of the
City's Official Plan.
4.3 Bonus Zoning Policies
Section 37 of the Planning Act authorizes municipalities with appropriate Official Plan
provisions to pass zoning by-laws for increases in height or density beyond what is
permitted by the zoning by-law, in return for the provision by the applicant of community
benefits. The City's Official Plan contains such policy provisions which permit City Council
to pass by-laws that grant an increase in height of a building or an increase in density not
exceeding 25 percent of the density permitted by the Official Plan providing:
4
Information Report No. 06-18 Page 5
• the density or height bonus is given only in return for the provision of specific services,
facilities or matters as specified in the by-law, such as but not limited to: additional open
space or community facilities, assisted or special needs housing, the preservation of
heritage buildings or structures, or the preservation of natural heritage features and
functions
• when considering an increase in density or height, and allowing the provision of
benefits off-site, the positive impacts of the exchange should benefit the social/cultural,
environmental and economic health of surrounding areas experiencing the increased
height and/or density
• the effects of the density or height bonus have been reviewed and determined by
Council to be in conformity with the general intent of the Official Plan, by considering
matters such as:
• the suitability of the site for the proposed increase in density and/or height in terms
of parking, landscaping, and other site-specific requirements
• the compatibility of any increase in density and/or height with the character of the
surrounding neighbourhood, and
• as a condition of granting a density or height bonus, the City requires the benefiting
landowner(s) to enter into one or more agreements, registered against the title of the
lands, dealing with the provision and timing of specific facilities, services or matters to
be provided in return for the bonus
The applicant is proposing to use the Bonus Zoning provisions of the City's Official Plan to
permit an additional 55 units beyond the maximum permitted density by the Official Plan.
The applicant has advised that in return for the additional density, the applicant is proposing
community improvements in the form of upgraded streetscaping and landscaping along the
Brock Road corridor and at the Brock Road and Dersan Street intersection focus area
and/or improvements to local parks.
The City is currently assessing the appropriateness of the applicant's request to use the
density bonus provisions of the Official Plan and the proposed community benefit.
4.4 Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Policies
Policies for the Mixed Use Areas — Mixed Corridors designation in this neighbourhood
require the following:
• new development to provide a strong and identifiable urban image by establishing
buildings closer to the street, providing safe and convenient pedestrian access and
requiring all buildings to be multi-storey
• require higher intensity multi -unit housing forms on lands adjacent to Brock Road and
restrict grade related residential development to lands adjacent to collector or local
roads
• the development of future roads adjacent to the Mixed Corridor designation on both
sides of Brock Road to provide alternative access and potential transit routes
5
Information Report No. 06-18 Page 6
The subject lands are located at the intersection of Brock Road and Dersan Street, which
has been identified as a Focal Point within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. Development
within Focal Points is to contribute to the prominence of the intersection by requiring:
• initial development on each property to occur at the corner of the intersection
• the inclusion of appropriate provisions in the implementing zoning by-law to address
such matters as the location and extentof build -to -zones, mix of permitted uses, and
required building articulation
• the use of other site development features such as building design, building material,
architectural features or structures, landscaping, public art and public realm
enhancements such as squares or landscaped seating areas to help achieve focal point
prominence, and
• all buildings to be a minimum of three functional storeys with four storey massing
The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Policies also require landowners to:
• submit a Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report that demonstrates
how the proposal is consistent with the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan to
the satisfaction of the Region, City and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
• become a party to the cost sharing agreement for Duffin Heights or receive an
acknowledgement from the Trustee of the Duffin Heights Landowners Group Inc. that
the benefitting landowner has made satisfactory arrangements to pay its proportion of
the shared development cost
The applications will be assessed against the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies and
provisions of the Pickering Official Plan during the further processing of the applications.
4.5 Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines
The intent of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines is to further the
objectives of the Official Plan and to achieve the following design objectives for the
neighbourhood:
• to create a streetscape which is attractive, safe and encourages social interaction within
the neighbourhood
• to establish a central focus to the neighbourhood which is safe, lively and attractive
• to provide a diversity of uses to support neighbourhood and City functions
The subject lands are delineated as Brock Road Streetscape on the Tertiary Plan, which
encourages higher density, mid -rise and mixed use buildings with a high level of
architectural quality. The Tertiary Plan also identifies the intersection of Brock Road and
Dersan Street as a focal point that will require special design considerations through the
use of appropriate building heights, massing, architectural features and landscaping in
order to establish a prominent image at these intersections.
6
Information Report No. 06-18 Page 7
The guidelines for lands within the Brock Road Streetscape include the following
requirements:
• properties fronting Brock Road shall be required to provide a built form across a
minimum of 60 percent of the lot frontage
• all primary frontages of buildings shall front Brock Road and provide pedestrian access
directly to the sidewalk and multi -use trail along Brock Road, and
• large walls visible from Brock Road shall be articulated through various treatments such
as offsets in massing; blank facades will not be permitted facing Brock Road or any
street
The application will be assessed against the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Guidelines
during the further processing of the application.
4.6 Zoning By-law 3037
The subject lands are currently zoned "A" — Rural Agricultural Zone within Zoning By-law 3037,
as amended, which permits a detached dwelling, home occupation, agricultural and related
uses, recreational and limited institutional uses. The applicant is requesting to rezone the
subject lands to appropriate zone categories with site-specific performance standards to
facilitate the proposal.
5. Comments Received
5.1 Resident Comments
As of writing ofthis report, no comments or concerns have been received.
5.2 City Department Comments
5.2.1 Engineering Services
• the owner shall satisfy the City respecting the submission of appropriate engineering
drawings that detail, among other things, City services, roads, storm sewers, sidewalks,
lot grading, street lights, fencing and tree planting, and financially secure such works
• the applicant is required to provide a platform for a future 2.0 metre wide sidewalk along
Brock Road
• the applicant is required to coordinate with Hydro One regarding site features and
landscaping proposed within the hydro corridor/easement and provide written
confirmation that Hydro One is in agreement with the proposed works within the Hydro
easement
• the Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report shall be updated to
meet design requirements for minor system and provide the City with confirmation that
the Region is in agreement with the proposed design
• the Preliminary Grading Plans shall be updated to identify grades around the perimeter
of the site, all future road grades and property line grades are to be coordinated with the
adjacent landowners
• tree compensation shall be provided for the removal of approximately 366 on-site trees
• barrier free path of travel is required to access the bus stop along Brock Road
7
Information Report No. 06-18 Page 8
5.3 Agency Comments
5.3.1 Region of Durham
• the application for a proposed high density development conforms to the Region of
Durham Official Plan (ROP) given the site is situated on a Regional Corridor and Transit
Spine, which can support the proposed uses within close proximity to transit and active
transportation
• an updated Road Traffic Noise Impact Study shall be provided to the Region and the
applicant is required to implement the recommended noise attenuation measures of the
updated study affecting the proposed development in a Site Plan Agreement and/or
Condominium Agreement to the satisfaction of the Region
• the submitted Stage 1 and Stage 2 Archeological Assessment report confirmed that the
subject site does not contain archeological resources and no further archeological
assessment would be required
• the Region will require that the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) to review
and approve the submitted archaeological report, and require MTCS's clearance letter
advising that all archaeological requirements have been met to its satisfaction
• the submitted Phase One Environmental Site Assessment report concludes that there is
low potential for environmental concern and recommends that no furtherenvironmental
investigation is required, and the Region will require a completed Certificate of
Insurance prior to Draft Plan of Condominium and/or Site Plan Approval
• a Waste Management Plan shall be completed if municipal service is requested
• if the development does not meet the Region's Guidelines and Standards for waste
collection on private property, then the applicant will be responsible for retaining private
waste collections services
• an engineering report will be required to confirm that the structure can carry the weight
of the waste vehicle, given that a waste vehicle will be travelling over an underground
parking structure
5.3.2 Hydro One Networks Inc. (HONI)
• the development proposal is abutting and encroaching onto HONI high voltage
transmission corridor
• all technical requirements are required to be addressed to HONI's satisfaction
6. Planning & Design Section Comments
The following is a summary of key concerns/issues or matters of importance raised to date.
These matters, and other identified through the circulation and detailed review of the
proposal, are required to be addressed by the applicant prior to a final recommendation
report to Planning & Development Committee:
• ensure conformity with the City's Official Plan and Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies
• assess the suitability and appropriateness of the site for the proposed increase in density
• determine if the proposed community benefit (improvements in the form of upgraded
streetscaping and landscaping along the Brock Road corridor and at the Brock Road
and Dersan Street intersection focus area and/or improvements to local parks) for the
additional increase in density and the suitability for the community
Information Report No. 06-18 Page 9
• require an appraisal of the land to determine the value of Section 37 contribution
• ensure the proposal addresses the goals and objectives of the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood Development Guidelines with respect to building siting and setbacks,
building heights and massing, architectural features and materials, landscaping, outdoor
open space, and pedestrian connectivity within and external to the site
• review the resident and visitor parking standards proposed that are similar to the City
Centre by-law and ensure that sufficient parking is provided to support the proposal
• conformation from Hydro required to permit parking within the Hydro easement
• ensure the vehicle entrance to the site is aligned with the future local road location of
the development to the west
• evaluate the design of the pedestrian connections within the site and to the transit
locations to ensure barrier free path of travel
• assess whether the size and configuration of the proposed private amenity space is
appropriate for the proposed development
• assess whether additional parkland is required from the development, given City
Council Resolution #323/17 expressing concerns with the lack of neighbourhood park
space on the west side of Brock Road
• assess any potential shadow impacts from the proposed 12 and 14 -storey buildings on
the subject development and the surrounding future residential developments
• ensure an appropriate interface between buildings located on the southerly limits of the
subject lands and the Madison development to the south
• review the setbacks between the stacked townhouse buildings
• ensure the preliminary grades, municipal services and utilities, vehicle access locations
and construction timelines of future roads and other infrastructure are coordinated with
abutting landowners to the west and south
• ensure the applicant becomes a party to the cost sharing agreement for Duffin Heights
or receives an acknowledgement from the Trustee of the Duffin Heights Landowners
Group Inc., that the benefitting landowner has made satisfactory arrangements to pay
its proportions of the shared development cost
• further issues may be identified following receipt and review of comments from the
circulated departments, agencies and public
The City Development Department will conclude its position on the applications after it has
received and assessed comments from the circulated department, agencies and public.
7. Information Received
Copies of the plans and studies listed below are available for viewing on the City's website
at pickering.ca/devapp or in person at the offices of the City of Pickering, City Development
Department:
• Planning Justification Report, prepared by Evans Planning Inc., dated November, 2017
• Sustainability Development Report, prepared by Evans Planning Inc., dated
December 2017
• Stage 1 &.2 Archaeological Assessment, prepared by Archaeologist Inc. dated
February 2017
9
Information Report No. 06-18 Page 10
• Environmental Impact Study, prepared by Beacon Environmental Limited, dated
November 2017
• Hydrogeological Report, prepared by V.A. Wood Associates Limited, dated.
December 2016
• Road Traffic Noise Impact Study, prepared by GHD, dated October 30, 2017
• Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by V.A Wood Associates Limited, dated
June 2016
• Phase 1 ESA, prepared by V.A Wood Associates Limited, dated July 2016
• Functional Serving and Stormwater Management Report, prepared by GHD, dated
October 2017
• Arborist Report, prepared by Beacon Environmental Limited, dated November 2017
• Traffic Impact Study, prepared by GHD, dated November 2017
8. Procedural Information
8.1 General
• written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the City Development
Department
• oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting
• all comments received will be noted and used as input to a Planning Report prepared by
the City Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee
of Council
• any member of the public who wishes to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision
must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal
• any member of the public who wishes to be notified of Council's decision regarding this
proposal must request such in writing to the City Clerk
9. Owner/Applicant Information
The owner of this property is Brock Dersan Developments Inc. and represented by
Evans Planning Inc.
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Air Photo Map
3. Submitted Conceptual Site Plan
4. Submitted Conceptual Rendering
10
Information Report No. 06-18 Page 11
Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By:
J
Cristina Celebre, MCIP, RPP
Princip I Planner, Development Review
Nilesh Suiti, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Development Review
& Urban Design
CC : Id
❑ate of Report: April 20, 2018
Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Chief Planner
11
Attachment # I to
Infnrrr►ntion RRoort#
_1J
RBBB UNTAV
WINVILLE ROAD
0
a
0
0
0
z
J
J
H
DERSAN STREET
• v 74% Ati♦.♦.♦.
•
► i♦i♦ ♦ • • ♦ 4
4► ••• • •4
d ►•A!4A_ AA_ A_ A
4♦• 4
SUBJECT
LANDS
BROCK ROAD
w
>-
E2
0
z HAYDEN LANE w
0
0
LIATRIS DRIVE
/1111/111
1111111111
Q
u^ Q M SZHOLLQI(1LDg Vl=
1
7
—J
J
J
ff
R 4 `'RriF
1
4
Location Map
File: A 12/17
d
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Applicant:Brock Dersan Developments Inc.
Property Description:Part Lot 19, Con 3, Part 1, 4OR-27836, Parts 1 and 2, 4OR-27837, Part 1,
4OR-27838 and Part 1, 4OR-2583 (2540 and 2550 Brock Road)
Date: Dec. 21, 2017
3 The Corporation of the City of Picketing Produced (In part) under Coe use from: O Queer. Pricier, IXtlno !Sentry of Nalual Res -turas..
All tights reseed, 0 Her Majesty the Queen m r Right of Canada, Depar rt of Natural Resauces. AO dglls reserved.;
ry
Simnel Enterprises Inc and its suppliers atl rights reserved.; O Municl pal Property Assessment Corporal. and Hs supp0ers Welds 'owned.;
SCALE. 1:5,000
THIS IS NOT A PIAN OF SURVEY.
Attachment #._toWr
O.uiwrrn�s4inrt RPi1r11'taafjk �1�J
/8
:r I p
1
4 MP
y
q
�wrr�
tft
Ri.
C ' -1
LLLE
ail
k. .5;11ingus
.,
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Air Photo Map
File: A 12117
Applicant:Brock Dersan Developments Inc.
Property Description:Part Lot 19, Con 3, Part 1, 40R-27836, Parts 1 and 2, 40R•27837, Part 1,
40R-27839 and Part 1, 4DR-2583 (2540 and 2550 Brock Road)
▪ 11. C.p.r.4*S.1W. y W Pk1.Anp P.d...d rn plop l.Nm. J.414 Dem CV Own. P,.44l.0e1.. 1.WfNry.IIII.4, I fie,eln...
AI rglalle..nN.P He, Ugrlry 0. GnenNRlpelNG.ud., Ntaftwg44 e! Na M1Pe.o..ae. ydpira..a..I.d;
O in.M C.b.r4.e.4r. IS Dal44d0,4.I...ned:C11..Y.4.,Vm..AYAIN..m.11Cn!Nnp...4M NI 1.1p! lin el 0K1. I.. ,.
Date: Apr, 18 2018
SCALE: 1:5,000
1W 2IIQI/iWli OF 1VW ..
3
DERSAN STREET
1= li a r1 LTi~
II 1I r-
-
ME
II
11-.1----1-'
—11-1. 11-
1
-7 E 77" 1 1 I ..-
i
X00
LI
ruzrwrxeu
rED04-I4STOREYrstzei oisem1 _ ' r �1 r�
AP RMIENTB IDYG-12sroREr Nor, 1 _ri . 11- u--�r 5--tra!
I srACKED TormsousEs+sratErli;�xv rer ,t
� ��3sr n1 1
.1E
l
`
-p
Tower B
12 Storeys
BROCK ROAD
04 °d
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Submitted Conceptual Site Plan
File No: A 12/17
Applicant: Brock Dersan Developments inc.
Property Description: Part Lot 19, Con 3, Part 1, 40R-27836, Parts 1 and 2, 40R-27837, Part 1, 40R-27838
and Part 1, 40R-2583 (2540 and 2550 Brock Road)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN AREAVA]LAEILE FOR VIEWING ATTHE CITY OF PICKEAING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
DATE: Ap- 5.2018
matuarbiglCore! ing•AingWppsvazo1T
..a
LIPIanrisizt,Owe Pk:.ningVAppsSAl2017
IR,... � .4 r� !
--_ Jam':_ ` .ti -'4-
1
��� ��
1.
k
/ ..w1
_
�~
F
e d
C4
Submitted Conceptual Rendering
File No: A12117
°6
P I C K E RI N G
City Development
Department
Applicant: Brock Dersan Developments Inc.
Property Description: Part Lot 19, Con 3, Part 1, 40R-27836, Parts 1 and 2, 40R-27837, Part 1, 40R-27838
and Part 1, 40R-2583 (2540 and 2550 Brock Road)
1 FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAMLA8LE FOR VIEWING ATT:HECITY OF PICKERIN
I CITY DEVELOPMENT p?ARTASEIT.
DATE: Apr. 5, 2018
ff
-. 3
D z
iD
4 kD
DICKERING
Cdy 602
Report to
Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: PLN 11-18
Date: May 7, 2018
From: Kyle Bentley
Director, City Development & CBO
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/16
R. & S. Cross
Part of Lot 3, Plan 12, Now Part 1 Plan 40R-5734
(4993 Brock Road)
Recommendation:
1. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/16, submitted by R. & S. Cross to facilitate
a residential building containing two separate dwelling units on lands municipally known as
4993 Brock Road, be approved, and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment as set out in
Appendix I to Report PLN 11-18 be forwarded to Council for enactment;
2. That Council endorse the recommendations of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee to
include the property municipally known as 4993 Brock Road on the City of Pickering
Municipal Heritage Register as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or
interest, under Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act; and,
3. That the proposal to construct an addition to the existing building and create two separate
dwelling units on lands municipally known as 4993 Brock Road, be subject to Site Plan
Approval.
Executive Summary: R. & S. Cross have submitted an application for a Zoning By-law
Amendment to permit a residential building consisting of two separate dwelling units on lands
located on the east side of Brock Road south of Central Street in the Hamlet of Claremont.
In response to comments and concerns raised by City staff following the Statutory Public Meeting,
the applicant undertook a Cultural Heritage Assessment for the subject property in order to
determine if any cultural heritage resources would be impacted by the proposed development,
including those on the subject lands and within the immediate area. The Cultural Heritage
Assessment concluded that the existing dwelling on the subject property has cultural heritage
value related to its design and context. The building is an example of an 1850's Ontario cottage
style that is becoming increasingly rare. The building was constructed in approximately 1851
making it one of the earliest buildings constructed in Claremont.
As a result of the findings of the Heritage Assessment, the applicant made a number of revisions
to their proposal. The key revisions included: retaining the majority of the exterior fapade of the
existing dwelling; constructing a 2 -storey addition to the rear of the building and matching the
architectural details of the existing dwelling; and eliminating the second driveway access from
Brock Road.
16
Report PLN 11-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: R. & S. Cross (A 14/16) Page 2
Given the identified heritage significance of the property, the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee
recommends that Council add the property as a non -designated property on the Municipal
Heritage Register.
Staff support the revisions to the original proposal and support the recommendation of
Heritage Pickering. Accordingly, staff recommends that the Zoning By-law Amendment
Application A 14/16, be approved, and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment as set out in
Appendix I to Report PLN 11-18 be forwarded to Council for enactment.
Additionally, staff recommend that Council endorse the recommendations of the Heritage Pickering
Advisory Committee to include the property municipally known as 4993 Brock Road on the City of
Pickering Municipal Heritage Register as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or
interest, under Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act.
Staff also recommend that the proposal be subject to Site Plan Approval to ensure that the design
of the addition and alterations to the property complement the existing building and maintain the
character of the area.
Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City area anticipated as a result of the
recommendation of this report.
1. Background
1.1 Property Description
The subject property is located on the east side of Brock Road, south of Central Street
within the Hamlet of Claremont (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The property has an
area of approximately 417.3 square metres with approximately 15.5 metres of frontage
along Brock Road.
The property currently contains a one and a half storey detached dwelling fronting Brock
Road and a two-storey coach house located in the rear yard. Both the detached dwelling
and coach house were used as separate dwelling units. Based on the submitted Cultural
Heritage Assessment, the existing detached dwelling was constructed in approximately
1851. The property is not currently included on the Municipal Heritage Register. The date
of construction of the coach house is unknown.
The surrounding land uses include a two-storey mixed use building (the Claremont General
Store) consisting of commercial and residential uses immediately to the north, and
detached dwellings in the form of bungalows and two-storey dwellings to the east, west,
and south (see Aerial Map, Attachment #2).
17
Report PLN 11-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: R. & S. Cross (A 14/16) Page 3
1.2 Applicant's Original Proposal
The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property to permit a residential building
containing two separate dwelling units. The initial plan proposed to demolish the existing
detached dwelling and coach house, and construct a new three-storey building containing
two.independent dwelling units having separate entrances from grade. The new building
was proposed to be approximately 10.0 metres in height, measured from the established
grade to the peak of the roof and to be constructed on the existing foundation, with the
exception of a slight enlargement of the building footprint on the east and west sides (see
Original Site Plan, Attachment #3 and Original Elevations, Attachment #4).
A total of four parking spaces (two for each unit) were proposed in support of the initial
development. Two parking spaces were to be provided within a shared internal garage,
accessed from a new driveway, and two spaces were to be provided in the rear yard,
accessed from the existing driveway. An existing mature tree within the municipal
boulevard was proposed to be removed or relocated to provide for a second driveway
access from Brock Road.
1.3 Applicant's Revised Proposal
The applicant has made a number of significant revisions to the original proposal as a
result of the findings and. conclusion of the Cultural Heritage Assessment in order to
preserve the building's cultural heritage value.
The revised plan proposes to maintain almost the entire building facade. The front and
side facades of the building that are currently cladded in wood will remain intact (see
Revised Site Plan, Attachment #5 and Revised Elevations, Attachment #6). The interior of
the existing building will be renovated to accommodate the proposal and meet the
requirements of the Ontario Building Code. An addition to the rear of the existing building
on the east side will match the architectural details of the retained portion of the original
structure and the existing roofline will be maintained with the addition. The two residential
units originally proposed will be accommodated within the retained portion of the building
and the proposed addition.
The internal garage initially proposed has been removed. Removing the garage eliminates
the need for a second driveway access off of Brock Road. A total of four parking spaces
(two spaces for each dwelling unit) will be accommodated on a surface driveway utilizing
the existing access off of Brock Road on the southern portion of the subject property.
2. Comments Received
2.1 May 8, 2017 Public Information Meeting and Written Submissions
A Public Information Meeting was held on May 8, 2017, at which two residents attended to
express their comments and concerns regarding the proposed development. The following
is a summary of key concerns and comments, received to date:
18
Report PLN 11-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: R. & S. Cross (A 14/16) Page 4
Resident of • concerned that the proposed building height of three -storeys
1642 Central Street would have a negative visual impact on the streetscape and
would be out of character with the surrounding area, which
consists namely of one and two-storey buildings
• concerned that the capacity of the existing septic system on the
subject property is inadequate to accommodate two independent
dwelling units
Resident of • requested that a privacy fence be installed along the south
1789 Central Street property line to mitigate noise from the adjoining driveway on the
subject property
• commented that construction occur in a timely manner and tree
protection fencing be provided during construction
Owner of • expressed concerns regarding the potential impact on their
1703 Central Street property during the construction process
(General Store) • requested construction mitigation measures be implemented
throughout the construction process and that any portion of their
property damaged be restored to the original state following
construction
Resident of • support the proposal and the revitalization impact it will have on
1711 Hoxton Street Claremont
Resident of • support the proposal and appreciate the investment in the
1639 Acorn Lane community
2.2 City Departments and Agency Comments
2.2.1 Durham District School Board
• no objection to the development proposal
• students from this development will attend Claremont Public School and Uxbridge
Secondary School
2.2.2 Durham Catholic School Board
• no objection to the development proposal
• students from this development will attend St. Wilfred Catholic Elementary School and
St. Mary Catholic Secondary School
19
Report PLN 11-18
Subject: R. & S. Cross (A 14/16)
May 7, 2018
Page 5
2.2.3 Region of Durham Planning and Economic Development Department
• no concerns with the proposed rezoning of the subject lands
• the Durham Regional Official Plan (DROP) designates the subject property "Hamlets",
which states that Hamlets shall be developed in harmony with surrounding uses and
may consist of predominately single -detached housing
• the proposal conforms to the policies of the DROP
• the subject property is located within the "Settlement Area" designation of the Oak
Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP)
• residential development is permitted within the "Settlement Area" designation subject to
the policies of the ORMCP
• a Site Screening Questionnaire, prepared and signed by Robb Hudson, Professional
Engineer, dated July 27, 2017, was submitted on August 4, 2017 to the satisfaction of
the Region
• a Noise Impact Study, prepared by SS Wilson Associates Consulting Engineers, dated
September 27, 2017, was submitted on September 27, 2017 to the satisfaction of the
Region
2.2.4 Durham Region Health Department
• reviewed the additional details' provided by the applicant related to the private services
on the subject property, including the daily sewage flow, the details of the existing
private sewage system and the type of well that is located on the property
• no concern with the approval of the rezoning application
• the size of the holding tank will need to be increased to comply with current Ontario
Building Code requirements
• prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant will be required to obtain final
approval from the Regional Health Department and meet the minimum requirements of
the Ontario Building Code, specifically as they related to private services
2.2.5 City of Pickering Engineering Services Department
• no objection to the approval of the zoning by-law amendment application
• an Encroachment Agreement may be required for the potential overhang of eaves onto
the property directly to the north
3 . Planning Analysis
3.1 Heritage Assessment
Given the approximate age of the existing building and the known history of area in which it
is located, City staff requested that the applicant undertake a cultural heritage impact
assessment for the subject property. The assessment would determine if any cultural
heritage resources would be impacted by the proposed development, including those on
the subject lands and within the immediate area.
20
Report PLN 11-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: R. & S. Cross (A 14/16) Page 6
The applicant submitted a Heritage Assessment, prepared by Philip Goldsmith, Architect,
dated September 27, 2017 (see Heritage Assessment, Attachment #7). The submitted
report assessed the subject lands based on the Provincial criteria under Regulation 09/06.
Regulation 09/06 outlines three separate criteria for heritage potential, which includes
design value, historical association value, and contextual value.
The heritage assessment concluded that the main building on the subject property has
cultural heritage value related to its design and context. The assessment outlines that the
building is an example of an 1850's Ontario cottage style that is becoming increasingly
rare. It further states that the main building is a good representation of an early style that
has survived largely intact, and of a typical wood frame construction and cladding of the
1850's period. The assessment also outlines that the building has contextual value in
relation to the Hamlet of Claremont. The construction of the building in the early 1850's,
makes it one of the earliest buildings constructed in Claremont, a village that was settled in
the 1840's. It is one of the few original buildings remaining in Claremont that anchor the
village in time. The existing coach house in the rear yard was not identified as having
heritage value under the criteria of Regulation 09/06. The report concludes that the
heritage value of the main building should be considered in the future planning of the
property.
Given the heritage significance of the subject property identified within the submitted
Heritage Assessment, City staff recommend that the property be added as a non -designated
property on the Municipal Heritage Register.
3.2 Ontario Heritage Act
The Ontario Heritage Act allows Council to include in their Heritage Register, properties
that are not designated but are of cultural heritage value or interest. These are commonly
known as "listed" properties. There are no legal restrictions registered on title as a result of
being included on the Heritage Register as a listed property. However, should the owner of
a listed property wish to demolish all or a portion of the building, the City may delay
issuance of a demolition permit for a 60 day period while conservation options are
considered, including proceeding to designation or removing the property from the Register
to allow for the issuance of a demolition permit.
3.3 Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee support the proposal and the inclusion of
4993 Brock Road on the Municipal Heritage Register
On February 28, 2018 the Heritage Advisory Committee reviewed the revised plans and the
Heritage Assessment submitted in support of the proposed development. The Committee
was pleased with the revised design which preserves the exterior facade of the existing
dwelling while accommodating an addition to the rear of the building that maintains the
scale and character of the existing dwelling and surrounding buildings.
21
Report PLN 11-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: R. & S. Cross (A 14/16) Page 7
The Committee concurred with the findings of the Heritage Assessment and supported the
revised proposal, and adopted the following motion:
1) That Heritage Pickering support the property being added as a non -designated
property on the Municipal Heritage Register;
2) That Heritage Pickering support the zoning by-law amendment application (revised
proposal) in principle; and
3) That Heritage Pickering be provided an opportunity to review the site plan application,
prior to final site plan approval being granted.
3.4 The proposal conforms to the policies of the Pickering Official Plan
The subject property is designated "Rural Settlements — Oak Ridges Moraine Rural
Hamlets" within the Hamlet of Claremont. This designation recognizes settlements located
on the Oak Ridges Moraine with historic roots as social and service centres for the
surrounding area, and provides for a variety of uses including residential, employment, and
commercial. Limited infilling and redevelopment is permitted within this designation.
The policies for the Hamlet of Claremont further designate this property as "Hamlet
Commercial". This designation provides for a variety of permissible uses including retail,.
office, business, personal service, employment, residential, and home occupations. The
Claremont policies encourage business uses to locate in the hamlet commercial area
surrounding Central Street and Brock Road and also encourage a wider variety of housing
forms within the Hamlet, particularly to meet the needs of young people and senior citizens.
The Official Plan also sets out broad goals and objectives related to significant cultural
heritage resources. A key objective of Council is to identify important heritage resources
from all time periods, so that they can be appropriately conserved and integrated into the
community fabric. Council is also encouraged to prevent the demolition, destruction or
inappropriate alteration of important cultural heritage resources to the extent possible.
The applicant's revised proposal preserves an important heritage resource that helps to
define the character of the area and supports the historical context of the Claremont
Village. The proposal complies with the policy requirements of the Official Plan.
3.5 A construction management plan will be implemented to minimize the impact of
construction activities
Some area residents expressed concerns with possible disruption during the construction
phase. The applicant has advised that they intend to implement various measures during
the construction process to minimize any negative impacts on abutting property owners.
The proposed measures include tree protection fencing to be installed to City standards
around existing trees within the rear yard and the mature tree within the municipal
boulevard. Additionally, temporary construction fencing will be erected around the exterior
of the property in order to contain the construction activity. Construction activity, including
the parking of construction vehicles, will be maintained on the subject property.
22
Report PLN 11-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: R. & S. Cross (A 14/16) Page 8
The applicant has indicated that neighboring property owners will be notified regarding the
commencement and duration of the construction. The applicant has also committed to
engage in discussions with the abutting property owner to the north at 1703 Central Street
in regards to protective construction fencing and access through their property during the
construction process. The applicant has advised that should any damage occur to the
driveway at 1703 Central Street as a result of the proposed construction, it will be restored .
to original condition.
3.6 Detailed design matters will be addressed at the site plan approval stage
The Site Plan Control policies of the City's Official Plan states that residential development
of one or two dwelling units per lot are exempt from Site Plan Control, except on properties
of historic or architectural value or interest. Given the heritage significance of the subject
property, staff recommend that the proposal be subject to site plan approval allowing staff
to ensure that the design of the addition and alterations to the property complement the
existing building and maintain the character of the area. Additionally, the site plan approval
process will provide the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee an opportunity to review
the proposal in greater detail and provide additional comments.
If Council approves the rezoning application to permit' a residential building consisting of
two dwelling units, the City will have the opportunity to review the proposal in greater detail
through the site plan approval process. Technical matters to be further addressed include,
but not limited to:
• an encroachment agreement for a portion of the existing building that encroaches onto
the property immediately to the north
• review of architectural design and material of the proposed addition
• compatibility of the original building and proposed addition
• detailed construction management
• on-site grading and drainage
• tree protection fencing
• privacy fencing along the south property line
4. Conclusion
The applicant has revised their proposal to retain the exterior facade of the existing building,
continue the roofline established by the existing building, and reduce the overall building
height from three to two storeys. The revised proposal will ensure the existing structure and
proposed addition will be consistent with the built form in the surrounding area and will be
compatible the broader community of Claremont.
Staff support the rezoning application, and recommends that a site specific exception
by-law, as set out in Appendix I, to add a residential duplex dwelling as a permitted use and
reduce the permitted building height from 12.0 metres to 9.0 metres, be forwarded to
Council for enactment.
23
Report PLN 11-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: R. & S. Cross (A 14/16) Page 9
5. Applicant's Comments
The applicant concurs with the recommendations of this report.
Appendix
Appendix 1 Draft Implementing Zoning By-law
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Aerial Map
3. Original Site Plan
4. Original Elevation
5. Revised Site Plan
6. Revised Elevation Plan
7. Heritage Assessment
Prepared By:
Cod
Piann
orris +n
Nllesh irti, MC1P, RPP
Manager, Development Review
& Urban Design
CM:Id
Approved/Endorsed By:
Catherine Rose, MC1P, RPP
Chief Planner
i-46)
Kyle Bentley, P. Eng.
Director, City Development & CBO
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
Tony Prevedel, P. Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
Z3,r8
24
Draft Implementing
Zoning By-law for A 14/16
Appendix 1 to
Report PLN 11-18
25
The Corporation of the City of Pickering
By-law No. XXXX/18
Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3037,
as amended by By-law 6640/06, to implement the Official Plan of
the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, in Part of Lot 3, Plan 12,
Now Part 1, Plan 40R-5734 (A 14/16)
Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering received an application
to rezone the subject lands in Part of Lot 3, Plan 12, Now Part 1, Plan 40R-5734, in the
City of Pickering to permit a residential building consisting of two separate dwelling
units;
And whereas an amendment to Zoning By-law 3037, as amended, is deemed
necessary to permit such uses.
Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as
follows:
1. Schedule 1
Schedule I attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon is hereby
declared to be part of this By-law.
2. Area Restricted
The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Part of Lot 3, Plan 12, Now
Part 1, Plan 40R-5734, in the City of Pickering, designated "ORM-C2-2" on Schedule
attached hereto,
3. Text Amendments
1. Section 9.3.3, Special Conditions is hereby amended by adding the following
new subsection following subsection 9.3.3.1 as follows:
9.3.3.2 — ORM-C2-2
a) In addition to the uses permitted within subsection 9.3.1, the following use
shall be permitted on lands zoned "ORM-C2-2":
i) Dwelling, Duplex
b) Despite Section 2.33, the following definition shall apply to the lands zoned
"ORM-C2-2":
"Dwelling, Duplex" shall mean the whole of a two-storey building divided
vertically into two separate dwelling units, each of which has an independent
entrance,
26
By-law No. XXXX/18 Page 2
c) Despite Section 9.3.1 (i), an accessory dwelling unit shall not be permitted an
lands zoned "ORM-C2-2".
d) Despite Section 9.3.2 (iv) Maximum Height, the maximum building height
permitted on lands zoned "ORM-C2-2" shall be 9.0 metres.
4. By-law 3037
By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640106, is hereby further amended only to the
extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law. Definitions and
subject matters not specifically dealt with in this 13y -law shall be governed by
relevant provisions of By-law 3037, as amended.
5. Effective Date
This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning
Act.
By-law passed this XX day of XXXX, 2018
David Ryan, Mayor
Debbie Shields, City Clerk
27
_1 1
28
E
in
Central Street
26.7 m
P
ORM-C2-2
(Part of Lot 3, Plan 12,
Now Part 1, Plan 40R-5734)
26.9 m
Schedule 1 to By -Law XXXX/18
Passed This
Day of
Mayor
tow
Clerk
ATTACHMENT # TO
REPORT #L ! a
1-
1-
2
-
1—
Q
J
J
lir= '4111
MN Mill
CENTRAL STREET
1 ANF STR=F
In
w
1
1
RFFT
Cr
z
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
w
tY
❑
0
z
0
ACORN LANE
0
tY
0
0
cc
WELLINGTON STREET
•
1-
0 0
C�
z
w
1-
1-
m
z
0
J
.
C4
Location Map
File: A 14/16
o4
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Applicant:R. & S. Cross
Property Description: Part of Lot 3, Plan 12, Now Part 1 Plan 40R-5734 ,
(4993 Brock Road)
Date: Apr. 05, 2018
g, The Corporation of the City of Plckenng Produced (In part) under Reuse ions ®Queens Primer, Qtano Husby of Natural Resources.
All rights reserved.;® Her Ltapaly the Queen In Right or Canada, Department e1 Uahrel Resoirees.All dons resorted.;
ATeranet Enterprises Inc. and Its suppFrs ell rights reserved.;®Municipal Property Assessmerl Corporation and its supple. al rights resented.;
SCALE.1:5,000 p�
THIS IS MOT APLAUOP SURVEY. P N -Ll U
ATTACHMENT ,#
#REPORT
3
64 4
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Aerial Map
File: A 14116
Applicant: R. & S. Cross
Property Description: Part of Lot 3, Plan 12, Now Part 1 Pian 40R-5734
4993 Brock Road
M.4
1CTu. .ts l Aa Cr1P^1 ild•.Mp PoWee.e ell ...Ur le.nw 11•m' owurn Plinlrr. Mw. 1lgHry aIHaLe.l flt.w[t.
h1116n....d.,T I1.1 1.41r4y IM wren P nerd of Card, Lee Wnv.nl.l Nair+ Re.edee.f. M lI I f al.,..1.:
13 T re eel 17.04....1 In. W .1..y13Hkre MI RO. stem!.; O 114/dge.dal'npelfy A... rem. eA Caglogn aef de swim h eMb reseeded;
Date: Apr. 19, 2017
SCALE: 1:3.000
RI IS 191ig. 4 P1MI l UNNCY.
PN -RU
ATTACHMENT # 3 TO
REPORT /i PLM I I f
319N4 ,
X01 2
PROPOSED ADDITION
\P�
irh
LO T 1
No.1703
2 STDREY
BRICK
DRIVEWAY
G'S
15.5
EXISTING
SI -ED
0
h
DWELLING
TO BE
RENDVED
LOT7
CJ
2 PARKING
—SPACES,- 2.75 X
6.0 At
NO 49_93
-J_ 'EXISTING
\\ A 11/2 STOREY
\\� FRAME
/\ 11 /\
H
/PROPOSED
/ ADDITION
3
L7
—2 PARKING
SPACES - 2.75 X
v o tit
EXIST, DRIVEWAY
'PBRC:H
C
15.5
L
L'9
WO
SIDE4/ALK
SIDEWALK
RELOCATE EXISTING 111tt
OR PLANT NEW
OLD
GUTTER
CURB
BROCK ROAD
GE INE F
Cts4
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Original Site Plan
FILE No: A 14/16
APPLICANT: R. & S. Cross
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Part of Lot 3, Plan 12, Now Part 1 40R-5734
(4993 Brock Rd)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
DATE: Feb. 21, 2018
31
ATTACHMENT # 7 TO
REPORT!
12
12
6.12
6.12
12
12
1111
TOP OF PLATE
FINISHED 114120 19_00R _ —t---
FINISED SECC. D FL009
FINIS -E0 GR004D FL009
9RAce 4 2
SOF pcor
12
12
East Elevation
12 • i2
101
IIIiD
II
II
II
6.12
12.12
16
12 _
12
(1111 11 ilh{
LI
0
TOP OF PLATE _ _ _a—
m
NNiSLHJ TWRD FLOOR _ —`—
A 1
FINISHED SECQ`D FLOOR
EMI—ED 920043 FLOOR
DRAW
42
REVISES WP. T. 13. 2016
REVISED. 314E 1, 2016
REVISD> MAY 14, 2016
West Elevation
O
e7
0
cite
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Original Elevations
FILE No: A 14/16
APPLICANT: R. & S. Cross
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Part of Lot 3, Pian 12, Now Part 1 40R-5734
(4993 Brock Rd)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
DATE: Feb. 21, 2018
32
ATTACHMENT # TO
REPORT # pLN I 1 : I -__
LOT 2
PROPOSED ADD.ITION
loi
w�-
AEI
8'
15.54 s(s
9E'0 9L'0--
EXISTING
SI -ED -
Qi•
79
•
DWELLING
TO BE
REMOVED
LOT
- No,1703
2 -STOREY
BRICK
9
6E'8
9
NO. 499•3
• EXISTING
.1 V2 STOREY
FRAME
9
No,4989
1 STOREY
FRAME
(snaW$d)
bL'I
.9
^r
cs
n+o
SIDEWALK - d45
SIDEWALK
O
WISED: DEC, 1 1, 2017 �+
E`LIS®� JLLY 21, 2017 Oma.
- + •09 ,9
C9��
'
GUTTER
cuRB
O BROGK ROAD
s40 CENTER LINE OF R0P 0
09
C44
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Revised Site Plan
FILE No: A 14/16
APPLICANT: R. & S. Cross
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Part of Lot 3, Plan 12, Now Part 1 40R-5734
(4993 Brock Rd)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
DATE: Feb. 21, 2018
33
ATTACHMENT TACHMENT # TO
REPORT # i I -18
1
11
• ' • : RIGHT: $IDE (SOI tH) .EI.#VATI.QN 7'..' :
..„EAK OF ROOF;
Ri
4
•
'• TOP QF P A7E ..
• FINI6FED.SECONb FI OQR:
• A
....? F4NI GRCUND F300R
2
•
FRONT 9 EVAT1ON
ctp4
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Revised Elevations
FILE No: A 14/16
APPLICANT: R. & S. Cross
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Part of Lot 3, Plan 12, Now Part 1 40R-5734
(4993 Brock Rd) •
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
DATE: Feb. 21, 2018
34
Heritage Assessment
C.0
01
Avtech Designs
1885 Clements Rd.. Unit 201
Pickering..
PHILIP GOLDSMITH !
27 September 2017
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd., Claremont
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 History 2
2.1 4993 Old Brock Road, Claremont 2
2.2 Context and Setting 2
3.0 Heritage Assessment 8
3.1 Design or Physical value 9
3.2 Historical or Associative value 10
3.3 Contextual Value 11
4.0 Landscape 13
5.0 Discussion 13
6.0 End Note 14
7.0 Bibliography 15
Heritage Consultant:
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 ARCHITECT
46 Dorset Street East, Port Hope, Ontario, L1 A 1 E3
t- 905-885-0348 e- philgoldmith@sympatico.ca
27th September 2017
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd.. Claremont 27th September 2017
1.0 Introduction
4993 Old Brock Road is a small 1-1/2 storey Ontario Cottage built in 1851. It is
located one property from the corner of Old Brock Road and Central St. (CR #5)
in the heart of the small village of Claremont.
This property includes the historic house and a garage / carriage shed which has
been altered and converted to a second residence on the property. The Owners
of the property ware considering the demolition of the existing buildings and their
replacement with a new two unit structure to the designs of Avtech Designs.
This heritage assessment of the property has been undertaken to determine if
there is heritage value in the structures in place at this time. This property is not
listed or designated currently.
My opinions are based on a site visit and historic research undertaken in
September 2017. The building was viewed only from the exterior from the street
and for privacy, the site nor the building was entered.
Based on my research and observations 1 feel the house at 4993 Old Brock Road
has heritage value, It is an early building dating to the first years of the
establishment of Claremont and is a classic Ontario Cottage design.
Further investigations would be required to adequately comment on the condition
of the building. From an initial review it appears largely unaltered but requires
some repair.
1. Site location. Geeg(e
2. Site aerial, building indicated. Googre
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 ARCHITECT Page 1
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd., Claremont
2.0 History
2.1 4993 Old Brock Road, Claremont
4993 Old Brock Road, Claremont is a frame one -and -a -half storey house with a
central door and two flanking windows and a central gable with a pointed -arch
window. The house was constructed on lot 3 directly behind the brick commercial
building constructed by John Michell in 1851 at the corner of Brock Road and
Central Street East in Claremont.
2.2 Context and Setting
The hamlet of Claremont is part of the Town of Pickering within the Regional
Municipality of Durham. The community was settled in the early 1840s. In the
1830s, the only roads constructed in Pickering Township was Brock Road and
Kingston Road. Brock Road would later intersect with the 9th concession
creating the four corners of the hamlet of Claremont.
Joseph and Joshua Wixon, who were of English descent, came from New York
and were the first pioneer settlers in the area. Joseph Wixon owned all the land
west of Brock Road and the 9th concession. Joseph's house was located north of
the four corners. Joshua owned all the land on the east side of Brock Road. The
first grist mill was owned by Joshua Wixon located east of the village.
In the late 1830s, settlers from England began to settle in the north Pickering
area which was a very good farming location. The land on the southwest corner
of the four corners was originally owned by John Hamilton, and the land on the
southeast by Alexander Spears. By 1846, the hamlet was already the centre of
many thriving businesses, including two blacksmith shops, two shoemaker
shops, two carpenters, a harness maker, and a cooper.
John C. Micheli was one of the first merchants in the area and established a
business a half a mile south of the four corners on the east side of Brock Road in
27th September 2017
3. Site aerial, building indicated. Google
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 ARCHITECT Page 2
Heritage Assessment - 4993 old Brock fid., Claremont
1844. In 1847, there was a stone building erected on the
southwest corner of Brock Road and the 9th concession on the
farmland owned by John Hamilton. Thomas Noble was the owner
of the first general store and rented the stone building on the
southwest corner. Claremont was originally known as Nobles
Corners after the early local business man.
in 1850, the hamlet needed to establish a post office. William
Michell, the first reeve of the township in 1850, suggested the
name Claremont named after Clermont in France, the ancestral
home of the Michell family. The post office was set up by 1851,
and Thomas Noble was the first postmaster.
fn 1853, William and John McNab of Scotland bought Thomas
Noble's grocery business on the southwest corner. In the
mid -1850s, the McNab's purchased a lot on the northwest corner
from Mr. Dow who had subdivided his land into one fifth of an
acre lots. The McNab's moved a frame building from the hamlet
of Greenwood to this lot and expanded their business. In July
1875, the McNab's purchased the brick store on the southeast
corner of the four corners. The land on this corner had originally
been owned by Alexander Spears and subdivided into lots in the
mid -nineteenth century. John C. Michell built a red brick store on
the southeast corner in 1851. The McNab's continued to operate
their business from this building until 1899 when the business
transferred to the sons of the McNab brothers.
The first school house was established in the early 1840s in a log
building on the northeast corner of Brock Road and Concession
Nine. A new school constructed of red brick was opened on
January 1, 1865. in 1886, a new school building was constructed
west of the log building designed by architect Albert Asa Post
(1850-1926). In 1925. the Claremont Public and Continuation School was re -built -
27th September 2017
Lot Ig
1,7.LLtC•13 OF
CIA REM0NT
Serrir'Re&pea•irrrh_
f,erf I+
.TReet1.
+d
54
.q iu J
I7nr •
1. riy.�._1
A$7'
Site —
f.
---- J
i, TOO. C— 4.2Z-__
I• i 1
1_ S
Lot /.1•
14'
4. Map of Village in 1877
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 ARCHITECT Facie 3
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd., Claremont 27th September 2017
again and the design was considered a modern school for the period. The school
later had an addition added in 1972.
The Claremont Hotel was built in the 1840s on the northeast corner originally
constructed of logs and operated by Mr. O'Brien. The original building was
replaced by a larger frame structure which burned down in 1937 and was
replaced by another building that burned down in 1970.
In 1884, the Canadian Pacific Railway established a station in Claremont one
mile north of the four corners which contributed to the growth of the community.
The line connected Claremont west to Toronto and eastward to Perth. The
Claremont train station was closed in the 1960 and tom down in the 1980s. The
railway attracted additional business to the hamlet which had been growing
rapidly since the 1860s with industries such as saw mills. grist and flour mills,
woolen mills. cider mills and feed mills.
Churches were built in the hamlet including a Wesleyan Methodist Church
completed in 1853 and later replaced with a new church in 1889. The Claremont
Baptist Church was built on Central Street in red brick in 1865. The Presbyterian
Church was built in 1876 and the building was used as the Claremont
Community Hall since 1925 when the church disbanded with the union of
Methodism and the creation of the United Church.
In 1907, Claremont hada population of about 300. In 1908, the hamlet was
separated from Pickering Township to become a police village. In 1968, the
hamlet of 600 residents re -joined the Town of Pickering. In 1972, the Government
of Canada expropriated 7,530 ha of !and west of Claremont to be used for a
future airport called the Pickering International Airport to relieve congestion at
Pearson International Airport. Airport traffic declined and the airport has not been
built to date.
■s_
5. Claremont CPR Station built in 1884. Photo
Credit, From Time Present and Time Past
6. Claremont Baptist Church completed in
1865. Photo Credit From Time Present and
Time Past
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 AF;CH(TECT Page 4
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd., Claremont 27th September 2017
• a. t
• e.
i �,; •
- _-
�� irk ..▪ . i •`_ �` -
r M Iv
;■
t.
• _ _ i ^Site: k- 1 d ••
- L i 1 r-.----. 4.
I .t • i
vrJ-•.r ! l • C L • i -.
_ ■ _ jr . �1 , W o 1 r
s Ca.
J
i 1[...rnRT tnn .l
I
ti
ti
i•.
1
4.
7_ Claremont drawn on the Illustrated Historical atlas of me County or Ontario, 1877
°TM
R—
L.
K , • LA. c.0.
L • i-
■ c,R •41,
;Ai
- + ~ ▪ - i ��
i . 9 1. � T..w.• Sri
1 laL -�
1
� i. % - L
■ ■ ▪ a. ▪ - T — ■r�
.- -ti --- • -- : :• _ t
■ ti _
•. . L
- y 1". F • , ` ~ -▪ .
}• ■ Al -i G
•� 1 a - ' lei H+•
•
.-r N
PHILIP GOLDSMIT>-E I ARCHITECT
.ta
Page 5
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd., Claremont
27th September 2017
a. View of the southeast corner of Brock Street and Centra!
Street. The tree to the rear of the building is in front of 4993
Brock Road. The corner store burned down in 2009.
9. View of the southeast corner of Brock Street and Central Street. The tree to
the rear of the building is in front of 4993 Brock Road. Photo credit: From lime Present
and Time Past
PHILIP GOLDSMITH I ARCHITECT
10. View of the the
Stone Store, the
Brick Store and the
Bowling Green from
Claremont Past and
Present: historic
sketch written upon
the occasion of the
centennial
celebration 1938.
The arrow indicates
the location of 4993
Old Brock Road.
Page 6
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd., Claremont
27th September 2017
11. Left, Top Photo: Central Street West with the
school house on the left. Bottom Photo: North Brock
Street. Photo Credit: From Time Present and Time Past
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 ARCHITECT
12. The Claremont Public School (S.S. #15) on Central
Street. Photo Credit: From lime Present and Time Past
Page 7
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd.. Claremont 27th September 2017
3.0 Heritage Assessment
Heritage assessments are based on Provincial criteria under Reg 9166 of the
Ontario Heritage Act. These are as follows:
1. The property has design value or physical value because it;
is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type,
expression, material or construction method
ii. displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, or
ill. demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement.
Z
2. The property has historical value or associative value
r
because it; - =
i. has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity,
organization or institution that is significant to a community r'
ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an
understanding of a community or culture, or
iii, demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder,
designer or theorist who is significant to a community.
3. The property has contextual value because it;
i. is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area,
is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings,
or
is a landmark.
O. Reg. 9/06, s. 1 (2).
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 ARCHITECT Page 8
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd., Claremont 27th September 2017
3.1 Design or Physical value
The property at 4993 Old Brock Road incudes two building structures, a house.
and a garage now converted to a residence.
The house is a 1-1/2 storey Ontario Cottage style building constructed, we
believe, in 1851, This makes it one of the very earliest buildings constructed in
Claremont, a Village that was settled in the 1840s.
The house is a simple rectangular form surmounted by a front to back pitched
roof with a large central gable over the front door. The roof includes a small
overhanging eave trimmed to the wall. At the rear of the building is a "saltbox"
single storey rear addition.
Within the gable is a window with a pointed arched head fitting into the roof slope
and highlighted by heavy wood trim. There is a small wood final above the
window at the apex of the dormer
The ground floor is 3 bays in width with a central doorway between two windows.
The doorway, typical to the style. has a central door flanked and overarched by
windows with small divided lites. The doorway is rimmed with a pilaster on each
side supporting an expressed lintel with small projecting cornice.
The ground floor windows are similarly trimmed with smaller elements including
side trim and lintel with cornice.
The building is mostly clad in wood board and batten siding, with one wall, the
north side wall, finished in cement plaster stucco.
This house is a typical Ontario cottage likely built to available traditional builders
plans at the time.
---11111.1111111111111
13. House from the NW, note store to the left.
There are no windows on the north, which
would be typical, a reflection of its historic
relationship to the store. Both Buildings were
originally constructed in 1851. PGA.
14. House from the SW. PGA
PHILIP GOLDSMITH I ARCHITECT Page 9
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Olcf Brock Rd., Claremont
It is my opinion that is this house is of a type that is becoming increasingly rare
but not unique. It is a good example that is representative of an early style that
has survived largely intact, and of a typical wood frame construction and cladding
of the 1850s period.
The converted carriage house /garage. l do not believe to be of the same period,
its general appearance with the Gambrel roof and wood siding suggests a date in
the 1900-1930 period. Old but not of the same significance as the house. We
were not able to determine specific historic information about the carriage
house / garage.
In this classification I would rate the house of med-high value and the carriage
houselgarage of low value.
3.2 Historical or Associative value
Although constructed in the same year as the red brick store at the SE corner of
Central St. and Old Brock Rd., built by John Mitchell, it is uncertain if the house
had a relationship to the store, it may have had.
As a simple traditional house, therefore, this building can only be associated with
the history of Claremont in general. It has existing in Claremont since its earliest
days. On that basis it does have some potential to yield, information that
contributes to an understanding of the community.
Finally, a a simple traditional design, it is my opinion, the house does not
demonstrate or reflect the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or
theorist who is significant to a community.
in this classification l would rate the house of med-low value and the carriage
houselgarage of low value.
27th September 2017
15. Detail view of entrance by with a
classic traditional arrangement of
entrance; dormer and windows. PGA
16. View to rear of house, the Carriage
House ! Garage converted to a residence.
FGA
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 ARCHITECT Page 10
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd.. Claremont
3.3 Contextual Value
Claremont has changed aver the years. As can be seen in the historic
images above what was a well defined crossroads village in the 19th
century, the character of the village has been eroded through time.
This is in part through the loss of a number of key historic buildings as
well as through construction of more contemporary ones not
necessarily built in a traditional village manner.
The loss of the SE Corner store was very unfortunate as was the
more historic loss of the NE corner buildings over the years resulting
in a garage.
There are a few buildings remaining, however, that are original and
do anchor the village in time. Several of these need restoration to
recapture their architectural potential, but are important in the village
context. This house at 4993 is one of those buildings.
It is my opinion that the house at 4993 Old Brock Road is important in
defining. maintaining or supporting the character of the area and is
physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its
surroundings. It however, not a landmark.
In this classification I would rate the house of med-high value and the
carriage house/garage of low value.
27th September 2017
17. View to house from Central St. near the corner of Did
Brock Rd. PGA
18, View past house, on the right, to the corner of Central
St. and Old Brock Rd. PGA
PHILIP GOLDSMITH I ARCHITECT Page 11
rn
n
c° Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd., Claremont
19. View across Central St. looking south on Old Brock Rd. PGA
c 1. V IC^w PL Ur a I9 aL7uu i U I IJIU DIULK rkU I IeaI t IL/Ube. rUA
PHILIP GOLDSMi7H I ARCHITECT
27th September 2017
JJ -
•
20. Similar view in the 1870s looking south to store and 4993
Old Brock Rd.. PGA
22
Maur tele-dein,Sr, +th on �j{j grnrlr Rrf noir hr%!T IOGated n} far Igft.
•
Page 12
Heritage Assessment - 4993 ofd Brock Rd., Claremont 27th September 2017
4.0 Landscape
There is little landscape associated with the property. It is a normal small village
lot with only a narrow north side yard, a wider south side yard utilized as a
driveway and a back yard that includes the Carriage House / Garage. The Front
of the house has a narrow set back from the street.
None of the open area of the lot is landscaped to a significant degree. It is my
opinion that the landscape of the property has no heritage value.
5.0 Discussion
Based on the criteria set out in the Ontario Heritage Act Reg 9/06 It is my opinion
this house does have heritage value, and particularly in the context of historic
Claremont village.
Although this report is not intended to reflect upon the condition of the house it
is worth commenting on, some condition issues are immediately apparent.
The house is quite complete and in its form and appearance largely unaltered
from it historic beginnings. In terms of original design, some an site investigation
is required to confirm if the mix of sidings is original, or if it was at first a cement
stuccoed house, which is possible. or a woof clad house also possible.
Windows appear to have been replaced, it would be expected for a building of
this age that original windows would be true divided lites, multi-lited, possibly
515 designs. There are also indications that some of the window sills require
repair or replacement from rot.
The roofing is at the end of its life and requires replacement.
There are obvious signs that repairs are required near grade in the lower wall at
the building sills and possibly at the supporting frame sill plate.
23. North wall of house, note cement plaster
stucco finish and lack of any windows except a
small window in the addition.
PGA
24. Detail view at front door sill, note rot in the
door sill. PGA
PHILIP GOLDSMITH I ARCHITECT Page 13
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd.. Claremont 27th September 2017
A full condition review would have to be undertaken to determine the full extent
of deterioration and repairs required to conserve the building and if that is even
possible. Despite a number of condition issues heritage value of the house
should be considered in planning the future of the property.
6.0 End Note
This is an opinion which considers the Heritage Value of the property based an
historic research and a site visit. Access to the interior of the building was not
available and the interior was not reviewed. Nor is this to be construed as a
condition review, which was not undertaken at this time and will also factor in
determining what conservation if any is possible.
The opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not represent any
assurance that the City of Pickering will come to similar conclusions. They wiii
assess the building(s) using the same Provincial criteria, however.
Should a specific proposal for the site be considered, I recommend that a
meeting be held with Historic Preservation staff in Pickering, to review the
findings of this report and initial plans for any development to confirm their
position.
25 Detail view at upper south window, note
deterioration in the window sill. PGA
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 ARCHITECT Page
Heritage Assessment - 4993 Old Brock Rd., Claremont 27th September 2017
7.0 Bibliography
Books
Claremont Past and Present: historic sketch written upon the occasion of the
centennial celebration 1938. Sabean, John.
Time Present and Time Past: A Pictorial History of Pickering. Altana Editions,
Pickering, 2000.
Wood, William R. Past Years in Pickering. William Briggs, Toronto, 1911.
On-line Sources
"Albert Asa Post" entry in the Biographical Dictionary of Architects in Canada
PHILIP GOLDSMITH 1 ARCHITECT Page 15
rt;; o/
DICKERING
Report to
Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: PLN 13-18
Date: May 7, 2018
From: Kyle Bentley
Director, City Development & CBO
Subject: Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP -2016-04
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/16
702153 Ontario Limited
Part Block M, Plan 418 and Block 25, 40M-1366
(527 Gillmoss Road)
Recommendation:
1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP -2016-04, submitted by 702153 Ontario
Limited, on lands being Part Block M, Plan 418 and Block 25, 40M-1366, to establish a
residential plan of subdivision consisting of 11 lots for detached dwellings, a block for an
Open Space Reserve, and a public road as shown on Attachment #3 to Report PLN 13-18,
and the implementing conditions of approval, as set out in Appendix I, be endorsed;
2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/16, submitted by 702153 Ontario Limited,
to implement the Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2016-04, on lands being Part Block M, Plan 418,
and Block 25, 40M-1366 be approved, and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment as set
out in Appendix II to Report PLN 13-18 be forwarded to Council for enactment; and
3. That an exception to the Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines — Precinct No.
3, to allow for minimum lot frontage of 10.5 metres and minimum lot depths of 27.0 metres
for single detached dwelling to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2016-04, be
endorsed as set out in Appendix III.
Executive Summary: The subject lands are located on the south side of Gillmoss Road, west of
the Canadian National Railway (CNR) corridor and east of Rosebank Road within the Rosebank
Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment#1).
702153 Ontario Limited has submitted applications for a Draft Plan of Subdivision and a Zoning
By-law Amendment to facilitate a residential development of 11 lots for detached dwellings: 9 lots
to be accessed through a new internal public road and the remaining 2 lots to front onto
Gillmoss Road (see Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision, Attachment #3).
While some of the lots within the draft plan do not meet the minimum lot frontage and lot area
requirements as set out in Design Precinct No. 3, staff support the proposed draft plan of
subdivision and zoning by-law amendment on the basis that the size and configuration of the
proposed lots in combination with the proposed zoning provisions will ensure that the proposed
built form will be compatible with the existing neighbourhood. The proposal implements the
policies of the Official Plan and is generally consistent with the Rosebank Development
Guidelines.
52
Report PLN 13-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: 702153 Ontario Limited (SP -2016-04, A 13/16) Page 2
Metrolinx has advised that it is supportive of reducing its minimum required building setback of
30.0 metres to approximately 24.0 metres from the abutting rail corridor, given that there is an
existing embankment ranging 2.5 metres to 8.0 metres in height above the tracks located between
the subject property and the tracks. Staff have also explored an option to allow for the possible
future northerly extension of Dunn Crescent to intersect with the extension of Gillmoss Road. The
applicant has addressed various concerns identified by the community with respect to loss of
mature vegetation, grading and drainage, construction management and future maintenance of a
remnant parcel of land identified as Block 25.
Accordingly, staff recommends that Council approve the Draft Plan of Subdivision Application
SP -2016-04, and endorse the implementing conditions of approval, as set out in Appendix I. It is
also recommended that the site specific amending by-law as set out in Appendix II, be approved
and forwarded to Council for enactment. In addition, staff recommend that an exemption to the
Rosebank Development Design Guidelines, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 10.5 metres and a
minimum lot depth of 27.0 metres for single detached dwellings within the boundaries of the draft
plan of subdivision, be approved.
Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the
recommendations of this report.
1. Background
1.1 Property Description
The subject lands are located on the south side of Gillmoss Road, west of the Canadian
National Railway (CNR) corridor and east of Rosebank Road within the Rosebank
Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The subject lands have an area of
approximately 0.89 of a hectare with approximately 81.0 metres of frontage along Gillmoss
Road.
The property contains a detached dwelling and an accessory structure, which are intended
to be demolished as part of the redevelopment of the property. There are a number of
mature trees located along the westerly and southerly property lines. However, several
trees located within the portion of the property to be regraded and developed have been
removed by the applicant prior to the submission of the applications. Surrounding land uses
to the north, south and west include low density residential development consisting of
detached dwellings. To the east, across the CNR corridor, is the Petticoat Creek
Conservation Area (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #2).
1.2 Applicant's Proposal
The applicant is proposing a residential development consisting of 11 lots for detached
dwellings: 9 lots will front onto an internal public road, and 2 lots will front onto
Gillmoss Road (see Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision, Attachment #3).
53
Report PLN 13-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: 702153 Ontario Limited (SP -2016-04, A 13/16) Page 3
Lot frontages will range between 10.5 metres and 35.0 metres, and lot areas will range
from 305 square metres to 806 square metres. Based on a conceptual sitting plan, the
applicant is proposing a minimum front yard setback of 6.0 metres, a minimum side yard
width of 0.6 metres on one side and 1.2 metres of the other side, and a minimum rear
yard depth of 7.0 metres. Lots 40.0 metres and greater in depth will have a minimum rear
yard depth of 10.0 metres. The proposed detached dwellings will have an approximate
building height of 10.0 metres. All of the dwelling units will be designed to accommodating
4 vehicle parking (2 spaces within a garage and 2 spaces on the driveway).
The internal public road will have a right-of-way width of 18.0 metres, and will extend from
Gillmoss Road southward terminating at a turning circle at the south end of the subject
lands. A 0.6 metre wide reserve Open Space Block between the proposed street and the
CNR corridor will be conveyed to the City.
2. Comments Received
2.1 February 6, 2017 Public Information Meeting
A Public Information Meeting was held on February 6, 2017 at which 6 residents attended.
The following is a summary of key concerns and comments:
• concerned with the Toss/removal of existing mature trees on the subject lands
• requested additional information regarding the City's future plans for extending
Dunn Crescent further north
• requested assurance that their property will not be negatively impacted by grading and
storm drainage from the developed site
• the resident at 657 Dunn Crescent, located at the southerly end of Dunn Crescent,
advised that he currently maintains Block 25, which forms part of the rear areas of
proposed Lots 10 and 11, and requested further clarification regarding ownership and
future maintenance of this parcel of land
• the resident at 633 Dunn Crescent, also indicated a concern regarding current draining
issues on this property, and is concerned that the redevelopment of the subject lands
may further worsen existing drainage issues within the neighbourhood
• a resident requested additional information regarding the applicant's construction
management practice to ensure construction impacts such as dust, noise, mud tracking,
parking of construction vehicles, and other related construction activities are minimized
2.2 City Departments and Agency Comments
2.2.1 City of Pickering Engineering Services Department
• no objection to the proposal
• reserved Open Space Block 12 is to be conveyed to the City
• require written confirmation from CNR/Metrolinx indicating that a crash wall is not
required and that the existing topography is sufficient and appropriate
• matters with respect to detailed grading and drainage, stromwater management,
construction management/erosion and sediment control, site servicing, detailed
right-of-way design, utility locations, easements, tree compensation, fencing details,
and -street tree planting will be further reviewed through conditions of draft plan of
subdivision approval
54
Report PLN 13-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: 702153 Ontario Limited (SP -2016-04, A 13/16) Page 4
2.2.2 Region of Durham
• the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement as it will take advantage
of existing infrastructure and public services within the neighhbourhood
• the proposed development conforms to the Growth Plan by facilitating growth and
intensification within the built-up area
• the Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Living Areas" which are
intended to be used predominately for housing purposes
• lands within the "Living Areas" are to be developed in a compact form through higher
densities and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas, particularly along arterial
roads
• sanitary sewer and municipal water supply is available to service the lands
• the submitted Noise Impact Study, prepared by J.E. Coulter Associates Limited,
addresses potential noise and vibration impacts from the CNR line, which is identified
as a Principal Main line with both freight and passenger train during day and night time
periods
• the Noise Impact Study indicates modest noise attenuation from the embankment rising
from approximately 2.5 metres to 8.0 metres; however, a 2.0 metre high acoustic fence
constructed in the side yards of Lots 3 to 11, closing off the gap between the dwelling
units, is recommended along with central air conditioning units for Lots 3 to 8 and
appropriate warning clauses
• as a condition of draft plan approval, the recommendations, mitigation measures, and
warning clauses identified in the Noise Impact Study be implemented and included in
the subdivision agreement with the City
• the Phase One Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Soil Engineers Ltd.,
confirmed that the site has low potential for environmental concern, and recommended
that no further investigation be done; however, as the study is over 18 months old, the
Region will require an updated Record of Site Condition compliant Phase One Report,
a Regional Reliance Letter, and a Certificate of Insurance as conditions of draft plan
approval
• the site is identified as being within an area of archeological potential, and a Stage 1
Archaeological Assessment must be completed by a qualified consultant as a condition
of draft plan approval
• the proposed development will be serviced by Durham Region Transit (DRT) Bus 107
and 193A with bus stops located on Rosebank Road, north of Cowan Circle and north
of Rougemount Drive
• as the proposed development is located beyond DRT's maximum walk guideline
distance of 400 metres, it is suggested that the proposed development include two
pedestrian walkway connections: the first to connect the easterly and westerly portion
of Gillmoss Road; and the second between Lots 10 and 11 to provide access to
Dunn Crescent
• the Region has no objection to the zoning by-law amendment and draft approval of the
plan of subdivision subject to the Conditions of Draft Approval provided by the Region
55
Report PLN 13-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: 702153 Ontario Limited (SP -2016-04, A 13/16) Page 5
2.2.3 Durham Catholic. District School Board
• no objections to the proposal
• the students generated by the proposed development will attend Father Fenelon Catholic
Elementary School and St. Mary Catholic Secondary School
2.2.4 Durham District School Board
• no objections to the proposal
• the proposed development is expected to generate 6 pupils and can be accommodated
by existing school facilities
3. Planning Analysis
3.1 The proposal conforms to the policies and provisions of the Pickering Official Plan
and the Neighbourhood Development Guidelines
The subject lands are within the Rosebank Neighbourhood and are designated as "Urban
Residential Areas - Low Density Areas" within the Pickering Official Plan, which provides
for housing and related uses with a net residential density of up to and including 30 units
per net hectare. The proposed development will result in a density of approximately
12.5 units per net hectare, which is within the density range for the lands designated Low
Density in the City's Official Plan.
The Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines identify three Design Precincts
within the neighbourhood. The proposed development falls within Design Precinct No. 3,
which permits semi-detached and single detached dwelling units. The minimum lot
frontages for single detached dwellings within this precinct is approximately 15.0 metres
and the minimum lot depth is approximately 30.0 metres.
The existing residential subdivision immediately to the north, along Gillmoss Road and
Cowan Circle, is also within Design Precinct No. 3. This draft plan of subdivision was
approved by City Council in 2010 having lots with minimum lot frontages of 11.0 metres.
Staff supported this proposal with reduced lot frontages on the basis that the inclusion of
the word "approximately" in the Development Guidelines provides for the consideration of
minor deviations from the standards expressed in the guidelines, provided the character of
the neighbourhood is maintained.
Of the proposed eleven lots, ten lots have lot frontages larger than 11.0 metres and four of
those lots have lot frontage of greater than 15.0 metres. Only Lot 9 has a slightly reduced
lot frontage of 10.5 metres due to the pie shaped configuration of the lot located on a
cul-de-sac. Aside from Lots 1 and 2, which have a slightly reduced lot depth of 27.0 metres,
all of the remaining Tots within the proposed draft plan have lot depths greater than
30.0 metres. The applicant is also proposing a maximum building height of 10.0 metres;
whereas existing building heights in the immediate area range between 9.0 metres to
11.0 metres.
56
Report PLN 13-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: 702153 Ontario Limited (SP -2016-04, A 13/16) Page 6
Although some of the lots within the draft plan do not meet the minimum lot frontage and lot
area requirements as set out in Design Precinct No. 3, the size and configuration of the
proposed lot in combination with the proposed zoning provisions as provided for in the
attached draft zoning by-law (see Appendix H) will ensure that the resulting built form will be
compatible with the existing neighbourhood.
Staff recommend that an exception to the Rosebank Neighbourhood Development
Guidelines be approved to permit lots for detached dwellings with minimum lot frontages of
10.5 metres and minimum lot depth of 27.0 metres, within the boundaries of this draft plan.
Further the implementing zoning by-law contains specific zoning provisions to address lot
frontage, side yards, building heights and other zoning standards to ensure the proposal
will be in keeping with the established built form in the immediate neighbourhood.
3.2 Metrolinx supports a reduced building setback from the rail corridor
The subject property is located immediately adjacent to the Lakeshore East Rail Corridor.
The standard setback requirement for new residential developments adjacent to a CNR
corridor is a minimum of 30.0 metres from the property line of the corridor to the main wall
of the dwelling. The proposed dwelling units will have a minimum setback of approximately
24.0 metres from the railway corridor.
Given the existing topography of the rail corridor in relation to the proposed grading of the
property, there is a natural barrier along the shared property line ranging in height
approximately from 2.5 metres at the north end to 8.0 metres at the south end above the
tracks. This embankment provides a natural safety barrier and a modest level of noise
attenuation from the railway corridor, and will mitigate any impacts of the minor reduction in
the required 30.0 metre setback.
Additional noise attenuation measures and warning clauses as recommended by the Noise
Impact Study, prepared by J.E. Coulter Associates, will be included as conditions of draft
plan of subdivision approval and within the subdivision agreement with the City.
Metrolinx has advised that given the height of the existing natural embankment between
the rail corridor and the proposed development, Metrolinx is supportive of the proposed
reduced building setbacks from the rail corridor.
3.3 Future northerly extension of Dunn Crescent
At the Public Information Meeting, Committee Members requested clarification with respect
to the future plans of Dunn Crescent. Engineering staff have explored two options for the.
northerly extension of Dunn Crescent.
The first option that staff considered was to extend Dunn Crescent further north to connect
with proposed Street 'A'. This option was not practically feasible give the significant grade
difference of approximately four metres between the existing northerly terminus of
Dunn Crescent and the southerly end of proposed Street `A'.
57
Report PLN 13-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: 702153 Ontario Limited (SP -2016-04, A 13/16) Page 7
The second option would be to extend Dunn Crescent north to intersect with the future
extension of Gillmoss Road. This option would require the severance of the rear of the lots
fronting onto Rosebank Road, as well as the extension of Gillmoss Road from the existing
turning circle to the east of the existing terminus in the west. The result would be a single
loaded extension of Dunn Crescent for a majority of its length, and would require a large
retaining wall on the lands to the east of the new Dunn Crescent road allowance. No land
or reserves will be required from the owners of the subject lands in order to facilitate this
option.
3.4 Tree compensation will be required for the loss of existing vegetation
Some residents expressed concerns with the loss of mature trees from the subject lands
prior to the submission of the applications. The applicant has submitted a Tree Inventory
and Preservation Plan, prepared by Cosburn Nauboris Ltd, dated September 1, 2016,
which surveyed and evaluated 67 trees along the westerly and southerly boundaries of the
subject lands. The consultant has identified a total of 28 trees within the site that can be
preserved and protected. Due to the proposed layout of the new lots, roads, grading,
including installation of swales and catch basins, 39 trees within the site are recommended
to be removed. The health condition of the trees proposed to be removed include poor, fair
and good, with various trees highlighted as having poor structure.
Staff have reviewed the submitted report and noted that an additional 3 trees at the
southeast quadrant of the property between the south property line and Street `A' can
potentially be protected. Appropriate tree protection fencing will be implemented
throughout the construction process. As a condition of draft plan approval, an updated Tree
Preservation Plan and a compensation planting plan are required to compensate the City
for the loss of tree canopy through either payment of cash -in -lieu and/or on-site or off-site
replanting.
3.5 Proposed grading and drainage from the development will not impact adjacent
properties
An area resident expressed concerns that drainages from the subject lands would
negatively impact existing properties in the immediate area, should the lands be developed.
A Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, prepared by Sabourin Kimble
& Associates Ltd, dated August 2016, was submitted in support of the proposal. The
proposed development will be graded in accordance with the City's grading criteria and to
match existing elevations in the area. Lots 1 and 2 will have front yard swales designed to
minimize draining onto Gillmoss Road and will be graded with the rear yard drainage being
directed into a side yard swale located in between Lots 4 and 5. Lots 4 to 7 have been
designed as front draining lots to empty into the new local storm sewers to be built within
the public road. A rear yard swale will be constructed across Lots 8 to 11, which will
convey surface run-off to a rear lot catchbasin located on the southwest corner of the site.
To avoid standing water and erosion, the use of an underlying sub -drain and rip -rap surface
treatment will be explored at the detailed design stage.
58
Report PLN 13-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: 702153 Ontario Limited (SP -2016-04, A 13/16) Page 8
The Recommended Conditions of Approval (see Appendix I) require the applicant to
prepare and submit detailed drainage and grading plans. These plans will be reviewed
further by City staff to ensure compliance with City's engineering standards. The required
detailed drainage and grading plans for the development will ensure that drainage from the
development will not impact adjacent properties. Drainage issues are not expected to
impact the existing lots surrounding the subject property as a result of this development.
3.6 A construction management plan will be implemented to minimize the impact of
construction activities
Area residents also requested additional information regarding the applicant's construction
management practice to ensure construction impacts such as dust, noise, mud tracking,
parking of construction vehicles, and other related construction activities are minimized.
The applicant has submitted a preliminary Construction Management plan, prepared by
Sabourin Kimble & Associates Ltd, proposes a variety of mitigation measures to be
implemented during the construction process in order to minimize any negative noise, dust
and traffic impacts. The mitigation measures proposed include a gravel mud mat and a
construction staging area, heavy duty sediment fencing and a tree protection zone. The
Recommended Conditions of Approval require that the applicant enter into a Subdivision'
Agreement with the City. A condition of the Subdivision Agreement will require that the
applicant implement the measures outlined in the submitted Construction Management and
Erosion/Sediment Control Plan as approved by City staff.
3.7 Maintenance of Block 25
The owner 657 Dunn Crescent indicated that they presently maintain an abutting remnant
parcel of land to the north, legally identified as Block 25 on Plan 40M-1366, and request
further clarification regarding the ownership and future maintenance of this parcel of land.
Block 25 was acquired by the applicant and will form part of the rear areas of proposed
Lots 10 and 11. The maintenance of this parcel of land will be by the future residents of
Lots 10 and 11.
3.8 Technical matters will be addressed as conditions of subdivision approval
To ensure appropriate development, the City, Region and agency requirements have been
provided as conditions of approval for the subdivision application. Technical matters to be
further addressed include, but not limited to:
• architectural treatment
• crash wall/berm
• noise attenuation measures
• construction management/erosion and sediment control
• stormwater management
• on-site grading and drainage
• site servicing
• fencing
• street tree planting and tree compensation
• payment of cash -in -lieu of parkland dedication
59
Report PLN 13-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: 702153 Ontario Limited (SP -2016-04, A 13/16) Page 9
The draft conditions of approval set out in Appendix I to this Report, address these (and
other) matters. It is recommended that Council endorse these conditions.
4. Conclusion
Staff supports the applications for draft plan of subdivision and rezoning. The proposed lot
sizes will be in keeping with the established lotting pattern within surrounding
neighbourhood. The draft zoning by-law amendment includes site specific provisions for lot
frontage, building setbacks and building height to ensure that the resulting building form is
compatible with the existing dwellings in the immediate area.
Staff recommend that Council approve the submitted applications for Draft Plan of
Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment applications, subject to conditions of approval
as set out in Appendix I, and the zoning by-law amendment as set out in Appendix II. Staff
also recommend that an exemption to the Rosebank Development Design Guidelines be
approved to permit reduced lot frontage and lot depth within the boundaries of the draft plan
of subdivision.
5. Applicant's Comments
The applicant has been advised of and supports the recommendations of this report.
Appendices
Appendix I Draft Conditions of Approval for Subdivision Application SP -2016-04
Appendix II Recommended Zoning By-law Provisions for Zoning By-law Amendment A 13/16
Appendix III Proposed Amendment 6 to the Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Air Photo Map
3. Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision
60
Report PLN 13-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: 702153 Ontario Limited (SP -2016-04, A 13/16) Page 10
Prepared By:
Amy Ernm, MCIP, RPP
Approvetl/Endorsed By:
a(„„A_,„
Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Plann-r II Chief Planner
Nilesh ` urti, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Development Review
& Urban Design
AE:NS:Id
"J.4,
Kyle Bentley, P Eng.
Director, City Development & CBO
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
Tony Prevedel, P.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
23/ 1.0/6
61
Recommended Conditions of Approval
for Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2016-04
62
Appendix I to
Report PLN 13-18
Recommended Conditions of Approval for
Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2016-04
General Conditions
1. That the Owner shall prepare the final plan generally on the basis of the draft plan of
subdivision, prepared by Donald E. Roberts Ltd., identified as Drawing Number
14-8346-2, dated October 24, 2017, which illustrates 11 lots for detached lots, a
new public road (`Street A') and a Block for an Open Space Reserve (Block 12).
Subdivision Agreement
2. That the Owner enters into a subdivision agreement with and to the satisfaction of the
City of Pickering to ensure the fulfillment of the City's requirements, financial and
otherwise, which shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the conditions outlined
in this document.
40M -Plan
3. That the Owner submits a Draft 40M -Plan to the satisfaction of the City Development
Department.
40R -Plan
4. That the Owner submits a Draft 40R -Plan indicating the easements required for the rear
lot catch basins and for the maintenance of the Gillmoss Road turning circle to the
satisfaction of the City.
Street Names
5. That street names and signage be provided to the satisfaction of the Region and the
City.
Development Charges & Development Review & Inspection Fee
6. That the Owner satisfies the City financially with respect to the Development Charges Act.
7. That the Owner satisfies the City with respect to payment for engineering review fees,
lot grading review fee and inspection fees.
Architectural Control
8. That the Owner submits preliminary model designs for sale to be reviewed and
approved by the City's Urban Design Review Consultant. The Owner will be
responsible for the City's full cost of undertaking this review.
Stormwater
9. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting the stormwater
drainage and management system to service all the lands in the subdivision and any
provision regarding easements.
63
Recommended Conditions of Approval Page 2
(SP -2016-04 — 702153 Ontario Limited)
10. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services for contributions for
stormwater maintenance fees.
11. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services for the design and
implementation of stormwater management facilities and easements for outfalls and
access to the outfalls.
Grading
12. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting the submission
and approval of a grading control plan.
13. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting authorization
from abutting landowners for all off-site grading.
14. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting the impact on
the existing retaining wall for the construction of the sewers connecting to Dunn Crescent.
Geotechnical Investigation
15. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting the submission
and approval of a geotechnical investigation.
Fill & Topsoil
16. That the Owner acknowledges that the City's Fill & Topsoil Disturbance By-law prohibits
vegetation or soil disturbance, vegetation or soil removal or importation to the site. No
on-site works prior to the City issuing authorization to commence works is permitted. A
Fill & Topsoil Permit will be required should grading works proceed prior to the
execution of a Subdivision Agreement.
Construction/Installation of City Works & Services
17. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting the construction
of roads, curb cuts, storm sewers, sidewalks and boulevard designs through the
submission and approval of a site servicing plan.
18. That the Owner satisfy the City respecting arrangements for the provision of all services
required by the City.
19. That the Owner satisfies the appropriate authorities respecting arrangements for the
provision of underground wiring, street lighting, cable television, natural gas and other
similar services.
20. That the Owner agrees that the cost of any relocation, extension, alteration or
extraordinary maintenance of existing services necessitated by this development shall
be the responsibility of the Owner.
64
Recommended Conditions of Approval Page 3
(SP -2016-04 — 702153 Ontario Limited)
Phasing & Development Coordination
21. That if this subdivision is to be developed by more than one registration, the Owner will
be required to submit a plan showing the proposed phasing, all to the satisfaction of the
Region of Durham and the City.
22. The owner acknowledges that the adjacent development to the north has not been
assumed by the City, therefore the owner will require approval from the adjacent
developer to connect into their infrastructure. The Owner agrees that they are
responsible for all restoration required outside of their lands.
Dedications/Transfers/Conveyances/Reserves
23. That the Owner conveys to the City, at no cost, Block 12 and all road allowances with the
proper corner roundings, sight triangles and reserves.
24. That the Owner agrees to lift part of the reserve Block 41, Plan 40M-2469, to provide
access for Lots 1 and 2 and for `Street A'.
Easements
25. That the Owner provides a 2.0 metre easement on Lots 1 and 2 to provide maintenance
access for the existing Gillmoss Road turning circle.
26. That the Owner conveys, to the satisfaction of the City, at no cost, any required
easement for works, facilities or user rights that are required by the City.
27. "That the Owner conveys any easement to any utility provider to facilitate the installation
of their services in a location(s) to the satisfaction of the City and the utility provider.
28. That the Owner arranges, atno cost to the City, any easements required on third party
lands for servicing and such easements shall be in a location as determined by the City
and/or the Region and are to be granted upon request any time after draft approval.
Construction Management Plan
29. That the Owner satisfies the City respecting the submission and approval of a
Construction Management/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan, with such Plan to contain,
among other matters:
(1)
details of erosion and sedimentation controls during all phases of construction
and provide maintenance requirements to maintain these controls as per the
City's Erosion & Sediment Control Guideline for Urban Construction;
(ii) addressing the parking of vehicles and the storage of construction and building
materials during servicing and construction, and ensuring that such locations will
not impede the flow of traffic or emergency vehicles on existing streets, or the
proposed public street;
65
Recommended Conditions of Approval Page 4
(SP -2016-04 — 702153 Ontario Limited)
(iii) assurance that the City's Noise By-law will be adhered to and that all contractors,
trades and suppliers are advised of this By-law;
(iv) the provision of mud and dust control on all roads within and adjacent to the site;
(v) type and timing of construction fencing;
(vi) location of construction trailers;
(vii) details of the temporary construction access.
Fencing
30. That the Owner satisfies the City with respect to the provision of temporary fencing
around the entire perimeter of the subject lands during construction, prior to the
commencement of any works.
31. That the Owner agrees to install a 1.8 metre high board -on -board wood privacy fence
along the west and south property lines, where there is adjacent existing residential lots
fronting onto Dunn Crescent, Rosebank Road, and Gillmoss Road.
32. That the Owner agrees to install acoustical fencing as per the Noise Impact Study,
prepared by J.E. Coulter Associates Limited, dated September 21, 2016.
Landscaping
33. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting the submission
and approval of a street tree -planting plan.
34. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services with the submission of a
tree preservation plan which will illustrate the protection of trees and other natural
features where appropriate, with specific attention to preservation in all public open
spaces prior to the approval of a preliminary grading plan.
Tree Compensation
35. That the Owner agrees that prior to final approval of the draft plan, compensation for the
loss of tree canopy will be required either through replacement planting or cash -in -lieu,
to be paid to the City of Pickering. In accordance with Council Resolution #387/18,
approved on January 15, 2018, tree removal compensation is to be calculated in
accordance with the City of Pickering Tree Inventory, Preservation and Removal
Compensation requirements. Where compensation through replanting is being
considered, the Owner will be required to provide a Landscape Plan indicating the
location, size and species of all trees, including boulevard trees, to the satisfaction of
the Director, Engineering Services.
Engineering Plans
36. That the Owner ensures that the engineering plans are coordinated with the
streetscape/architectural control guidelines and further that the plans coordinate the
driveway, street hardware and street trees to ensure that conflicts do not exist, asphalt
is minimized and all objectives of the streetscape/siting and architectural design
statement can be achieved.
66
Recommended Conditions of Approval Page 5
(SP -2016-04 — 702153 Ontario Limited)
37. That the Owner satisfies the City respecting the submission of appropriate engineering
drawings that detail, among other things: City services, roads, storm sewers, sidewalks,
lot grading, streetlights, fencing, tree planting; and financially -secure such works.
Noise Attenuation
38. That the owner agrees in the subdivision agreement to implement noise control
measures and warning clauses as recommended in the Noise Report.
Parkland Dedication
39. That the Owner satisfies the City with respect to the payment of cash -in -lieu in
accordance with the parkland dedication requirements of the Planning Act.
Fire
40. That the Owner agrees that no development will proceed on any land until adequate
services are available including adequate water pressure to the satisfaction of the City's
Fire Services Department.
Model Homes
41. That the Owner enters into a model home agreement with the City, if applicable for this
draft plan. All model homes must satisfy all requirements of the siting and architectural
design statement.
Other Approval Agencies
42. That any approvals which are required from the Region of Durham, the Ministry of
Transportation or any utility for the development of this plan be obtained by the Owner
and upon request written confirmation be provided to the City as verification of these
approvals.
43. That the Owner, through the approval of the Utility Coordination Plan, is to enter into an
agreement with Canada Post Corporation for the provision of a Community Mailbox(es)
including technical specifications and financial terms.
Plan Revisions
44. That the Owner acknowledges and agrees that the draft plan of subdivision and
associated conditions of approval may require revisions to the satisfaction of the City,
to implement or integrate any recommendation resulting from studies required as
conditions of approval.
45. That the Owner revises the draft plan as necessary to the satisfaction of the City, to
accommodate any technical engineering issues which arise during the review of the
final engineering drawings. Required revisions may include revising the number of
residential building lots or reconfiguring the roads or lots to the City's satisfaction.
67
Recommended Conditions of Approval Page 6
(SP -2016-04 — 702153 Ontario Limited)
46. That the Owner agrees to implement the requirements of all studies that are required by
the City for the development of this draft plan of subdivision to the satisfaction of the
City.
Notes to Draft Approval
47. This draft approval shall lapse three years from the date the draft approval has been
granted if the noted conditions have not been fulfilled, or if it has not been extended by
the City of Pickering.
68
Appendix 11 to
Report PLN 13-18
Recommended Zoning By-Iaw Provisions
for Zoning By-Iaw Amendment A 13/16
69
The Corporation of the City of Pickering
Icy -law No. XXXX/18
Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 2511, as
amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering,
Region of Durham, being Part Block M, Plan 418, and Block 25,
Plan 40M-1366 (A 13/16), City of Pickering
Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering received an
application to rezone the subject lands being Part Block M, Plan 418, and Block 25,
40M-1366, in the City of Pickering to permit the development of 11 lots for detached
dwellings accessed from an internal public road;
And whereas an amendment to Zoning By-law 2511, as amended, is required to permit
such uses;
Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as
follows:
1. Schedule I
Schedule I attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon are
hereby declared to be part of this By-law.
2. Area Restricted
The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands being Part Block M,
Plan 418, and Block 25, 40M-1366, in the City of Pickering , designated
' 84-14"and "OS" on Schedule I attached hereto,
3. General Provisions
No building, structure, land or part thereof shall hereafter be used, occupied,
erected, moved or structurally altered except in conformity with the provisions of
this By-law.
4. Definitions
In this By-law,
(1) "Bay, Bow, Box Window" shall mean a window that protrudes from the
main wall, usually bowed, canted, polygonal, segmental, semicircular or
square sided with window on front face in plan; one or more storeys in
height, which may or may not include a foundation; may or may not
include a window seat; and may include a door.
(2) (a) "Dwelling" shall mean a building or part of a building containing one
or more dwelling units, but does not include a mobile home or
trailer.
70
By -I Page 3
(b) "Dwelling Unit" shall mean one or more habitable rooms occupied
or capable of being occupied as a single, independent, and
separate housekeeping unit containing a separate kitchen and
sanitary facilities.
(c)
"Dwelling, Detached" shall mean a single dwelling which is
freestanding, separate and detached from other main buildings or
structures.
(3) "Floor Area - Residential" shall mean the area of the floor surface
contained within the outside walls of a storey or part of a storey.
(4) "Height, Building" shall mean the vertical distance between the established
grade, at the front of the house, and in the case of a flat roof, the highest
paint of the roof surface or parapet wall, or in the case of a mansard roof
the deck line, or in the case of a gabled, hip or gambrel roof, the mean
height between eaves and ridge.
(5)
(a) "Lot" shall mean an area of land fronting on a street which is used
or intended to be used as the site of a building, or group of
buildings, as the case may be, together with any accessory
buildings or structures, or a public park or open space area,
regardless of whether or not such lot constitutes the whole of a lot
or block on a registered plan of subdivision.
(b) "Lot Frontage" shall mean the width of a lot between the side lot
lines measured along a line parallel to and 7.5 metres distant from
the front lot line.
(6) "Private Garage" shall mean an enclosed or partially enclosed structure for
the storage of one or more vehicles, in which structure no business or
service is conducted for profit or otherwise.
(7) (a) "Yard" shall mean an area of land which is appurtenant to and
located on the same lot as a building ar structure and is Open,
uncovered, and unoccupied above ground except for such
accessory buildings, structures, or other uses as are specifically
permitted thereon.
(b) "Front Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a
lot between the front lot line of the lot and the nearest wall of the
nearest main building or structure on the lot,
(c) "Front Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of
a front yard of a lot between the front lot line and the nearest wall of
the nearest main building or structure on the lot.
(d) "Rear Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a
lot between the rear lot line of the lot, ar where there is no rear lot
line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of
the nearest main building or structure on the lot.
71
118 Page 4
(e) "Rear Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of
a rear yard of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where
there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and
the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot.
(f) "Side Yard" shall mean a yard of a lot extending from the front yard
to the rear yard, and from the side lot line to the nearest wall of the
nearest main building or structure on the lot.
(g) "Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a
side yard of a lot between the side lot line and the nearest wall of
the nearest main building or structure on the lot.
(h) "Flankage Side Yard" shall mean a side yard immediately adjoining
a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a
street.
(i) "Flankage Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal
dimension of a flankage side yard of a lot between the lot line
adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of
which is a street, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building
or structure on the lot,
(l)
"Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side yard other than a flankage
side yard.
(8) "Wall, Front" shall mean the wall of the dwelling closest to the front lot line.
5. Provisions
(1) Uses Permitted ("05" Zone)
No person shall within the lands zoned "OS" on Schedule I attached
hereto, use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure for any
purpose except the following: '
(a) preservation and conservation of the natural environment, soil and
wildlife; and
(b) resource management
(2) Uses Permitted ("S4-14" Zone)
No person shall within the lands zoned "84-14" on Schedule I attached
hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any
purpose except the following:
(a) Detached Dwelling
72
/18
Zone Requirements ("S4-14" Zone)
aoe
No person shall within the lands zoned "S4-14" on Schedule l attached
hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building except in
accordance with the following provisions:.
(a)
(b)
Lot Frontage
(minimum)
Lot Area
(minimum)
(c)
Front Yard Depth
(minimum)
"S4-14" Zone
10.5 metres
300 square metres
6.0 metres
(d)
Side Yard Depth
(minimum)
1.2 metres one side, and
0.6 of a metre on the other side
(e)
Flankage Yard Depth
(minimum)
2.7 metres
(f)
Rear Yard Depth
(minimum)
(i) 7.0 metres
(ii) Despite 5(2)(f)(i) above, lots
40 metres or greater in depth, -
10.0 metres
(g)
Building Height
(maximum)
10.0 metres
(h) Lot Coverage
(maximum)
(i)
(j)
Parking Requirements
(minimum)
(i) 45 percent
(ii) Despite 5(2)(h)(i) above, lots
40 metres or greater in depth —
35 percent
A minimum of 2 parking spaces per
dwelling unit for resident, one of which
must be provided within an attached
private garage.
Driveway Width
(maximum)
Maximum driveway width shall not
exceed the width of the exterior walls of
the private garage.
(k) Garage Requirements
Minimum one private garage per lot
attached to the main building, the
vehicular entrance of which shall be
located not less than 6.0 metres from
the front lot line, and not less than 6.0
metres from any side lot line
immediately adjoining a street or
abutting on a reserve on the opposite
side of which is a street.
73
/18
Page 6
(4) Special Provisions
The following special provisions shall apply to lands zoned "S4-14" on
Schedule l:
(a) Obstruction of Yards (maximum):
(i)
uncovered and covered unenclosed porches and associated
stairs not exceeding 1.5 metres in height above established
grade may encroach a maximum of 2.0 metres into the
minimum required front or flankage yard;
(ii) uncovered balconies, decks and associated stairs, not
exceeding 1.5 metres in height above grade may encroach a
maximum of 4.0 metres into the required rear yard, provided
they are setback 0.6 metres from a side lot line;
(iii) balconies located above the first floor projecting or inset in the
rear are prohibited;
(iv) bay, box or bow window, with or without foundation, having
a width of up to 4.0 metres may encroach a maximum of
0.6 metres into any required yard; and
(v) window sills, chimney breasts, fireplaces, belt courses,
cornices, pilasters, eaves, eaves troughs, and other similar
architectural features are permitted to project a maximum of
0.6 metres into any required yard and are required to be
setback 0.6 metres from a side lot line.
74
"S4-14" Zone
(I)
Interior Garage Size
Each parking space within a private
(minimum)
garage shall have a minimum width of
3.0 metres and a minimum depth of 6.0
metres provided; however, the width
may include one interior step and the
depth may include two interior steps.
(m)
Garage Projection
A maximum 2.0 metres projection
beyond the wall containing the main
entrance to the dwelling unit, except
where a covered and unenclosed porch
extends a minimum of 1.8 metres from
the wall containing the main entrance to
the dwelling unit, in which case no part
of any attached private garage shall
extend more than 3.0 metres beyond
the wall containing the main entrance to
the dwelling unit.
(4) Special Provisions
The following special provisions shall apply to lands zoned "S4-14" on
Schedule l:
(a) Obstruction of Yards (maximum):
(i)
uncovered and covered unenclosed porches and associated
stairs not exceeding 1.5 metres in height above established
grade may encroach a maximum of 2.0 metres into the
minimum required front or flankage yard;
(ii) uncovered balconies, decks and associated stairs, not
exceeding 1.5 metres in height above grade may encroach a
maximum of 4.0 metres into the required rear yard, provided
they are setback 0.6 metres from a side lot line;
(iii) balconies located above the first floor projecting or inset in the
rear are prohibited;
(iv) bay, box or bow window, with or without foundation, having
a width of up to 4.0 metres may encroach a maximum of
0.6 metres into any required yard; and
(v) window sills, chimney breasts, fireplaces, belt courses,
cornices, pilasters, eaves, eaves troughs, and other similar
architectural features are permitted to project a maximum of
0.6 metres into any required yard and are required to be
setback 0.6 metres from a side lot line.
74
By-law No. XXXX118 Page 7
6. Model Homes
(1)
Despite the provisions of Clause 6.1 of By-law 2511, a maximum of 2 model
homes, together with not fewer than two parking spaces per Model Home,
may be constructed on the lands set out in Schedule I attached to this
By-law prior to the division of those lands by registrations of a plan of
subdivision or enacting a by-law exempting those lands from the Part Lot
Control provisions of the Planning Act.
(2) For the purpose of this By-law, "Model Horne" shall mean a dwelling unit
which is not used for residential purpose, but which is used exclusively for
sales, display and marketing purposes pursuant to an agreernent with the
City of Pickering.
7 By-law 2511
By-law 2511, as amended, is hereby further amended only to the extent
necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as it applies to the area
set out in Schedule I attached hereto. Definitions and subject matters not
specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of
By-law 2511, as amended.
8. Effective Date
This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the
Planning Act.
By-law passed this XXth day of XXX, 2018,
DRAFT
Dave Ryan, Mayor
DRAFT
Debbie Shields, City Clerk
75
Glllmons Rond
76
Schedule 1 t
Passed Ttiii
Day of XXX
Mayor
Cillmoss Road
xx/18
os
Clerk
Appendix III to
Report PLN 13-18
Amendment 6 to the
Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines
77
Amendment 6 to the Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines
Purpose:
Location:
Basis:
The purpose of this amendment is to permit, as an exception
to the 15.0 metre minimum frontage requirement for new lots
for single detached dwellings within Design Precinct No.3,
minimum frontages of 10.5 metres for new lots for single
detached dwellings within the proposed subdivision plan
boundaries established by subdivision file SP -2016-04.
The subject lands are approximately 0.89 of a hectare in
area and are located on the south side of Gillmoss Road,
west of the Canadian National Railway (CNR) corridor and
east of Rosebank Road. The lands fall within Part Block M,
Plan 418 and Block 25, 40M-1366.
The amendment has been determined to be appropriate
because it will establish a built form which is in character
with the immediate neighbourhood.
Actual Amendment: The City of Pickering Rosebank Neighbourhood
Development Guidelines are hereby amended by:
1. Adding a second paragraph to section A1.1.3, Design
Precinct No. 3, as follows:
"Despite the minimum frontage requirements for new
lots for single detached dwellings within Design
Precinct No. 3, new lots for single detached
dwellings within subdivision file SP -2016-04 are
permitted a minimum frontage of 10.5 metres and a
minimum lot depth of 27.0 metres (see Exhibit A)."
Cross Reference:
Informational Revision to the Official Plan Compendium Document
(Related Files: SP -2016-04 and A 13/16) •
(Applicant: 702153 Ontario Limited)
(Date: May 7, 2017)
78
Exhibit A to
Amendment 6 to the
Rosebank Neighbourhood
Development Guidelines
Rosebank Neighbourhood
Development Guidelines
The following Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines were adopted by Pickering
Council on January 22, 1979, and amended four times: No.1 on February 4, 1985; No. 2 on
October 15, 1991; No. 3 on May 4, 1992; No. 4 on October 19, 1992 and No. 5 on July 14, 2010.
Section A1.1
As indicated on the map, the Neighbourhood comprises three design precincts. The following
provides detailed guidelines for each of these precincts.
A1.1.1 Design Precinct No. 1
Within Precinct No. 1, residential development shall be limited to the provision of single
detached dwellings only. All new lots created in this precinct shall have minimum lot frontages of
approximately 15.0 metres and minimum lot depths ranging between approximately 33 metres
and 60 metres, unless the character of the area is such that a smaller lot frontage or smaller lot
depth is desirable.
A1.1.2 Design Precinct No. 2
Within Precinct No. 2, residential development shall be limited to the provision of single
detached dwellings only. All new lots created in this precinct shall have minimum lot frontages of
approximately 15.0 metres and minimum lot depths ranging between approximately 30 metres and
36 metres.
A1.1.3 Design Precinct No. 3
Within Precinct No. 3, residential development shall be limited to the provisions of single detached
and semi-detached dwellings. All new lots created in this precinct for semi-detached
dwellings shall have minimum lot frontages of approximately 10.5 metres and minimum lot
depths of approximately 30 metres. New lots for single detached dwellings shall have the same
minimum lot dimensions as new lots in Precinct No. 2.
Exception Despite the minimum frontage requirements for single detached dwellings within
Design Precinct No. 3, new lots for single detached dwellings within the subdivision
connecting Cowan Circle and Gillmoss Road (subdivision file SP -2008-02) are
permitted a minimum frontage of 11.0 metres.
Proposed Despite the minimum frontage requirements for new lots for single detached
Exception dwellings within Design Precinct No. 3, new lots for single detached dwellings
within subdivision file SP -2016-04 are permitted a minimum frontage of
10.5 metres and a minimum lot depth of 27 metres.
79
CLEOD CRESCEN
1a
0
DAHLIA cRESCE N
MA TLANh DRIVE
srAc3HUr+N Rnnn
I1DU6EMOuN7 °RIVE
VOIS
lid
mEN
NMI
NE
MMI
..
1'1/
fion
owe WM
Ins=
Immo
me
COWAN CIRC:
GILLMOS8 Roh
0
HOW cm
11 if
IIIFF
sTER Must 4111,
1*
Wftr
_ r
P4f,
11110, AS"
NOMAD ROAD
1
aer
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
iiiiIIlI
ATTACHMENT M / TQ
REF'URT ?E N r 2f//
i rt iG
Location Map
FILE: SP -2016-04 and A13/16
P1CK
City Development
`J
❑ tartn�ent
APPLICANT: 702153 Ontario Limited
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:Part Black M, Plan 418 and
Block 25, 40M-1366527 Giilmoss Rd)
Date: Jan 18, 2017
nEkC.99er.u.�Idlh.i.ly.rAeL.ya'I.nlwp.ylnl� i h .CRv..ir.M.Y.r.q.irl.lANNn 9.w.in..a,,....
A/Iryll+.M..!wd01.1.1t..,I,.sLwn,Rg1.I.1C...un.,O.pµNalrl.ru.11l.r.w.... M 10141...0.4.;
9741.1.1 i.lrrp�l..a 1p....4 .....ppl.n.y.1SI..I...m.p,; 9 NI.Y1 Pip..* �1u.....n Cr94fl9.4 .M .1 .pew. Al . M1 r.wwN .
SCALE: 1;5,UU0 1 {ry
I99,19 I9T A rt App M SVIifl Y, r N- I G
1 PN-12
ATTACHMENT M / TQ
REF'URT ?E N r 2f//
ATTACHMENT #_ o? _Tu
ru-i0117 / CI AI t -to?
1'
•
•
106.1 -
f 6
li
CO
4.-
rrl
tI
1140
1 1, 1 . T lit ;� • +• ' S t
WA I
'040•Iolik'rtrsxa•:
•
r
•r,Nt:1T�:
4 •a. ti.r-:
0111111411151111010•-- .1ral.1"
"gri+
owi
•
° . iia. 1i 4 a40
L
fay -
EiorM
;lr
•
s•
-
aA.74511: '
h E�. e- 4.L'zL•. ..
C4 k�
PICKE Rl NG
City Development
Department
Air Photo Map
FILE: SP -2016-04 and A13/16
APPLICANT: 702153 Ontario Limited
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:Part Block M, Plan 418 and
Block 25, 40M-1366(527 Oillmoss Rd?
OTC. 5-•••••31.141, .Ithrrmy oI Ptr...1 gram.' p..•11 a F4! O&..n.vr.a,r, o,A.a• wh.ny. II.MnlR..w,....
.1•o. n umd AXE. IA•l.••• Car•••hRyrA el C•••••. Delwin MI .r I1...•1 R. VOW. .. a lbjk., l:
IDT•1.Mi[•I.7n.•. Ina .IH I. ...men at MINI 1••.MW.; 01.••••4•1•101••• Au.nm.NCnpntl.• 4.l 11•.uay,•D.!•yPA. ••••ryal.;
Date: Jan 18, 2017
SCALE: 1:5,000
T1USI IIOrA PIMP Afaii
1 PN -12 _
- Gillmoss Road
E
L
11.1 m
E
N
11.1 m
E
N
39.5m
E
LOT 3
33 9
LOT 1
11.6 m
LOT 2
11.1 m
N
LOT4
29.3 m
52.0m
LOT 5 ,�•
47.2 m
. A�
LAT a F .e•
41.5 m
'!MT 1
46.0 m LAT 7
c('
LOT 8 tiagLtr
59.4 m O
LOT !h f'
o `
39.9m �
�
E
LOT 1O m
34.0
.LOCK 25.
PA! 26311-0J350.7) -
7
b'
ply
35.0
m
LAT 11
7.6 m 49.6 m
Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision
c4 4
FILE No: SP 2016-04 and A13/16
PICKERING
APPLICANT: 702153 Ontario Limited
City Development
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Part Block M, Plan 418 and Block 25, 40M-1366 (527 Gillmoss Road)
Department
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
DATE_ April 6, 201 B
P
cz
DICKERING
Report to
Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: PLN 14-18
Date: May 7, 2018
From: Kyle Bentley
Director, City Development & CBO
Subject: Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP -2017-04
Draft Plan of Condominium Application CP -2017-02
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 07/17
Madison Brock Limited
West side of Brock Road, south of Dersan Street
(2480 and 2510 Brock Road)
Recommendation:
1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP -2017-04, submitted by Madison Brock Limited,
on lands located on the west side of Brock Road, south of Dersan Street, to establish 2 blocks
for residential development, an arterial road and a local road, as shown on Attachment #3 to
Report PLN 14-18, be approved and the implementing conditions of approval, as set out in
Appendix 1, be endorsed; and
2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 07/17, submitted by Madison Brock Limited, to
implement the Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2017-04 and to facilitate a residential
condominium development, be approved, the zoning provisions contained in Appendix 11 to
Report PLN 14-18 be endorsed, and that staff be authorized to finalize and forward an
implementing Zoning By-law to Council for enactment.
Executive Summary: The subject lands are located on the west side of Brock Road, south of
Dersan Street within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1).
Madison Brock Limited acquired the subject lands from the City of Pickering in June 2017 and
submitted applications for a Draft Plan of Subdivision, Draft Plan of Condominium, and Zoning
By-law Amendment to facilitate a common element residential condominium development
consisting of 118 townhouse units, and a standard condominium development consisting of
75 stacked townhouse units (see Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision, Submitted Draft Plan of
Condominium, and Original Concept Plan, Attachments #3, #4 and #5). The proposal was revised
to increase the size of the private parkette, refine internal site design and improve internal
pedestrian connections resulting in the reduction of 1 street townhouse unit and 10 visitor parking
spaces (see Revised Concept Plan, Attachment #6).
Staff recommend that Council approve the Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP -2017-04,
endorse the implementing conditions of approval as set out in Appendix I, approve the Zoning
By-law Amendment Application A 07/17, endorse the implementing zoning provisions contained in
Appendix II, and authorize staff to finalize and forward an implementing Zoning By-law to Council
for enactment.
83
Report PLN 14-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17) Page 2
Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed
development.
1. Background
1.1 Property Description
The subject lands are located on the west side of Brock Road, south of Dersan Street
within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The subject
lands, which comprise 2 properties, have a combined area of approximately 4.3 hectares,
with approximately 312 metres of frontage along Brock Road. Madison Brock Limited
acquired the subject lands from the City of Pickering in June 2017.
Surrounding land uses include:
North: a temporary sales office trailer and vacant lands designated as "Mixed Use Areas -
Mixed Corridor" in the City's Official Plan for which the City has received a
complete rezoning application, submitted by Brock Dersan Developments, for a
residential condominium development consisting of street townhouses, back-to-
back townhouses and 2 apartment buildings
East: across Brock Road, Duffin Meadows Cemetery and Pistritto's Farms Market
South: vacant lands for which Council has approved applications for official plan and
zoning by-law amendments, submitted by Duffin's Point Inc., to permit a
retail/commercial development
West, vacant lands for which the City has received complete applications, submitted by
9004827 Canada Inc. (Stonepay), for a residential condominium development
consisting of various stacked townhouses and back-to-back townhouses
1.2 Applicant's Original and Revised Proposal
The applicant has submitted applications for draft plan of subdivision, draft plan of
condominium (common element) and zoning by-law amendment to facilitate a residential
condominium development consisting of a mix of stacked townhouses, rear lane
townhouses and street townhouses. The typologies of the units are explained in Proposed
Housing Typologies, see Attachment #2.
The Draft Plan of Subdivision proposes 2 development blocks for residential use and
2 blocks for public roads (see Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision, Attachment #3).
A standard condominium consisting of 75 stacked townhouse units is proposed within
Block 1. The standard condominium will be created through a Draft Plan of Condominium
application to be submitted at a later date.
84
Report PLN 14-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17) Page 3
A common element condominium is proposed within Block 2. The common element areas
include, but are not limited to, private roads, laneways, sidewalks, a private open space
area and visitor parking spaces (see Submitted Draft Plan of Condominium, Attachment #4).
The submitted Draft Plan of Condominium application for the Block 2 lands is to facilitate
the future creation of the lots through an exemption from part lot control. The original
concept plan proposed a total of 119 units consisting of 60 street townhouse units fronting
internal private roads and 59 rear lane townhouse units fronting future public roads (see
Original Concept Plan, Attachment #5).
Through collaboration between City staff and the applicant, the proposal was revised to
enlarge the size of the private parkette from approximately 360 square metres to
approximately 755 square metres. The visibility and access to the parkette block was
improved by removing visitor parking from the frontage of the parkette and pulling it up to
two private roads. In addition, the internal pedestrian pathway network has been revised to
provide improved connections to within the site and to the abutting public streets (see
Revised Concept Plan, Attachment #6). These revisions resulted in the loss of one
street townhouse unit, and the reduction of 10 visitor parking spaces.
Proposed are 2 public right-of-ways, one having a 27 metre right-of-way being the westerly
extension of Valley Farm Road (to be named Palmer's Sawmill Road), and the other being a
north -south local road with a 20 metre right-of-way (to be named Four Seasons Lane) that
will connect to Dersan Street to the north and to Palmer's Sawmill Road to the south.
Access to the development will be from Four Seasons Lane by way of 2 private roads.
Visitor parking spaces and some of the resident parking spaces associated with the
stacked townhouse units are provided in surface parking areas. These surface parking
areas are proposed to be shared between the standard condominium and the common
element condominium. Reciprocal easements and agreements to secure shared access to
the development from Four Seasons Lane and for the shared use of the visitor parking
spaces will be required in favour of the standard and common element condominiums.
The applicant has submitted a site plan application, which has been circulated and is
currently under consideration by City staff.
2. Comments Received
2.1 November 6, 2017 Public Information Meeting and Written Comments
The Public Information Meeting was held on November 6, 2017 at which no members of
the public attended the meeting to voice their comments regarding the proposed residential
development. No comments have been received from the public as a result of circulation of
the public notice of the application.
Written comments have been received from The Biglieri Group Ltd., on behalf of
9004807 Canada Inc. (Stonepay), owner of the lands to the west of the subject lands,
requesting to be notified of any further reports and/or public meetings.
85
Report PLN 14-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17) Page 4
2.2 City Departments.& Agency Comments
2.2.1 Region of Durham
• no objection to the proposal subject to the conditions of draft approval of the plan of
subdivision and plan of condominium (common element) provided
• the proposed townhouse development is consistent with Provincial Policy Statement
policies that encourage the efficient use of land, infrastructure and planned public
service facilities
• the applications comply with the objectives of the Growth Plan
• the Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Living Areas", which are
intended to be used predominantly for housing purposes with a mix of housing types,
sizes, and tenure
• sanitary sewer servicing is available to the subject site to service the proposed lots from
the existing sanitary sewer located on Brock Road; however, due to limited capacity
remaining in the Duffin Heights Sanitary Sewer Pumping Station, the site has been
designed to split flows so that approximately a third of the site will drain to the Central
Duffin Collector on Tillings Road to relieve some.of the concerns regarding capacity
• water supply to the proposed development will be provided through the extension of
Valley Farm Road, to be named Palmer's Sawmill Road, and extending the existing
300mm watermain westerly within the new right-of-way
• the Region recommends the overall design for. municipal servicing be coordinated and
agreed to by all parties prior to finalizing the Functional Servicing Report
• the proposed developmentmeets the objective of the Durham Region Transit Five Year
Service Strategy to have transit services available within a reasonable walking distance
of approximately 400 metres
• as a condition of approval, the Region requires the applicant to include all
recommended noise control measures of the Noise Feasibility Report in the subdivision
agreement
• as a condition of approval, the Region will require a completed Reliance Letter and
Certificate of Insurance to extend reliance to the Region for the Environmental Site
Assessment Reports and the Landfill Impact Assessment
• as a condition of approval, the Region requires the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and
Sport's clearance letter indicating all cultural heritage resource requirements at the site
have been met
2.2.2 City of Pickering Engineering Services Department
• no objection to the proposal subject to the conditions of draft approval provided
• the owner shall satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise of the City of Pickering
including, among other matters, the execution of a subdivision agreement between the
owner and the City concerning the provision and installation of roads, services, grading,
drainage, utilities, tree compensation, construction management, cash in -lieu of.
parkland, noise attenuation and any other matters
86
Report PLN 14-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17) Page 5
• a portion of the stormwater is intended to go to a future Stormwater Management
Facility (SWMF) #2 on the Stonepay lands; however, an interim strategy has been
developed requiring the construction of a temporary SWMF providing quantity, quality
and erosion controls on the Madison lands, allowing on an interim basis all flows to be
accommodated in the existing SWMF #4 located on the north side of Rossland Road,
east of Brock Road; any costs associated with the interim strategy are the responsibility
of Madison Brock Limited
2.2.3 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
• no objections to the proposal
• the subject site is not within a Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
Regulated Area; a TRCA permit under O. Reg. 166/06 will not be required for any
proposed development and/or site alteration on the property
• TRCA reviewed the proposal and provided technical comments on the hydrology,
stormwater management and drainage to ensure the criteria of the Duffin Heights
Environmental Servicing Plan are met
2.2.4 Durham District School Board
• no objections to the proposal
• students from this development will be accommodated within existing schools
2.2.5 Durham Catholic District School Board
• no objections to the proposal
• students from this development will attend St. Wilfred Catholic Elementary School
located at 2360 Southcott Road and St. Mary Catholic Secondary School located at
1918 Whites Road
3. Planning Analysis
3.1 The revised concept plan is within the density range of the Official Plan and is
consistent with the policies for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
The subject lands are designated "Mixed Use Areas — Mixed Corridors" in the Pickering
Official Plan, which permits a density range of over 30 units up to and including 140 units
per net hectare and a maximum FSI up to and including 2.5 FSI. The revised concept plan
proposes a total of 193 residential units for a residential density of approximately 58 units per
net hectare and a FSI of 0.9. The revised concept plan complies with the density
requirements of the Official Plan.
The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies for the Mixed Corridor designation require new
developments to provide:
• a strong and identifiable urban image by establishing buildings closer to the street,
providing safe and convenient pedestrian access, and requiring all buildings to be
multi-storey
87
Report PLN 14-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17) Page 6
• higher intensity multi -unit housing forms on lands adjacent to Brock Road while restricting
grade related residential development to lands adjacent to collector or local roads, and
• the development of future roads adjacent to the Mixed Corridor designation on both
sides of Brock Road to provide alternative access and potential transit routes
The revised concept plan implements the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies by siting
the 3 -storey (approximately 12.5 metres in height) stacked townhouse blocks in close
proximity to the Brock Road frontage. Three walkway connections are provided between
the stacked townhouse blocks allowing for convenient pedestrian access from the proposed
development to Brock Road and potential transit routes. The proposed grade related street
townhouse and rear lane townhouse dwellings are interior to the proposed development
(see Submitted Rear Lane Townhouse Elevations and Submitted Street Townhouse
Elevations, Attachments #7 and #8). Vehicular access to the proposed development is
from Four Seasons Lane and Palmer's Sawmill Road. Overall, the proposal places higher
density multi -unit dwellings adjacent to Brock Road. In addition, development establishes a
well-defined urban street edge along Brock Road and future public streets, and creates a
pedestrian friendly environment.
3.2 Urban design objectives of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development
Guidelines have been addressed
The intersection of Brock Road and Palmer's Sawmill Road is identified as a Focal Point on
the tertiary plan contained in the Council adopted Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Development Guidelines. Developments at Focal Points are to contribute to the
prominence of the intersection where buildings are to have a minimum of three functional
floors and a minimum four storey massing. In addition, buildings at Focal Points are to
have a unique identity and architectural design through the use of appropriate building
heights, massing, architectural features and landscaping. The revised elevations for the
stacked townhouse dwellings address the design objectives through the introduction of an
elevation with enhanced materials and incorporates an architectural tower element at the
intersection of Brock Road and Palmer's Sawmill Road appropriately framing the
intersection and creating a gateway into the community (see Submitted Stacked
Townhouse Elevations, Attachments #9).
The guidelines for lands within the Brock Road Streetscape include the following
requirements:
• properties fronting Brock Road shall be required to provide a built form across a
minimum of 60 percent of the lot frontage
• all primary frontages of buildings shall front Brock Road and provide pedestrian access
directly to the sidewalk and multi -use trail along Brock Road, and
• large walls visible from Brock Road shall be articulated through various treatments such
as offsets in massing; blank facades will not be permitted facing Brock Road or any
street
88
Report PLN 14-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17) Page 7
The revised concept plan proposes a built form across at least 85 percent of the
Brock Road frontage with the majority of the unit entrances facing Brock Road. As
described above, the revised concept plan provides for an enhanced pedestrian network to
allow future residents to traverse the site from east to west and north to south in order to
access public transit, commercial uses along Brock Road, the proposed private parkette,
the future village green to the west and the surrounding neighbourhood. Through the site
plan approval process, staff will work with the applicant to review the architectural design of
proposed buildings to ensure they are appropriately articulated with elements that
emphasize this intersection as a focal point in the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood.
3.3 Four Seasons Lane will be constructed as part of the development and Palmer's
Sawmill Road will be constructed as part of this or the development to the south
Engineering Services staff are satisfied that the proposed right-of-way width of 20.0 metres
for Four Seasons Lane can accommodate a 3.0 metre wide multi -use path, a 1.5 metre
wide sidewalk, boulevard trees, underground utilities, on -street parking and street furniture.
Four Seasons Lane will be constructed as part of the proposed development at the
landowner's cost.
Engineering Services staff are satisfied that the proposed right-of-way width of 27.0 metres
proposed for Palmer's Sawmill Road is appropriate for an arterial road. Palmer's Sawmill
Road will be constructed as part of either this development or the proposed commercial
development to the south proposed by Duffin's Point Inc. The City will pay for the costs for
oversizing of Palmer's Sawmill Road from a local road to a Type C arterial road standard.
14 A sufficient number of parking spaces are being provided to support the
development
For residential condominium developments in the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood, the City
has supported the following resident and visitor parking ratios:
• a minimum of 2.0 resident parking spaces per dwelling unit for grade related dwellings
(single, semi, and townhouse)
• a minimum of 1.0 resident parking spaces per stacked townhouse dwelling unit
• a minimum visitor parking ratio of 0.2 spaces per dwelling unit
The table below compares the minimum number of parking spaces required based on the
above -noted parking ratios that have been established in the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
and the total proposed parking spaces provided by the applicant.
89
Report PLN 14-18
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17)
May 7, 2018
Page 8
Unit Type
No. of
Units
Parking Ratio and
Arrangement
No. of Spaces
Required
No. of Spaces
Provided
Stacked
Townhouses
75
75 units at 1.0 resident
spaces per unit
(one space in a private
garage and one space on a
driveway in front of the
garage, and 15 parking
spaces within the surface
parking area located across
the private road from the
unit)
75
135
Rear Lane
Townhouses
59
2.0 resident spaces per unit
(one space in a private
garage and one space on a
driveway in front of the
garage)
118
118
Street
Townhouses
59
118
118
Total
193
311
371
Visitor
Parking
0.2 visitor parking spaces
per unit within the at -grade
parking area
39
39
In summary, based on the established parking ratios within the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood, the applicant would be required to provide a minimum of 311 parking
spaces for residents and 39 parking spaces for visitors, whereas the applicant is proposing
to provide a total of 371 resident parking spaces and 39 visitor parking spaces.
In addition, the proposed design of the right-of-way for Four Seasons Lane (the north -south
road) incorporates on -street parking which will provide additional parking for visitors.
These spaces have not been included in the overall number of parking spaces being
provided by the development.
Staff are satisfied that there are sufficient parking spaces available to accommodate the
proposal. However, through the site plan approval process, staff will review whether there
will be opportunities to provide for additional visitor parking spaces.
3.5 An interim stormwater management strategy is proposed
The ultimate stormwater management strategy for the, proposed development has
stormwater from Four Seasons Lane conveyed to the future SWMF #2, which is to be
constructed within the neighbouring Stonepay development. The stormwater from the
residential blocks is to be controlled and conveyed to the existing SWMF #4 located on the
north side of Rossland Road, east of Brock Road.
90
Report PLN 14-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17) Page 9
Since the proposed development will proceed prior to the construction of SWMF #2 on the
Stonepay lands, Engineering Services has advised that an interim stormwater management
strategy is required. In the interim, all stormwater flows from the entire development will be
conveyed to SWMF #4 allowing the proposed development to proceed in advance of the
construction of SWMF #2. This strategy is subject to the applicant constructing a
temporary SWMF providing quantity, quality and erosion controls within the proposed
development to compensate for additional flows to SWMF #4 in the interim. The temporary
SWMF will be located in the southwest quadrant of the site and will delay the construction
of four rear lane townhouse blocks (Block 15, 16, 17 and 18) until such time as SWMF #2
on the Stonepay lands is constructed.
The recommended conditions of approval (see Recommended Conditions of Approval for
Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2017-04, Appendix I) contain a condition requiring that any
costs associated with over -sizing storm drainage infrastructure for the interim strategy are
the responsibility of Madison Brock Limited.
3.6 The proposed development will be well served by private rear yards, a private
parkette and future City parks
Open space requirements are sufficiently addressed by this proposed development through
providing private rear yards for the street townhouse dwellings, private amenity space
above garages for the rear lane townhouse dwellings, balconies for the stacked townhouse
dwellings and a private parkette. As noted earlier in this report, the applicant has increased
the size of the proposed private parkette from approximately 360 square metres to
approximately 755 square metres. In addition, the visibility and access to the centrally
located parkette block was improved by removing visitor parking from the frontage of the
parkette and pulling the block up to two private roads. The conditions of draft plan of
subdivision approval contain a condition for the payment by the landowner of cash -in -lieu of
parkland.
City Council Resolution #323/17 directed staff to work with developers and agencies to plan
and provide appropriate outdoor recreation areas/parks in the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood. In addition to a proposed village green on the Stonepay lands to the west,
staff are also investigating a strategy of the City entering into a long term lease of hydro
corridor lands to the west of Brock Road for playing fields and a soccer pitch. In addition, a
public school with outdoor playing fields is anticipated to be located on the
decommissioned City Operations Centre. The proposed development will be well served
by the private parkette and future City parks located to the west of Brock Road.
3.7 The applicant is required to become a party to the Duffin Heights cost sharing
agreement or pay their proportionate share of the development costs
The owner has been made aware of the requirement within the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood Policies to become a party to the cost sharing agreement for Duffin Heights
or receive an acknowledgement from the Trustee of the Duffin Heights Landowners Group
Inc. that the benefiting landowner has made satisfactory arrangements to pay its
proportionate share of the development costs. A condition of draft approval addresses this
requirement.
91
Report PLN 14-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17) Page 10
3.8 Technical matters will be addressed as conditions of subdivision approval and
through site plan approval
Detailed design issues will be dealt with through the subdivision agreement and site plan
approval process. These requirements will address matters such as, but not limited to:
• drainage and grading
• site servicing
• noise attenuation
• cash -in -lieu of parkland
• tree compensation
• requirements for Construction Management Plan
• building design
• landscaping
• resident, visitor and accessible parking spaces
• emergency vehicle access
• waste management collection
• location of community mailboxes
• security for the construction of Four Seasons Lane (Street '1') and Palmer's Sawmill
Road (Street '2')
3.9 Draft Approval of the Draft Plan of Condominium is delegated to the Director, City
Development
Applications for standard and common element condominium are delegated to the Director,
City Development for final approval. No further approvals are required at this time.
3.10 Conclusion
The applicant's proposal satisfies the applicable official plan policies for the Duffin Heights
Neighborhood and also addresses the applicable urban design requirements as established
in the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines. The applicant has worked
with City staff and external agencies to address various technical requirements. It is
recommended that the Conditions of Approval for Draft Plan of Subdivision attached as
Appendix I to this Report be endorsed by Council.
The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject lands to appropriate zone categories with
site-specific performance standards to facilitate the proposal. To ensure'an appropriate
site design, the zoning by-law will have site specific provisions including, but not limited to,
maximum building height, build -to -zone requirements, maximum number of units, minimum
private amenity area per unit, minimum outdoor amenity area, minimum interior garage
size, and minimum number of resident and visitor parking spaces.
Staff supports the rezoning application and recommends that a site specific implementing
by-law, containing the standards attached as Appendix II to this Report be finalized and
brought before Council for enactment.
92
Report PLN 14-18 May 7, 2018
Subject: Madison Brock Limited (SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02, A 07/17) Page 11
3.11 Applicant's Comments
The applicant supports the recommendations of this report.
Appendices
Appendix I Recommended Conditions of Approval for Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2017-04
Appendix 11 Recommended Zoning By-law Provisions for Zoning by-law Amendment
Application A 07/17
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Proposed Housing Typologies
3. Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision
4. Submitted Draft Plan of Condominium
5. Original Concept Plan
0. Revised Concept Plan
7. Submitted Rear Lane Townhouse Elevations
8. Submitted Street Townhouse Elevations
g, Submitted Stacked Townhouse Elevations
Prepared By:
Deborah Wyli-', MCIP, RPP
Princi•le PIpanner, Development Review
Nilesh urti, MClP, RPP
Manager, Development Review
& Urban Design
DW:Id
Approved/Endorsed By:
Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Chief Planner
Kyle Bentley, P.Eng,
Director, City Development & CBO
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
Tony Prevedel, !D.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
Loi
93
Recommended Conditions of Approval
for Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2017-04
94
Appendix I to,
Report PLN 14-18
Recommended Conditions of Approval for
Draft Plan of Subdivision SP -2017-04
General Conditions
1. That the Owner shall prepare the final plan generally on the basis of the draft
plan of subdivision, prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc., identified as
project number P-2857, dated June 19, 2017, which illustrates 2 blocks for
residential development (Blocks 1 and 2) and 2 blocks for public roads
(Streets '1' and '2').
Subdivision Agreement
2. That the Owner enters into a subdivision agreement with and to the satisfaction
of the City of Pickering to ensure the fulfillment of the City's requirements,
financial and otherwise, which shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the
conditions outlined in this document.
40M -Plan
3 That the Owner submits a Draft 40M -Plan to the satisfaction of the City
Development Department.
Zoning
4. That the implementing by-law for Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 07/17
becomes final and binding.
Street Names and House Numbers
5. That street names and signage be provided to the satisfaction of the Region and
the City.
6. That house numbers are assigned as per the City's addressing conventions.
Development Charges & Inspection Fee
7. That the Owner satisfies the City financially with respect to the Development
Charges Act.
8. That the Owner satisfies the City with respect to payment for engineering review
fees, stormwater maintenance, lot grading review fee and inspection fees.
Dedications/Transfers/Conveyances
9. That the Owner conveys to the City, at no cost:
(i)
road allowances, Street '1' and Street '2' along with the proper corner
roundings, and sight triangles to the City and any other easements as
required; and
(ii) 0.3 metre reserve(s) as required by the City.
95
Stormwater
10. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting interim
storm drainage and stormwater management for the drainage of the
development, Street '1' and Street '2' as well as any offsite drainage to the
satisfaction of the City.
11. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services for the design,
implementation, operation and maintenance of stormwater management
facilities, erosion and sedimentation control structures, and outfalls including
access to the outfalls for the development.
12. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services to implement all
water balance/infiltration measures identified in the approved Duffin Heights
Environmental Servicing Plan and the Functional Servicing and Stormwater
Management Report.
Grading
13. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting the
submission and approval of a grading control plan for the development.
14. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting
authorization from abutting landowners for all off-site grading.
Fill & Topsoil
15. That the Owner acknowledges that the City's Fill & Topsoil Disturbance By-law
prohibits vegetation or soil disturbance, vegetation or soil removal or importation
to the site unless a permit has been issued. No on-site works prior to draft plan
approval is permitted. A Fill & Topsoil Disturbance Permit will be required should
vegetation removal or grading works proceed prior to the subdivision agreement
being executed.
Construction/Installation of City Works & Services
16. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting the
submission of appropriate engineering drawings that detail, among other things,
City services, construction of roads with curbs, storm sewers, pedestrian
walkways/sidewalks, boulevard design, lot grading, streetlights, fencing and tree
planting, and financially secure such works.
17. That the Owner satisfy the City respecting arrangements for the provision of all
services required by the City.
18. That the Owner satisfies the appropriate authorities respecting arrangements
and/or the conveyance of any easement to any utility to facilitate the installation
of their services including the provision of underground wiring, street lighting,
cable television, natural gas and other similar services for the development.
96
19. That the Owner agrees that the cost of any relocation, extension, alteration or
extraordinary maintenance of existing services necessitated by this development
shall be the responsibility of the Owner.
Geotechnical Investigation
2b. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services respecting the
submission and approval of a geotechnical investigation.
Phasing & Development Coordination
21. That if this subdivision is to be developed by more than one registration, the
Owner will be required to submit a plan showing the proposed phasing, all to the
satisfaction of the Region of Durham and the City.
Easements
22. That the Owner conveys, to the satisfaction of the City, at no cost, any required
easement and any reserves for works, facilities or user rights that are required by
the City.
23. That the Owner conveys any easement to any utility provider to facilitate the
installation of their services in a location(s) to the satisfaction of the City and the
utility provider.
24. That the Owner arranges, at no cost to the City, any easements required on third
party lands for servicing and such easements shall be in a location as
determined by the City and/or the Region and are to be granted upon request
any time after draft approval. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering
Services with any required on-site or off-site easements for works, facilities or
use rights that are required by the City.
Construction Management Plan
25. That the Owner satisfies the City respecting the submission and approval of a
Construction Management/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan with such. Plan to
contain, among other matters:
(i)
details of erosion and sedimentation controls during all phasesof
construction and provide maintenance requirements to maintain these
controls as per the City's Erosion & Sediment Control Guideline for Urban
Construction;
(ii) addressing the parking of vehicles and the storage of construction and
building materials during servicing and construction, and ensuring that
such locations will not impede the flow of traffic or emergency vehicles on
existing streets, or the proposed public streets;
(iii) assurance that the City's Noise By-law will be adhered to and that all
contractors, trades and suppliers are advised of this By-law;
97
(iv) the provision of mud and dust control on all roads within and adjacent to
the site;
(v) type and timing of construction fencing;
(vi) location of construction trailers;
(vii) details of the temporary construction access.
Fencing
26. That the Owner satisfies the City with respect to the provision of temporary
fencing around the entire perimeter of the subject lands during construction, prior
to the commencement of any works.
Landscaping
27. That the Owner satisfies the Director, Engineering Services with the submission
of a tree preservation plan which will illustrate the protection of trees and other
natural features where appropriate, with specific attention to preservation in all
public open spaces prior to the approval of a preliminary grading plan. •
28. That the Owner submit a tree planting plan to the satisfaction of the City. This is
to include boulevard plantings along Brock Road, Street '1' and Street '2'.
Tree Compensation
29. That the Owner agrees that prior to final approval of the draft plan, or any phase
thereof, compensation for the loss of tree canopy will be required either through
replacement planting or cash -in -lieu, to be paid to the City of Pickering. In
accordance with Council Resolution #387/18, approved on January 15, 2018,
tree removal compensation is to be calculated in accordance with the City of
Pickering Tree Inventory, Preservation and Removal Compensation
requirements. Based on the City's Tree Replacement Formula/Cash-in-lieu
Calculations, 54 trees are required for compensation. Should there be
inadequate space on the development site to provide all the compensation
plantings, the developer shall pay cash -in -lieu to the City for the difference at
$500 per tree to fund plantings elsewhere in the community. Where
compensation through replanting is being considered, the Owner will be required
to provide a Landscape Plan indicating the location, size and species of trees to
the satisfaction of the Director, Engineering Services.
Engineering Plans
30. That the Owner satisfies the City respecting the submission of appropriate
engineering drawings that detail, among other things; City services, roads,
storm sewers, sidewalks, lot grading, streetlights, fencing, tree planting; and
financially -secure such works.
31. That the Owner satisfy the City respecting arrangements necessary to provide for
coordination of services and roads with adjacent lands.
98
Noise Attenuation
32. That the Owner agrees in the subdivision agreement to implement noise control
measures and warning clauses as recommended in the Noise Report.
Parkland Dedication
33. That the Owner satisfies the City with respect to its obligation to provide parkland
or payment of cash -in -lieu in accordance with the parkland dedication
requirements of the Planning Act.
Fire
34. That the Owner agrees that no development will proceed on any land until
adequate services are available including adequate water pressure to the
satisfaction of the City's Fire Services Department.
Duffin Heights Cost Sharing
35. That the Owner satisfy, to the satisfaction of the City, all matters required by the
Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan, including but not limited to the
following:
(i) Functional Servicing and Stormwater Report
(ii) Monitoring Report
(iii) Compensation Report
(iv) Fish Habitat Restoration Fund contribution
(v) Watershed System Monitoring and Management Fund contribution, and
(vi) Adaptive Management Fund contribution
Model Homes
36. That the Owner enters into a model home agreement with the City, if applicable
for this draft plan.
Other Approval Agencies
37. That any approvals which are required from the Region of Durham, the Ministry
of Transportation or any utility for the development of this plan and for the
construction of Street '1' and Street `2' be obtained by the Owner, and upon
request written confirmation be provided to the City as verification of these
approvals.
Plan Revisions
38. That the Owner acknowledges and agrees that the draft plan of subdivision and
associated conditions of approval may require revisions to the satisfaction of the
City, to implement or integrate any recommendation resulting from studies
required as conditions of approval.
99
39. That the Owner revises the draft plan as necessary to the satisfaction of the City,
to accommodate any technical engineering issues which arise during the review
of the final engineering drawings. Required revisions may include revising the
number of residential building lotsor reconfiguring the roads or lots to the City's
satisfaction.
40. That the Owner agrees to implement the requirements of all studies that are
required by the City for the development of this draft plan of subdivision to the
satisfaction of the City.
Notes to Draft Approval
41. This draft approval shall lapse three years from the date the draft approval has
been granted if the noted conditions have not been fulfilled, or if it has not been
extended by the City of Pickering.
100
Appendix H to
Report PLN 14-18
Recommended Zoning By-Iaw Provisions
for Zoning By-Iaw Amendment A 07/17
101
Recommended Zoning By-law Provisions for
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 07/17
That the implementing zoning by-law permit residential condominium developments in
accordance with the following provisions:
A. Zoning Provisions for Block 2 (Common Element Condominium)
Permitted Uses
1. Permitted uses include Block Townhouse Building, Private Park and Water
Meter Room.
Building Restrictions
102
Unit Type
Block Townhouse with
integrated garage at the
rear of the dwelling
(Rear Lane Townhouse)
Block Townhouse with
integrated garage at the
front of the dwelling
(Street Townhouse)
1.
Number of Dwelling Units
(maximum)
118
2.
Lot Frontage (minimum)
4.5 metres
5.5 metres
3.
Lot Area (minimum)
110 square metres
135 square metres
4.
Front Yard Depth
(minimum)
3.0 metres
4.5 metres
5.
Side Yard Depth
(minimum)
1.5 metres except where dwellings on abutting Tots
share a common wall, no interior side yard shall be
required adjacent to that wall on either lot
6.
Rear Yard Depth
(minimum)•
6.0 metres
7.0 metres
7.
Flankage Yard Depth
(minimum)
2.4 metres
8.
Building Height
(maximum)
12.0 metres
9.
Driveway Width
(maximum)
3.7 metres
102
2. Private amenity area (Block Townhouse with integrated garage at the rear of
the dwelling):
a. Minimum Area — 10.0 square metres
b. Shall be located above the garage at the rear of the dwelling unit and
shall not be enclosed
c. Accessory structures such as pergolas, sheds or other similar structures
shall not be permitted on the private amenity area above the garage at
the rear of the dwelling unit
Parking Requirements
3. Minimum 2.0 parking spaces per dwelling unit to be provided plus 0.2 of a
parking space per dwelling unit for visitors.
4. Garage requirements: minimum one private garage per lot attached to the
main building, the vehicular entrance of which shall be located a minimum of
6.0 metres from the common element condominium street.
Interior garage size: a private garage shall have a minimum width of
3.0 metres and a minimum depth of 6.0 metres; however, the width of a
private garage may include one interior step and the depth may include
two interior steps.
6. No parking lot or parking space shall be permitted within 4.5 metres of a
public street.
7. The minimum right-of-way width for a private street shall be 6.5 metres.
Model Homes
8. A maximum of 2 blocks together with no fewer than 2 parking spaces per
Model Home is permitted.
General Provisions
9. Projections such as window sills, chimney breasts, fireplaces, belt courses,
cornices, pilasters, eaves, eave troughs and other similar architectural
features may be permitted in any required yard, provided that no such feature
projects into the required yard more than 0.6 metres or half the distance of
the required yard, whichever is less.
10. A porch, uncovered deck, or balcony, may encroach into any required front
yard to a maximum of 2.0 metres or half the distance of the required yard,
whichever is less.
11. A porch, uncovered deck, or balcony, may encroach into any required
flankage yard to a maximum of 2.0 metres.
103
12. A porch, uncovered deck, or balcony, may encroach into any required rear
yard to a maximum of 2.75 metres for lands zoned to permit a Block
Townhouse with integrated garage at the rear of the dwelling (Rear Lane
Townhouse) and 2.0 metres for lands zoned to permit a Block Townhouse
with integrated garage at the front of the dwelling (Street Townhouse).
13. Stairs to a porch, uncovered deck or an entrance may encroach to within
0.3 metres of the front lot line or.flankage lot line; to within 1.0 metres of a
rear lot line and to within 0.6 metres of a side lot line.
14. A bay, box window, withor without foundation, having a maximum width of
4.0 metres may encroach into any required yard to a maximum of 0.6 metres
or half the distance of the required yard, whichever is less.
15. Air conditioners are permitted on a lot provided they are located in the rear
yard or side yard or on a balcony or roof In addition, such units shall not be
located any closer than 0.6 of a metre to a side lot line and shall not be
located on any easement in favour of the City.
B. Zoning Provisions for Block 1 (Standard Condominium with Brock Road
Frontage)
Permitted Uses
1. Permitted uses include Stacked Dwelling.
Building Restrictions
2. All buildings and structures shall be located entirely within a building envelope
with the following minimum setbacks:
a. 3.0 metres to Brock Road;
b. 2.4 metres to a day lighting triangle, and
c. 5.0 metres to any other street
3. A 3.0 metre wide build -to -zone adjacent to Brock Road.
4. No building or portion of a building or structure shall be erected within the
build -to -zone, unless a minimum of 60 percent of the entire length of the
build -to -zone is occupied by a continuous portion of the exterior wall of a
building.
5. Maximum length of a block of Stacked Dwellings shall be 60 metres.
6. Minimum separation between buildings: 5.0 metres
7 Maximum number of dwellings units: 75
104
8. Maximum building height: 13.0 metres
9. Minimum private amenity area: 5.0 square metres per unit.
Parking Requirements
10. Minimum 1.0 parking spaces per dwelling unit to be provided either in a
private garage or in a parking area plus 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling
unit for visitors. The visitor parking spaces may be permitted on a separate
lot.
11. Garage requirements: any vehicular entrance foran enclosed private garage
shall be located a minimum of 6.0 metres from a private street that provides
vehicular access to the private garage.
12. Interior garage size: each parking space within a private garage or in a
parking area shall have a minimum width of 3.0 metres and a minimum depth
of 6.0 metres, however, the width of a private garage may include 1 interior
step and the depth may include 2 interior steps.
13. No parking lot or parking space shall be permitted within 4.5 metres of a
public street.
Model Homes
14. A maximum of 1 block together with no fewer than 2 parking spaces per
Model Home is permitted.
General Provisions
15. Projections including balconies, uncovered and covered porches, decks,
platforms and awnings, stairs, window sills, chimney breasts, fireplaces, belt
courses, cornices, pilasters, eaves, eave troughs and other similar
architectural features may project outside the building envelope provided that
no such feature projects a maximum of 1.8 metres from the main wall of the
building.
16. Air conditioners shall not be located any closer than 0.6 of a metre to the
building envelope and shall not be located on any easement in favour of the
City.
17. A water meter room required by the Region of Durham for the purpose of
measuring the quantity of water delivered shall be exempt from the zone
provisions and requirements.
105
C. Restrictions on the Parking and Storage of Vehicles for Blocks 1 and 2
(Common Element and Standard Condominiums)
1. A maximum of 2 vehicles, only 1 of which may be a trailer, are permitted to
park on a driveway.
2. For vehicles parked on any driveway, the maximum permissible height is
2.6 metres, and the maximum permissible length is 6.0 metres.
3. The height for vehicles parked on any driveway is measured from the
established grade immediately beside the vehicle up to the vehicle's highest
point, which excludes lights, antennas and other such items ancillary to the
vehicle's body.
4. No part of any yard except a driveway is to be used for the parking or storage
of vehicles and no vehicle is to encroach onto any Street or Private Street.
5. The parking or storage of an inoperative vehicle is not permitted unless it is
entirely within a fully enclosed building or structure.
6. The parking or storage of a construction vehicle or commercial vehicle is not
permitted, unless it is entirely within a fully enclosed building or structure.
7. A vehicle that exceeds the maximum permissible vehicle size provisions is
permitted to park temporarily for the sole purpose of delivering to, servicing or
constructing the premises.
106
ATTACHMENT # / TO
REPORT # 1✓L-1 1L -i -1j
1111.111111111011111.1
0
Lt
0)
U
z
J
J
DERSAN STREET
KALMARAVENU
w
_ z
� J
z ▪ HAYDEN LANE
O 1Z
Y d
U
•
5
ES
J
MISTHOLLOW DjIVg
J
BROCK ROAD
IA -12
9ITTF
• SUBJECT .�
PROPERTIES \,
C4
Location Map
File: SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02 and A 7/17
o11
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Applicant:Madison Brock Limited
Property Description:Pt Lt 1 Con 3 Pts 2-5 40R26764 Pt 40 40R6934
& Pt 2 40R29605 (2480 & 2510 Brock Rd)
Date: Apr. 20, 2018
b The Corporation of the City ofPickenng Produced tin part) under license from:® Queens Pruner, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources.
Ag rights reserved.0 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. Aff rights reserved.;
ed:
S Teranet Enterprises !no. and its suppters all rights reserved.:Q Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppters DI rights resented:
SCALE. 1:5,000
THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. PN -RU
1
7
ATTACHMENT#®a TO
REPORT N; PLN lL t - I
Proposed Housing Typologies
Housing Typology
Description
Stacked Townhouses
Along Brock Road, 5 modules of 3 -storey stacked townhouse
units are proposed consisting of a total of 75 units. The
stacked townhouse modules have dual frontages. The grade
related units have front door access from Brock Road and the
upper units have front door access from the interior private
road. Vehicular access for all the stacked townhouse units is
from an interior private road. Each unit will have a balcony
providing private amenity space.
Rear Lane Townhouses
The 59, 3 -storey rear Zane townhouseunits will front onto the
future Valley Farm Road extension (to be named Palmer's
Sawmill Road) and Street '1' (to be named Four Seasons
Lane) with vehicular access to the rear of the units from an
interior private road. There are also two blocks of rear lane
townhouse units internal to the development, which will have
front door access from an internal private road and vehicular
access from a rear internal private road. A private amenity
space will be provided for all units on the roof of the private
garages located at the rear of the units.
The zoning by-law will refer to this townhouse form as Block
Townhouse with integrated garage at the rear of the dwelling.
Street Townhouses
•
The 59, 3 -storey street townhouse units are located internal to
the site with front door and vehicular access from the internal
private roads. A 7.0 metre rear yard provides private amenity
spaces for these units.
The zoning by-law will refer to this townhouse form as Block
Townhouse with integrated garage at the front of the dwelling.
108
i; STREET ' 1 '1.3
i
U)
N
11
BLOCK 2
RESIDENTIAL DEV. BLOCK
( 6.514±Acs. )
LDf '
27m
RI Mart4f
10. 3
n LO C K i RESIDENTIAL DEV. BLOCK
0( .1.744±Acs. )
-.� E_
_
BROCK ROAD
•
Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision
°i
File No: SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02 and A 07/17
PICKERI NG
Applicant: Madison Brock Limited
City Development
Property Description: Pt Lt 1 Con 3 Pts 2-5 40R26764 Pt 40 40R6934 & Pt 2 40R29605
Department
(2480 & 2510 Brock Rd)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERINGDATE:OCt.17,
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
2017
Future Condominium (Standard) Application
Submitted Draft Plan of Condominium
°
PICKERING
City Development
Department
File No: SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02 and A 07/17
Applicant: Madison Brock Limited
Property Description: Pt Lt 1 Con 3 Pts 2-5 40R26764 Pt 40 40R6934 & Pt 2 40R29605
(2480 & 2510 Brock Rd)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN AREAVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
DATE:April 12, 2018
P
l3
g4
2
it
11
Id
1,
7—
MN kilMVII ___
imis
—
Fnur
Conceptual Site Plan
onslane S]REE11'
—C'
a
■ii■ ■■igiii
m;F r
_,_ .......„.._ .._,_
, errs-', r ®IC 1.surr
ik I ME 71
EN M 1i LIR
gra IMI
admazIveaL
■■Fii
.1,1•1i1� [.{� ��" 11
Entrfruniparm inignimmitryirafrigillm
rn
BROCK RD
\w, walxO,V.
e rorr c13411s,71.4
'ODEa7a1+ I
1.• G7M9
RF,AR V.** TONSWA se
srActLQlpsivg3uSE
slowtrw tegroglaust
c4 Pe
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Original Concept Plan
File No: SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02 and A 07/17
Applicant: Madison Brook Limited
Property Description: Pt Lt 1 Con 3 Pts 2-5 40R26764 Pt 40 40R6934 & Pt 2 40R29605
(2480 & 2510 Brock Rd)
FULL SCALE COPIES OFTHIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
I DATE:April 12, 2018
Enlarged
Pedestrian Walkway
Tot Lot
Relocated
-.==
r
F • ur Seasons
Lane Street ` l 1 �i
7.~
Al,
—I1I
i
N
-f
— IIID ;
IhI ..II Pin. 11 IWI! I'1
mocc 7 srpcn psi
175161"ill I111 ..M illi
m a[a erazx
!I'!7II , .i
io
ri
_
^ri
i
ti)va
11
,�
it 11 ocr li
�
lip
- iii ci¢••
iii
ki--oo--
L
V
=11M111�11iY
Yi11111101
UN
1dYkg
T-1
- �
] i
�'
REAR LANE TOWNHOUSES
_
��
�1
��
,`
�� /' "
MIQI�-
�
gm
.'
-
_
_
STACKED TOWNHOUSES
3
..ril
6IIM'
- ..„.
.....
ill
- --'--:
yl
®p
0
��
+�J_
_
ih- • STREET TOWNHOUSES
Y
• L
L.
I
I
``:�-rrrrrr
®a ._r --t_ ' - - - -11---�: ~� � r -r --L
_r
i
!.~
-4126
4
E1�
r
.i i n
--- —
uinua. uiu
_ _ - W
■,w,..,w,■
■ ■■ wIf■ ■
_
�
I
? "
' V
�____- -- - - -_ -
_ ---
\.— - - - — - -
••{1.1.11•71'...N.17•
TBrock Road _.,.„
.........;
...,,...._ .,-,..-,,,----
Enhanced Building
Elevations
Revised Concept Plan
File No: SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02 and A 07117 _
P I
C K E R I
N G
Applicant: Madison Brock Limited
City Development
Property Description: Pt Lt 1 Con 3 Pts 2-5 40R26764 Pt 40 40R6934 & Pt 2 40R29605
Department
(2480 & 2510 Brock Rd)
SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEW NGATTHE CRY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
•ApFULL
, bATE nl 1Z 2018
Front Elevation - Palmer's Sawmill Road & Four Seasons Lane
a
ti
1
1
1111111.1111111111111111111110
Rear Elevation - Internal Private Road
0414
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Submitted Rear Lane Townhouse Elevations
File No: SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02 and A 07/17
Applicant: Madison Brock Limited
marartiMMIVA
Property Description: Pt. Lt 1 Con 3 Pts 2-5 40R26764 Pt 40 40R6934 & Pt 2 40R29605
(2480 & 2510 Brock Rd)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
DATE:April 12, 2018
J
-0
Front Elevation (Block 5) - Internal Private Road
Rear Elevation (Block 5) - Internal Private Road
cdrd
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Submitted Street Townhouse Elevations
File No: SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02 and A 07/17
Applicant: Madison Brock Limited
Property Description: Pt Lt 1 Con 3 Pts 2-5 40R26764 Pt 40 40R6934 & Pt 2 40R29605
(2480 & 2510 Brock Rd)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
DATE:April 12, 2018
Ey El
E3 CIiiCI
D �::; ❑
Front Elevation - Brock Road Frontage
II(� = r= ? } ISI Ifs
EI
E3 1:31
Rear Elevation - Internal Private Road
aire
PICKERING
City Development
Department
Submitted Stacked Townhouse Elevations
File No: SP -2017-04, CP -2017-02 and A 07/17
Applicant: Madison Brock Limited
Property Description: Pt Lt 1 Con 3 Pts 2-5 40R26764 Pt 40 40R6934 & Pt 2 40R29605
(2480 & 2510 Brock Rd)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
DATE:April 12, 2018