Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
January 14, 2002
PICKERING AGENDA PLANNING COMMITTEE Anne Greentree Supervisor, Legislative Services JANUARY 14. 2002 Planning Committee Meeting Monday, January 14, 2002 7:30 P.M. Chair: Councillor Ryan ADOPTION OF MINUTES Meeting of November 26, 2001 DELEGATIONS Lloyd Thomas, representing the Whitevale & District Residents Association, will present a petition to Members of Council requesting that the Ontario Realty Corporation not consider the demolition of a building in Whitevale that was damaged by fire on December 2?. (IH) MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION PAGE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT PD 04-02 ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 33/00 802226 ONTARIO LIMITED PART OF LOT 18, CONCESSION 1 PARTS 6-8, 12, 13, PL32q 40R-10635 L! 048 TOY AVENUE) 1-12 PLANNING & DEX, qELOPMENT REPORT PD 01-02 ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 19/97(R01) CHRISTOPHER SPE1RS LOTS 15, 16 AND 17, PLAN 21 430 WHITEVALE ROAD 13-65 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT PD 05-02 ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 13/99 E. MATTACCHIONE AND M. LAPOSTA LOTS 14 AND 15, PLAN 489 1210 AND 1218 KINGSTON ROAD (NORTH SDE OF KINGSTON ROAD,__EAST OF WALNUT LANE 66-99 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT PD 06-02 ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 14/01 MARSHALL HOMES (ALTONA) LTD. ON BEHALF OF M. J. MITCHELL AND M.L PYPER LOT 6 AND PART OF LOTS 3, 4 AND 5, PLAN 506 314-350 FINCH AVEN~L~E ~NORTH SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE, EAST OF ALTONA ROAD) 100-141 Planning Committee Meeting Monday, January 14, 2002 7:30 P.M. Chair: Councillor Ryan PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT PD 02-02 NOTION ROAD LAND USE AND URBAN DESIGN STUDY IMPLEMENTATION OF STUDY FINDINGS: -PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA 01-003/P (CITY-INITIATED) -ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 19/01 (CITY-INITIATED) -,AMENDMENT 7 TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN -NOTION ROAD AREA DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES -iNFORMATIONAL REVISION 10 TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN PART OF LOT 17, CONCESSION 1 (WEST SIDE OF NOTION ROAD, BETWEEN PICKERING PARKWAY AND KINGSTON ROAD, EXCLUDING ]'HE SOUTH-WEST CORNER OF KINGSTON ROAD AND NOTION ROAD) AND OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION OPA 87-002/P ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT A 5/87 SILWELL DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED 8,: BERMA ESTATES (NOW THE METRONTARIO GROUP) PART OF LOT 17, CONCESSION 1 LIMITED 142-196 CORRESPONDENCE Members of Council may formally table an item of correspondence that has been circulated by the Mayor, CAO, Clerk or other staff person. (V) ADJOURNMENT 001 RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY 1. That Zoning Bv-law Amen&nent Application A 33/00. submitted bv 802226 Ontario Ltd. on lands being Part of Lot 18, Concession 1. (Pm-ts 6-8. 12 & 13. Plan 40R-10635). City of' Picketing, to amend the zoning of the lands in order to add a vehicle service and repair shop which shall include the sale of associated vehicle accessories as a permitted use. be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix 1 to Report Number PD 04-02. PICKERING REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development DATE: January 3, 2002 REPORT NUMBER: PD 04-02 SUBJECT: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 33/00 802226 Ontario Limited Part of Lot 18, Concession 1 Parts 6-8, 12, 13, Plan 40R-10635 (1048 Toy Avenue) City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION: That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 33/00, submitted by 802226 Ontario Ltd., on lands being Part of Lot 18, Concession 1, (Parts 6-8, 12 & 13, Plan 40R-10635), City of Pickering, to amend the zoning of the lands in order to add a vehicle service and repair shop which shall include the sale of associated vehicle accessories as a permitted use, be APPROVED subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix I to Report Number PD 04-02. ORIGIN: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 33/00 submitted to the City of Picketing. AUTHORITY: The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 FINANCIAL IMPLICATION S: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to add a vehicle service and repair shop, including the sale of associated vehicle accessories, to the existing industrial zoning. The subject property currently supports two buildings, one of which is used for a recycling facility and the other as a multi-tenant industrial building. A location map and a reduction of the applicant's site plan are included as Attachments #1 and #2 to this Report. The current zoning of the property permits a "Truck Centre" which allows the uses requested by the applicant, however it restricts the uses to trucks only. The applicant is requesting that this definition be broadened to accommodate all vehicle types. The requested amendment is in character with the existing zoning of surrounding properties. It is recommended that Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 33/00 be approved, subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix I to Report Number PD 04-02. Report to Council PD 04-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 33 00 Date: January 3. 2002 PaGe '~ BACKGROUND: 1.0 Information Meetin~ A Public Information meeting was held on March 22, 2001, to discuss the applicant's proposal, inlbrmation Report Nc). 10-01, x~hictn summarizes tile applicant's proposal and outlines the issues identified through circulation of tine application, was prepared tbr the meeting. The text of the In tbrmation Report is provided Ibr reference (see Attachment ::3 ). At the Public Information Meeting, Planning staff gave an explanation of the application. Mr. Mike Nunes, of Sonic Automotixe located at 1034 Toy Avenue. indicated that he ha~ concerns with the potential for overflow parking fi'om 1048 Toy Avenue to occur on his property, which is situated immediately south of the subject lands. Minutes o1' the meeting are included as Attachment .=4. 2.0 Additional Infbmaation Since the preparation of Int'ormation Report No. 10-()l. tine tbllowing comments inavc been received: ri'he Region of Durham Planning Department haxe adx ised that they have no objections to the application. Mr. Mike Nunes, of Sonic Autoinotivc, located at 11)34 Toy :\venue expressed concerns with on-site parking, property conditions, and that approxal of tins application would only result a worsening of tine existing situation. .-X copy of his detailed comments is included with this report (see Attachment xS). 3.0 Discussion 3.1 Appropriateness of Application The subject property is located within an area o~' the City designated "Employment Area General Employment" whictn permits, among other uses, the establishment of automotive and vehicle sales and repair f;acilities. The subject propcrt> is surrounded by industrially zoned properties on Toy Avenue that support or currently provide service and repair facilities for all vehicles types. The applicant's request to add a vehicle service and repair use with the sale of associated vehicle accessories, to the list of pennitted uses, is compatible xvith tine uses in the area, subject to site function details discussed in Section 3.2 of this Report. 3.2 Site Conditions A concern ~vas raised by an abutting landoxvner (Sonic Automobile Enterprises Limited) that the addition of this use will further exacerbate an existing problem regarding the overflow of parking from the applicant's properu onto tlac soutlnerly abutting lands. Planning & Development staffhave visited tlnc site and observed its operation. Users of the subject site are utilizing the parking area of thc abutting property to the south without pennission. In order to discourage tins actixitx it is rcconnnended that a condition of approval require the oxvncr of tile subject property to erect a 1.2 metre higtn chain link fence along tile south lot line. Implementation of this measure will discourage tine use of tine Sonic Automobile property lbr parking. It is recommended that the erection oi: this fence be addressed through an amendment of the approxcd site plan. prior to tine tbrxvarding of' an implementing by-law tbr Council's consideration. 3.3 Recommended Zoning Provisions The subject property was originally zoned "MI" - Light Storage and Manut:acturing Zone and "M2" Industrial Zone, by By-law 2511. which pemnitted the service and repair of any vehicle. These zoning prox isions still apply to many properties on Toy AvelnUe. Report to Council PD 04-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 33/00 Date: January 3, 2002 Page 3 Recommended Zoning Provisions The subject property was originally zoned "MI" - Light Storage and Manufacturing Zone and "M2" - Industrial Zone, by By-law 2511, which permitted the selwice and repair of any vehicle. These zoning provisions still apply to many properties on Toy Avenue. The zoning for the subject property was amended, in 1986, through the submission of Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 62/80. The amending by-law specifically permitted truck sen, ice and repair and did not include provisions for the service and repair of other vehicles. After reviewing the associated planning report, regarding the addition of the "Truck Centre" use, it appears that the limitation to truck repair and service was based on the applicant's request to permit a truck centre, and was not an intentional efibrt to prohibit the service and repair of other vehicles. It is recommended that the "Truck Centre" definition and use be deleted and replaced with a new broader definition and use category to accommodate a vehicle sen'ice and repair shop which shall include the sale of associated vehicle accessories for all vehicle types. Accordingly, staff recommends that Council approve Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 33/00, subject to conditions as set out in Appendix I to Report Number ?D 04-02. 4.0 Applicant's Comments The applicant has reviewed the contents of this Report and concurs with the recommendation for approval but does not agree with the Planning & Development Department's recommendation to install a fencing along the south lot line of the subject property. The applicant will address Council regarding this matter. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Property Location Map 2. Applicant's Submitted Plan 3. Information Report 4. Minutes of Public Information Meeting 5. Mr. Mike Nunes, 1034 Toy Avenue PreParg~d~y: Planner II Lynda Tay'~or, MCIP R~ Manager, Current o15erations TB/jf Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council ,- ./~,-,,~-~'/ ,~-- l~-~ '~/~,"~ Pt~'o~s'J. qtti/n, Cl~ef Adm~"m-"~ti?e Officer ,Approved Endorsed By: Director, P~m4mg & Development APPENDIX I TO REPORT NUMBER PD 04-02 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR ZONING Bx,'-LA~' AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 33/00 1.0 2.0 That. prior to l:be Ibrwarding of an implementing zoning to Council. thc applicant owner stroll: (a) obtain revised site plan approval t}'Oll~ the City's Director, Planning & Development, to address and secure tbr the addition ot'a 1.2 metre high chain link fence along the south lot linc ot'the subject propert>. That, the implementing by-law shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the folloxving: (a) the deletion and replacement of the "Truck Centre- definition with a new definition that permits a vehicle ~crx icc and repair' use, which shall include thc sale of associated vehicle accessories tbr all vehicle types. A*r*TACHU~? ~ / 1'0 REPORT# PD_ .?~/-¢_ * ~~/ / ~ / ~' O& II IJ_~ ~ ~e--. $1/BJEC T r L--------____J ~ ~ PROPERTY BAYLY STREET BAYLY ~- ORANGEBROOK :Z I Gity of F:'ickering Planning & Do¥olopment D~partmont PROP~-HTY DESCRIPTION PART OF LOT 18, CONCESSION 1, PARTS 6, 7, 8, 12 AND 13, 40R-10635 OWNER 802226 ONTARIO LTD. DATE JAN 5, 2001 DRAWN BY Re ~"/~ APPLICATION No. A 33/00 SCALE 1:7500 CHECKED BY JA FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY PN-4 PA- ATTACHMENT ~ '~_.~..~TO REPORT ~ PD, ~; ~ ' ~ A, INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANT'S SUBMITTED PLAN A 33/0O 802226 ONTARIO LTD. ,,/' BAYLY QUARTZ ST. STREET BUIL_~,i!'XGS ,~,? i 048 TOY ,q'¥ENUE SUBJECT OF ZONING AMENDMENT N WAS P/~ODLJC£D 8¥ rile OlI'Y OF PICKER/NO DEVELOP,~£N? OEPARrl~ENr, FEBRUARY 12, 2001. ATTACHMENT # ~:~ TO RFPOR'r# PD c)~-d '2_ PICKERING INFORMATION REPORT NO. 10-01 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF March 22, 2001 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990. chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A33/00 802226 Ontario Limited Part of Lot 18, Concession 1 Now Parts 6-8, 12, 13, Plan 40R-10635 1048 Toy Avenue (East side of Toy Avenue, north of Quartz Street) City of Pickering 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.1 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION the subject property is located on the east side of Toy Avenue, north of Quartz Street and is approximately 0.851 hectares in size (see location map - Attachment #1 ); there are two buildings existing on site with one building fronting on Toy Avenuc (industrial mall) and the other fronting on Quartz Street (recycling facility); the surrounding land uses include various industrial and industrial-commercial uses to the north, south, west and east; there is a railway line adjacent to the easterly property line running in a north-south direction. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL the applicant, Mr. Chuck Kunc, proposes to change the present zoning on the subject lands to add the service and repair of vehicles, and the sale of associated accessory items to the list of permitted uses already on the subject property (see Applicant's Submitted Plan - Attachment #2). OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING Durham Regional Official Plan - the Durham Regional Official Plan identifies the subject lands as being within an "Employment Area" designation; - this designation permits a wide range of employment and employment-related uses such as, manufacturing, assembly and processing of goods, serv'ice industries, storage of goods and materials, and business parks; - the applicant's proposal seems to comply with this designation; In£ornmtion Report No. 10-01 /~TTACHME~JT # -'-~ TO REPORT ¢ PD~~ Page 3.2 3.3 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 Pickering. Official Plan schedule I of thc Picketing Of'tic;al Plan identifies tile subject lands as being located within an "Employment General Employment Area" designation: this designation permits, amoi-~g other uses. automotive and vehicle sales and repair, and retail sales as a minor component of an industrial operation: the subject site is also located within tile Brock Industrial Neighbourbood and it appears that a small portion of the subject property falls within a "Detailect Reviexx Area"; City Council max adopt development guidelines should they consider a~s application to be ~ development tbr any "Detailed Review Area", or part et' an area. identified on a neighbourhood map: the applicant's proposal appears to cotlI'ori-11 tO the applicable official plan and neighbourhood policies as they relate to schedule i; schedule 1II of tile Picketing OflScial Plan identifies that the subject site abuts lands that are designated both "Shoreline and Stream Corridors" and "Wetlands": City Council shall for major development, and may for minor development, require the submission and approval of an environmental report as part of thc consideration of a development application: tile applicant's proposal appears to conform to the applicable official ~>lan policies as tilex' relate to schedule III. Zoning Bx'-law 2511 the subject property is cun'entlv zoned "NIC'-C' hadustrial Commercial zone, by Zoning By-Law 251 ], as amended by Bx-Laxx 2234 S0: this zone penn;ts, anlollg other uses, a light manut5icturin5 plant, truck centre, and a warehouse; an alnendment to the present zoning [>x-law is required in order to permit thc additional uses being requested. RESULTS OF CIRCULATION Resident Comments no resident coinmcnts have been rcccix cd to-date. Ao~encv Comments tile Durham District School Board has no objections to tile proposed Zoning Bv-Laxx Amendment (see Attachment #3); Vet;dian Connections has provided a number of comments that must be addressed tile applicant (see Attachment #4). Staff Comments in reviewing the application to-date, the, Ibllov, in~g matters have been identified for further reviev,' and consideration: · thc appropriateness compatibility of permitting tine proposed usc and associated accessorx retail usc 01~ tiao subject propcrt>: · the impact that this use may iaax c on neighbouring properties; · site plan matters and propcrt> ilnproxement matters to determine if the proposed uses can be accommodated: · dete~ining the significance of thc proposal to sec whether a "Detailed Review" is required; · dete~ining the significance of the proposal to see whether the preparation of environmental repo~s are necessary. f} 1 {7} Information Report No. 10-01 Page 3 ATTACHMENT #,,, -':~ TO REPORT ~ PD 5.0 6.0 6.1 6.2 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; - all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; - if you wish to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision, you must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-la~v for this proposal; - if you wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding this proposal, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk. OTHER INFORMATION Appendix No. I list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of xvrit/ng report; Company Principal the company principal is Mr. Charles Wiltshire. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY John Andreevski Planning Technician JA/pr ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Taylor, MCIP, RPP anager, Current Operations Copy: Director, Planning & Development ATTACHMENT #. d/- TO ft- Excerpts of' Statutory Public Information Meeting Minutes of Thursday, March.~, '~ '~ 2{~01 ( ttq o PICKERING STATUTORY PUBI,1C INFORhlATION MEETING MINUTES A Statutor5 Public Inibrmation Nleeting was held Oil Thursday, March 22, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. The Manager, Current Operations Division, pro\ idcd an overview of the requirelnents of' tile Planning Act and tile Ontario Municipal Board respecting this meeting and matters under consideration thereat. (V) ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT API'LICATION A 33/00 802226 ONTARIO LIMITEI) PART OF LOT 18, CONCESSION 1 NOW PARTS 6-8, 12, 13, PI,AN 40R-10635 1048 TOY AVENUE (EAST SIDE OF TOY AVENUE~ NORTII OF QUARI'Z STREET) JobI1 Andreevski, Planning Technician, provided an explanation of the application, as outlined in Information Report #104)1. Chuck Kunc, representing the applicant, would like to add a lesser use to permitted uses. He further advised that Veridians concern with respect to hydro has been addressed. He has spoken with Nir. Barnett of Veridian and advised him that this is not a new facility but a building already having hydro. Mike Nunes, Sonic Automobile, questioned it' the present zoning allows for mechanical work. He statcd his concern with parking, questioning if ovcrflow of parking will end up on his property. Car repairs have been occun-ing at this site tbr 10 years, why ask for rezoning now. Mr. WJltshire, applicant, advised that repairs are being done on cars but they have only just realized that zoning for truck repair does not include car repair. Traffic will not be increased theyjust want to be in compliance. John :M~dreevski, Planning Technician, stated that truck repairs are alloxved, not cars. Parking concerns wilt be addressed. ATTACHMENT ~', ~ TO REPORT # PD.,, ~ 5z- ¢ -,2. Thursday, March 29, 2001 ATT: RE: SONIC AUTOMOBILE ENTERPRISES UMITED 1034 Toy Ave., Pickering Ont., Canada L1W 3P1 Telephone: (905) 683-8005 Fax: (905) 683-3311 Planning & Development Department City of Pickering Zoning By-law Amendment Application A33/00 802226 Ontario Limited Part of Lot 18, Concession 1, Parts 6-8, 12, 13, Plan 40R-10635 1048 Toy Avenue (East side of Toy Avenue, north of Quartz Street) City of Pickering With regard to the above noted zoning by-law amendment application, we at Sonic Automobile Enterprises Ltd. would like to comment as follows; We find it laughable that this re-zoning application is being made at this time, given the ' fact that servicing and repairing of automobiles has been performed on the subject's property for the past ten years, and continues today. At the present time there are at least two car repair businesses operating on the site. It is our understanding that there was even an illegal "chop shop" business conducted on the site in the past. We find it very disturbing that the present landlords have been unable or unwilling to deal with these illegal property uses. At the present time there are eight unlicensed vehicles being "stored" on the property's parking lot. As a result of the parking congestion caused by these vehicles, our parking lot has been used on occasion by tenants and visitors of the subject's property, forcing us to post no parking signs on our property to deal with this nonsense. One has to wonder whether these problems would not be exacerbated by approval of the proposed zoning by-law. In addition to all of the above, the subject property is notoriously poorly maintained with respect to lawn care, decorative planting and cleanliness. The current landlord has shown little or no inclination to rectify or improve this situation. We at Sonic are convinced, based on past experience, that approval of this by-law amendment application will only result in a worsening of our areas of concern as outlined above. We trust you will treat this correspondence confidentially and we urge you to be very meticulous when reviewing the history and the conduct of the applicant making this by-law amendment application. Yours truly, John E. ©'Halloran President Enclosure: Photographs Michael B. Nunes Vice-President RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97 (R011. submitted by Christopher Spelts. on lands being Lots 15. 16 and 17. Plan 21, City' of Picketing. to amend the zoning of the subject lands from ~HMCT' to a "HMR3" zone, in order to permit the development of a detached dwelling on the subject lands, be APPROVED subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix I to Report Number PD 01-02: and That the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning Bv-la;~ Amendment Application A 19/97 (R01), as set out in draft in Appendix I1 to Report Number PD 01-02, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. That the City Clerk advise the Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) that Picketing City Council requests their assistance in x~orking with Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) and the City to explore access opportunities to the Seaton Hiking Trail, north of Whitevale Road. 014 PICKERING REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development DATE: January2, 2002 REPORT NUMBER: PD 01-02 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97(R01) Christopher Speirs Lots 15, 16 and 17, Plan 21 430 Whitevale Road City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION: That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97 (R01), submitted by Christopher Speirs, on lands being Lots 15, 16 and 17, Plan 21, City of Pickering, to amend the zoning of the subject lands from "HMC7" to a "HMRY' zone, in order to permit the development of a detached dwelling on the subject lands, be APPROVED subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix I to Report Number PD 01-02; and; That the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97 (R01), as set out in draft in Appendix ii to Report Number PD 01-02, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. That the City Clerk advise the Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) that Pickering City Council requests their assistance in ~vorking with Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) and the City to explore access opportunities to the Seaton Hiking Trail, north of Whitevale Road. ORIGIN: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97(R01) submitted to the City of Pi ckering. AUTHORITY: The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The subject property is located at the north-west comer of the intersection of Whitevale Road and Mill Street in the Hamlet of Whitevale. The subject lands are currently zoned "HMC7" by Zoning By-law 3037, as amended, and only permits a mill, granary and fertilizer establishment. The applicant has requested a "HMRY' zone which permits detached dwelling residential uses, "domestic business - type A" and "domestic business type - B". An amendment to the zoning by-law is required to implement the applicant's proposal. Report to Council PD 01-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19 97(R01) Date: January,. '~ 2001 Page 2 The proposed development reflects an appropriate land use, does not adversely impact the existing neighbourhood and the requested zoning is tile exact same zoning that is applied to thc majority of the residential properties in \Vhitexalc. It is recommended that Council approve Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 1c) 971RI)l). and that the draft amending zoning by-law set out in Appendix I to Report Number PD 01-02, be for~arded to City Council for enactment. BACKGROUND: 1.0 Introduction The subject lands are located at the north-west corner of intersection of Whitevale Road and Mill Street in the Hamlet of Whitevale. A property location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1 ). The subject lands currently support a steel and concrete block building that was at one time part of a grain mill operation. The Seaton Hiking Trail is located on adjacent property next to West Duffins Creek. and tip until a fey, years ago passed through the subject property. Thc application that is being considered is ail amendment to thc zoning by-law in order to pcrrnit the construction of a new detached dxvelling on the eastena portion of tile property. The applicant's proposed lot layout is provided for reference I see Attachment #2). The existing building on the property is to be retained and used as all accessory structure to the proposed dwelling. The prelilninar.x design concept for thc proposed dv~clling is a two storey, board and batten structure of approximately 300 square metres, that conveys the character and external appearance of a typical late 19~' centurx small commercial building (see Attachment #4). The applicant has requested to rezone tile property to a "HMRY' zone, which is the same zoning that is applied to the majority of the residential properties in Whitevale. 2.0 Information Meeting A Public Information meeting for the subject application was held on September 20, 2001. Information Report No. 24-01. which summari×es the applicant's proposal and outlines the issues identified as of the date of writing the report, was prepared for the meeting. No written comments from area residents or circulated agencies had been received as of the date of the writing of the information report. Thc text of thc Inlbnnation Report is provided for reference {,see Attachment ~3 ). At the Public Information Meeting, Planning staff gave an explanation of the application. There were several interested ratepayers in attendance at thc meeting. Three ratepayers spoke in opposition to the application. Their opposition can be summarized as follows: · the application does not provide an indication of the proposed use of the existing buildings; · the application does not address the historical significance of the subject property; · access to the Seaton Trail that used to bc enjoyed across the subject property has been lost; · loss of available parking lbr Scaton Trail cisers: · the zoning of the property is premature until the issue of the trail use is concluded; · scale of proposed building not in keeping with the surrounding buildings: and, · the subject lands should be acquired by the municipality For public use. The applicant submitted a report at the public information meeting that outlined the application and provided an opinion on the issues that had been raised (see Attachment #4). lVlinutes of the public information meeting held September 20, 2001 are included as Attachment #5. Report to Council PD 01-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97(R01) Date: January; 2, 2001 Page 3 2.0 Additional Information Since the preparation of Information Report No. 24-01, the following agency comments have been received: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has advised that the western portion of the property is within the Authority's fill regulation limit and the property is adjacent to the Duffins Creek valley corridor and the Whitevale Corridor Environmentally Significant Area. In consideration that no works are proposed in the xvestern portion of the property, they have no objection to the application (see Attachment # 6). Region of Durham Planning Department has advised that the subject lands are designated as Hamlet in the Durham Region Official Plan. The proposal ~vould appear to be permitted by the polices of the Durham Plan. Municipal services (water supply and sanitary sewers) are not available to the subject lands. The site is presently serviced by a well and septic system. The Durham Health Department is unable to comment on the application until detail site plans are provided showing the existing and proposed location of all strnctures, xvell(s) and private sewage disposal systems. Region Of Durham Planning Department has advised that the subject lands have been screened in accordance with the terms of the provincial plan review responsibilities. No provincial interests appear to be affected (see Attachment #7). Durham District School Board has advised that they have no objections to the application. (see Attachment #8) Heritage Pickering (LACAC) has advised that they have no objections to the application (see Attachment #9). Since the public meeting the following comments have been received from area residents. Michael and Shirley Curran, 459 Churchwin Street - advise they support the application, consider the proposal complimentary to the Hamlet and are not aware of any negative impact the proposal will have on the community (see Attachment # 10). Charles and Brigitte Sopher, 440 Whitevale Road - advise that they are in opposition to the proposed rezoning. They are concerned that the public access through the subject property was lost without public consultation and the resolution of the trail access must be resolved prior to the subject application being considered. Further concerns relate to: insufficient parking for trail users at the community center; increased commercial use of the south mill property; present use of the subject property: the disruption of the proposal on the significant heritage feature and archaeological site: and. the proposal does not comply with the Heritage Guidelines. Suggests the City should provide the applicant with alternative land and then acquire the subject lands for public purposes (see Attachment #11). Marion Thompson, 437 Whitevale Road - advises that she objects to the application. Concerns relate to the size of the proposed building, the use of the existing building, the placement of rocks and tree limbs on the subject property and the loss of the access through the subject land to the Seaton trail and the parking lot. Suggest the City should buy the subject lands and use them for public purposes (see Attachment #12). Ronald Dawe, 385 Whitevale Road advises that he has no objection to the subject application. He notes that the previous use of the property, a mill operation generated complaints form the community. He does want the issue of access to the north portion of the Seaton Trail to be resolved, hoxvever not at the cost of the applicant (see Attachment #13). Report to Council PD 01-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19'97{R01) Date: January 2, 2001 Page 4 017 Gordon and Anna Wilson, 455 Whitevale Road - advise that they do not support the application. Their reasons for objection include: the application does not describe the proposed use of the existing heritage building or the rest of the property; the historical, industrial, social and political si~dficances of the property to the Hamlet of Whitevale does not seem to be considered by the applicant, or the Municipality: and, that the issue of access to the Seaton Trail including public parking has not been resolved by the Municipality {see Attachment #14). James Thompson, 437 Whitevale Road advises that he objects to the application. Tile reasons for objection include: the application is premature and no decision on tile land use of' the subject property should be made until the matter of access and parking to the Seaton Trail has been concluded: the property has been and continues to be used in violation of the zoning by-law; tile previous application t'or the subject property was opposed by a large number of residents: and concerns that the proposed building would not be in keeping with the Heritage guidelines (see Attachment = 15). isobel and Tommy Thompson, 3181 Byron Street have expressed concern on the application. They have requested inlbnnation on wtmt Lxpe of business uses thc applicant is proposing. They also have concerns ttnat access to the norttn Seaton Trail has been lost and xvtnether access could be obtained ttn'ough tile subject propcrt.x by means of the trail along the west side of the subject property Isee Attachmeint = 10). 3.0 Discussion 3.2 3.3 3.1 Neighbourhood Character The subject property is located at the norttl-x~ est corner of Mill Street and \Vhitevale Road in the Hamlet of Whitevale. The Hamlet is composed of a mixture of typical rural Ontario vernacular architecture style dwellings located on a variety of lot sizes. The proposed dwelling is considered to be in keeping wittn the level of massing and scale to the existing buildings in the Hamlet. Ttnerefore. the proposal would be compatible with the other dwellings in Whitevale. Whitevale Heritage Conservation District The subject property is included within tile V','hitevale Heritage Conservation District. The conservation guidelines apply to maintenance and repair oi' existing heritage buildings, alterations and additions to existing buildings, new buildings, site development, landscaping, and municipal infrastructure. A Heritage District Permit would be required for the site development, any alterations which afl'ect the external appearance of the existing building and for the construction of a new detached dxvclling. The Whitevale Heritage Consel-vation District Guidelines provide guiding principles for new buildings, including building height, setbacks and visual compatibility. '['}ne proposed dwelling, as characterized by the applicant is designed to reflect a small, late 19t*" century commercial building. The proposed development has been conceptually reviexx cd and supported by Heritage Pickering as meeting the intent of the guidelines. Detailed review xxill occur ttwough the Heritage/Building permit process. The detailed design of tile proposed development will be reviewed against the Heritage guidelines and will have to comply in order to obtain a building permit. Seaton Trail It is recognized that the Scaton ]'rail, at one umc. had access for the general public across the subject property. A driveway and parking area was available on and adjacent to the subject property for use by the general public. It is also recognized that this access is no longer available. The public has no permission to cross the subject lands to assess the Seaton Trail. The Seaton Trail currently is accessible from Whitevale Road by means of a wooden stair and trail that is located west of the subject property. Report to Council PD 01,02 Date: January 2, 2001 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97(R01) Page 5 Some trail users have established an informal access point off of Mill Street, north of the subject property. This informal access can be characterized as "less challenging" than the formal access along the banks of the West Duffins Creek. However, the informal trail access could be made more accessible with some modification. While the loss of the previous public access across the subject property is regrettable, it is now time to explore other opportunities that will provide improved public access to the Seaton Hiking Trail within reasonable cost parameters. The current landowner is not responsible for providing public access across the subject property. The Seaton Trail is not located on municipal property, but rather on lands owned by the Provincial Government (ORC). One option that warrants close examination is the introduction of a formal trail access point from Mill Street, north of the subject property. Trail users will be able to use the parking lot at the Whitevale Community Centre and Park on the west side of Duffins Creek south of Whitevale Road and walk to the new proposed access point. The Toronto Regional Conservation Authority has expressed interest in becoming involved with ORC, the City and the community to explore access opportunities to the trail system. 3.4 Appropriateness of the Application The current zoning by-law only permits the property to be used for industrial type of uses (mill, granary and fertilizer establishment). The proposed use, being a detached dwelling, is considered to be more compatible with the surrounding land uses than the existing uses permitted by the zoning by-law. The proposal is considered appropriate in its location and contributes positively recognizing the land use context and the surrounding land uses. The proposed detached dwelling is compatible with the surrounding land uses. The new dwelling will be serviced by private well and septic system. Durham Health Department approval will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. The proposed "HMR3" zone is identical to the zoning that is applicable to the majority of the residential properties in the Hamlet. This zoning will permit the opportunity for the establishment of a 'domestic' business, subject to the identical restrictions and opportunities of other properties in the area. The subject application is considered to be consistent with and in general conformity to the Durham Regional Official Plan and the City of Picketing Official Plan. The existing, approximately 310 square metre, steel and concrete block building (at one time part of the grain mill operation) is to remain on the site. Any alterations to this building will require a Heritage Permit. The buiding is to be used as an accessory structure to permitted uses. At this time the building will be associated with the proposed residential use. The proposed zoning will not permit industrial or warehouse uses. An area resident expressed concern respecting potential for an archeological site in this area. The Region of Durham is responsible for review of Provincial interests and have advised that no provincial interests are affected by the proposal. In reviewing this application consideration was given to the competing interest of the applicant, the immediate neighbourhood and the community as a whole. A balanced consideration of the competing interests was considered and it was concluded the application is appropriate, compatible with the surrounding land use and would not have a destabilizing effect on the area. Accordingly, staff recommend that Council approve Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97(R), as set out in draft in Appendix I to Report Number PD 01-02. Further, staff recommend that the draft by-law be forwarded to City Council for enactment. Report to Council PD 01-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment .~Xpplication .a. 19 971R01 > Date: January 2, 2001 Page O .3.5 Recommended Zoning By-lave Provisions A Draft By-law, attached as Appendix ii to tills report, has DecI~ prepared which recommends the subject property be rczoned I¥om "HMCT" zone to a "HMR3" zone. ~I-t~e existing perfon:~ance standards respecting >'ard depth, building height and lot coverage tt'~at are contained in tile existing zoning bv-laxv, and already apply to tile rest of tiao majority of residential properties in Whitcx'alc will apply to tiao subject property. Tile curt'tnt use rights within this zone are as relieves: i) a "HMR3" zone v,T~ich permits detached dv,'elling residential uses. "domestic business - type A" and "domestic bt~sii~ess typo B": ii) -domestic business tFs~e .~" is dei%~ed as an antique store, an arts and crati shop. a book store, a business office, a clothing boutique, a custom xxorkshop, a prol~ssional office, or a specialty }nome lk~nnishing sl~op, which is: a) operated t¥om a detached dxvclling on tho lot, or a building or structure accessory to thc detached dwelling on the lot' and b) managed, directed or condt~cted bx one or n~orc of thc occupants of the detached dwelling on the lot: iii) "domestic business type B" is delincci :is bakcl-x of a tea room. whic]l is: a) operated From a detached dxxellinz~ on tiao lot. or a bc~ildin,,= or stru~ctuirc accessory to the detached dwelling, on the lot' z~nd b) managed, directed or conducted bx otqc or nTore of rite occtl}3alltS of tt~e detached dxvelling on the lot. Thc by-law l'urther specifies that ttnc a~<re~ate of the ~ross floor area o£ all "domestic business type A" and "domestic business type B", on a lot shall not exceed 25 percent of the gross floor area of the detacl~ed dxx cllin,,= on tt~e lot. This zoning will result in the cxistin,.4 structure becoming legal non complying. While the use of the building as an accessory structure is pcnq~itted, thc building will not comply with location or Yard requirements. .:Xnv IUture additions or alterations would be required to comply to the new zoning provisions. 4.0 A__p_plicant's Comments The applicant has revievced the contents of this Report and draft by-law and concurs with the contents. 0£0 Report to Council PD 01-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97(R01) Date: January2,2001 Page 7 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Property Location Map 2. Applicant's Submitted Plan 3. Information Report 4. Applicants report on the Proposal for Rezoning 5. Minutes of September 20, 2001 Statutory Public Information Meeting 6. Agency Comment- Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 7. Agency Comment - Region of Durham Planning Department 8. Agency Comment - Durham District School Board 9. Agency Comment - Heritage Pickering 10. Resident Comment - Michael and Shirley Curran, 459 Churchwin Street 11. Resident Comment - Charles and Brigitte Sopher, 440 Whitevale Road 12. Resident Comment - Marion Thompson, 437 Whitevale Road 13. Resident Comment - Ronald Dawe, 385 Whitevale Road 14. Resident Comment- Gordon and Anna Wilson, 455 Whitevale Road 15. Resident Comment- James Thompson, 437 Whitevale Road 16. Resident Comment Isobel and Tommy Thompson, 3181 Byron Street Prepared By: Ross Pym, MCIP, Principle Planner - Development Review Approved / Endorsed By: /' Nell Carroll~RPP Director, Planning & Development Lynd~ i~tyfor, MCIP RP/ Manager, Current Op/erations RP/jf Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council ~h6/Z~'~i' ~ui¢ Chief ~dministra~f~ficer .APPENDIX 1 TO REPORT NUMBER PD 01-02 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 19/97(R) ( a ) (b) That the subject lands be rezoned l¥om a "HMC~'' zone in Zoning Bx'-taw 303,7, as amended, to a HMR> zone. That prior to approval of any building permit the owner applicant: (i) submit plans, to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development in consultation with Heritage Picketing that demonstrate the proposed development complies with ttac( onservation ©uideline of the Whitevale Heritage Consep, ation District: (ii) submit, and receive approval, bx the City of Picketing, of a tree preserx ation plan for the subject property: (iii) submit and receive City approval of a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment report; (iv) satis£v the requirements of the Toronto and Region Conservation :\uthoritv for any works on the property. APPENDIX II TO REPORT NUMBER PD 01-02 DRAFT BY-LAW ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 19/97(R01 ) THE CORPORATION OF THE CIT'f OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-lay,' 3037. as amended, to implement the Official Plan o£ the City of Picketing District Planning Area. Region of Durham in Lots 15, 10 and 17. Plan 21 IParts 31, 50 and 52.40R-1140) in the City of Picketing. (A 10 01 (R)) WHEREAS tile Council of' tile Corporation of tile City of Picketing passed By-law 2677/88. amending Zoning By-law 3037. to peru-dr development of residential, commercial, church, community, agricultural and greenbelt uses in part of lots 30.31.32, and 33, Concessions 4 and 5 in the City of Picketing; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Picketing nov, deems it desirable to anaend By-law 2677 88 to Zoning By-law 3037, to pemait tile development ora detached dwelling on Lots 15, 16 and 17, Plan 21 fPans 31, 50 and 52.40R-114!)) itl the City of Picketing; '~" ' _1 AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-lay, ,6/7'88 to Zoning Bx-laxx ,/),: as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPO[LqTION OF TitE CITY OF N PICKERI: G HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. SCHEDULE I Schedule I to By-law 2677/85. as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zoning from a "HMCT" zone to a "H?',IR3" zone designation of the lands being Lot 15. 16 and 17, Plan 21, in the Git>' of Picketing. as shown on Schedule 'T' to this bv-laxx. AREA RESTRICTED The provisions of ti-ds By-law shall apply to those lands in Lots 15. 16, and 17, Plan 21 (Pans 31,50 and 52, 40R-1140t designated "HMR3" on Schedule I attached hereto. BY-LAV~' 3037 By-law 3037, as amended bv By-law 26"', SS. is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as it applies to tile area set out m 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 3037. as amended by By-law 2677/88. EFFECTIVE DATE This By-law shall take effect from thc day of passing hereof subject to thc approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. if required. BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this ____da,,' of ,2002. "i: ':: :';';' 5 ...... :, Wayne Arthurs. Mayor Bruce Taylor. C~lerk' (1.34 HMR3 PARTS 31, 50 AND 40R-114-0 52, SCHEDULE T PASSED THIS DAY OF 2OO2 MAYOR CLERK 025 EPORT ~ PO ~ .... ' WHil EVALE City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LOTS 15 TO 17, PLAN 21; PARTS 31, 50 AND 52, 40R-1140 APPLICANT CHRISTOPHER SPEIRS APPLICATION No. A 19/97(R01) T DATE AUG 8, 2001 I DRAWN BY SCALE 1;7500 ~ CHECKED BY FOR lENT USE ONLY PN-S2 PA- -- 0o6 INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANT'S SUBMITTED PLAN A 19/97(R01) C. SPIERS lB EXISTING DRIVEWAY AND WH ITEVALE ~ ~ ,4 7.6m ',_ ~1~-[' 1.5 9.1m "'4.5rr ROAD THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, INFORMATION & SUPPORT SERVICES, AUGUST 24, 2001. PICKERING INFORMATION REPORT NO. 24-O1 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF September 20, 2001 IN ACCORDANCE WITtt THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF TIKE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/97(R01) Christopher Speirs Lots 15, 16 and t 7, Plan 21 430 Whitevale Road City of Picketing 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION the subject lands are located at thc north-west torquer of the intersection of' Whitevale Road and Mill Street in the }tamlet of \Vhitevale; a property location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1); the subject lands cun'ently support a steel and concrete block building that was at one time part of a grain inill operation; there is a wood fence along the eastern property line; the Seaton Hiking Trail is located on the adjacent property next to West Duffins Creek, and up until a few years ago, passed through the subject property; surrounding land uses are; north - wooded open st>aces; south - buildings associated with the lbrmer mill operations; east - hamlet residential properties; ,,vest - main channel of thc \\:est Duf'fins Creek. 2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL the application that is being considered is an amendment to the zoning by-law in order to permit the construction of a new detached dwelling on the eastern portion of the property; the applicant's submitted plan is provided for reference (see Attactnnent #2); the existing building on the property is to be retained and used as an accessory structure to the proposed dwelling; the preliminary design concept for the proposed dwelling is a two story, board and batten structure, that conveys the character and extenml appearance of a typical late 19th century small conmmrcial building; the applicant has requested to rezone the property to a "I-tN, iR3" zone, which is the same zoning that is applied to the majority of ti~e residential properties in Whitevale. 3.0 BACKGROUD - the rezoning application for the subject property ,,','as originally submitted in November 1997 by 1047114 Ontario limited; thc original application was to rezone the site to permit the development of a "Building Supply Centre"; - a public information meeting was held on the original proposal in February 1998 (see Attachment #3 for excerpts from the February 19, 1998 Statutory Public intbrmation Meeting); Information Report No. 24-01 ATTACHMENT # 3 TO REPORT # PD ©i - C, 7.. Page 2 the City received numerous letters of objection to the original proposal; after the public information meeting, a follow-up meeting was held with local residents and City staff to explore options for the subject property; the original application has been inactive since the spring of 1998; the subject property has since been conveyed to the current owner who has amended the application and requested that the revised application proceed. 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING Durham Regional Official Plan - the Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as within the Hamlet of [Vhitevale; - the Durham Regional Official Plan states that Hamlets shall be developed in harmony with surrounding uses and may consists of a variety of housing types (including detached dwellings), employment area and commercial uses that meet the immediate needs of the residents of the hamlet and surrounding rural area; - the application appears to conform to this designation; Picketing Official Plan - the Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as Rura! Settlement; - the Whitevale Settlement Plan, within the Official Plan, designates the lands as Hamlet Commercial; uses permitted within t~ramlet Commercial include, amongst others, residential uses and home occupations; - the Whitevale Settlement Policies of the Official Plan encourage opportunities for enhancing the historical village of Whitevale through general or site-specific zoning that allows the introduction of arts and craft studios, custom workshops and small-scale commercial enterprises on suitable sites, provided the historical character of the village and the interests of the neighbouring residents are respected; - the Whitevale Settlement Policies of the Official Plan specifies that development within the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District is to comply with the adopted heritage district guidelines and heritage district permit process; - Schedule III of the Pickering Official Plan - Resource Management, designates lands in close proximity to the subject lands as Shorelines and Stream Corridors and Environmentally Significant Areas in recognition of the subject properties proximity to West Duffins Creek; - the exact boundaries of the Shorelines and Stream Corridors will be determined in consultation with the relevant agencies, and in consideration of a required environmental report; - Schedule II of the Pickering Official Plan - "TransPortation Systems" designates Whitevale Road where it abuts the subject lands as a Local Roa& - Local Roads generally provide access to individual properties, to local roads, carry local traffic and generally have a right-of-way width of up to 20 metres; - the subject applications will be assessed against the policies and provisions of the Pickering Official Plan during the further processing of the applications; Zoning By-law 3037~ as amended - the subject lands are currently zoned "HMC7" by Zoning By-law 3037, as amended; - the existing zoning permits a mill, granary and fertilizer establishment; - an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to implement the applicant's proposal; - the applicant has requested a "HMR3" zone which permits detached dwelling residential uses, "domestic business - type A" and "domestic business type - B"; - "domestic business type - A" is defined as an antique store, an arts and craft shop, a book store, a business office, a clothing boutique, a custom workshop, a professional office, or a specialty home furnishing shop, which is: a) operated from a detached dwelling on the lot, or a building or structure accessory to the detached dwelling on the lot; and lnfom~ation Report No. 24-01 4.4 b) managed, directed or conducted by one or more of the occupants of the detached dwelling on the lot; - "domestic business type--- B" is defined as bakery or a tea room, which is: a) operated from a detached dwelling on the lot, or a building or structure accessory to the detached dwelliug ou the lot; and b) managed, directed or conducted by one or more of the occupants of the detached dwelling on the lot; - the by-law further specifies that the aggregate o£ the gross floor area of all "domestic business - type A" and "domestic business type B", on a lot shall not exceed 25 percent of the gross floor area of the detached dwelling on the lot; - the requested use right are the same use rights that are enjoyed by the majority of the residential properties in Whitevale; Whitevale Heritage Conservation District By-law - the subject property is included within tile Whitevale tteritage Conservation District; - the conservation guidelines apply to maintenance and repair of existing heritage building, alterations and additions to existing buildings, new buildings, site development, landscaping, and municipal infrastructure; - a Heritage District Poi-mit would bo required for thc site development, any alterations which affect the external appearance of tile existing building or fl0r the construction of' a new detached dwelling; - the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Guidelines provide guiding principles for new building, including building height, setbacks and visually compatibility. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION Resident Comments no resident comments have been received to-date on thc revised application; A_~en cv Comments - no comments from any of the circulated agencies have been received to-date on the revised application; Staff Comments in reviewing the application to-date, the tbllowing matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: · ensuring that the proposed development is compatible with, and sensitive to, surrounding lands; · whether the proposal is compatible with the VChitevale Heritage Conservation District; · impacts o£the proposed application on the Seaton Trail, considering the subject property's past relationship with the Seaton Trail; · the impact tile proposed use / site changes may have on the character of the neighbourhood; · the impact thc development might have on the existing vegetation on the subject property; this Department wilt conclude its position on the application after it has received zmd assessed comments fi'om the circulated departments, agencies and the public. (~ ,~ 0 Inform/tion Report No. 24-01 ¥_i~r,T ~. PD chi- Page 4 6.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; - all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; - if you wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding the zoning by-law amendment application, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk; - if a person or public body that files a notice of appeal of a decision of the City of Pickering in respect of the zoning by-law amendment does not make oral submission at the public meeting, or make a written submission to the City of Pickering before the zoning bydaw is passed, the Ontario Municipal Board may dismiss all or part of the appeal; if you wish to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision of the proposed zoning by-law amendment application, you must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal. 7.0 7.1 7.2 OTHER INFORMATION Appendices Appendix I - list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing this report; Information Received - copies of the Applicant's submitted plan and building elevations are available for viewing at the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department; - the City of Pickering has not received any technical information/reports on the proposed application; - certain technical reports may be required to be submitted and will be reviewed and reported on, as necessary. Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner - Development Review RP/pr Copy: Director, Planning & Development Department Lynda T/aylor, MCIP~P Manager, Current Operations APPENDIX I TO INFOR3IATION REPORT NO. 24-01 COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDO~VNERS (1) None received to-date COMMENTING AGENCIES (1) None received to-date COMMENTING CITY DEI'ARTSIENTS (1) None received to-date AT~ACHI'~EKI~' # ~ TO P;EPOR~ PD O i-O~z Proposal for Rezoning Lots 15, 16, 17, Plan 21 Whitevale, City of Pickering Prepared by Christopher Speirs Reference to: City of Pickering, InfOrmation Report NO. 24-01 TO ~.) 33 _J .TO Table of Contents 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Purpose of the proposed application Responses to staff comments Conclusion Elevation sketches of proposed new structure Photos of Lot 15: proposed location of new structure Survey illustrating government vs. private lands Page 1 Pages 2 - 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 TO Purpose of the rp__E0_posed aDpiication: With regards to the proposed application and ti~e subject proper[y, I would tike to make Whitevale my place of residence, and, in so doing, wish to construct a new building for a personal residence, and renovate the existing buildings in such a manner that their presence would provide a seamless transition from neighbouring properties. Any additions or renovations would carefully replicate the 19th century architectural styles common to Whitevale, while respecting the historical uses of this particular piece of property. The present zoning is HMC7 - Mill, Granary and Fertilizer establishment. I would like to amend the zoning to HMR-3. This would allow a single family residential home as well as small hamlet-commercial uses. The requested use rights are the same use rights that are enjoyed by the majority of the residential properties in Whitevale. At present the only structures on the property are a steel clad barn and a weigh-scale shed. I would like to construct an additional structure on the property that would be suitable for use as my personal residence. The property is bounded by 3 road allowances to the west, south and east, and adjoins Ontario Realty Corporation property on the north perimeter. The western boundary, known as the unopened road allowance ~River Street', is also owned by the Ontario Realty Corporation. The O.R.C. operates the 'Seaton Hiking Trail' along the River Street road allowance and through their land holdings to the north of my property. The ORC does not have any structures on these lands. The original mill race still terminates at the north-east section of the property, though it is now dry as a result of the gates having been removed from the head of the dam in the 1970's. Mature deciduous trees run along the east and west boundaries of the property, providing natural screening as well as reinforcing the traditions of a rural environment. It is my intention to supplement these existing trees with additional specimen plantings at other points on the property. I am planning additional landscaping to reduce the toll that late 20th century commercial practices have taken; much of the property is covered with a gravel surface that was used to provide driveways for heavy transport trucks. I will undertake a 'greening' of this land to restore it to a more traditional appearance. The piece of the property known as Lot 15 is the highest portion of the property, and is therefore the lot which is best suited for a residence. In response to the City of Pickering, Information Report NO. 24-01, Section 5.3, Staff Comments, I would like to make the following submissions. With regards to: "Ensuring that the proposed development is compatible with, and sensitive to, surrounding lands." The subject property is bounded by Whitevale road on the south lot line and Mill Street on the east lot line. The north and west lot lines abut the Seaton Hiking Trail. In effect the property is an island of privately owned land in a sea of land that is controlled by various levels of government. The nearest building is located on the opposite side of the Whitevale Road allowance, this being the former mill structure which towers over 50 feet in the air. The nearest residential structure is located on the opposite side of the Mill Street road allowance, this being a 2-storey brick structure that is obscured from view by a 25 foot tall cedar hedge on that property. · The proposed construction of a single family home on the eastern portion of the subject property is an extremely Iow-impact development. The grading of the lot at the lot lines would not be changed in any manner, and any other grading changes would be minor in order to facilitate gardens or similar landscape features. · There will be no interference with existing swales or ditches. · As a single family home it can be expected that traffic volume will be very Iow. · The existing tree lines will remain and will be maintained using sound horticultural practises. · Intended improvements to the existing accessory building will substantially improve its visual appeal. · New specimen trees will be planted to improve the visual appeal of the property. · Water runoff from the proposed new structure will be carefully controlled to replicate existing water runoff patterns. "Whether the proposal is compatible with the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District?" Histor~ of the Pro e. Qc__d~ The earliest land patent on file for this property was issued to Truman P. White in 1852, according to Land Registry records, it is acknowledged that this land was in the posession and use of Truman White from 1845 onwards. Prior to this the land was occupied by Mr. John Major, who had operated a sawmill from approximately 1820 until the sale of the property to Mr. White. The village of Whitevale, as named by Truman White in his village plan of 1870, was once known as Majorville, a name assigned to it by John Major. These 3 lots were the site of the town's first grist milt; it was this mill which provided the original economic engine around which the community of Whitevale was built. The original mill was lost in a fire in 1876. This site has also been home to other enterprises including a cooper shop, a sawmill and turning factory, a private residence, a dentist's office, a blacksmith shop, as well as being the home of a temperance hall, where the town's first church services were held. Following World War II, the property was used chiefly for grain delivery and storage, as well as to service the needs.of the now defunct milling operation. l, like my fellow neighbours, appreciate the unique character, history, environment and tranquility of Whitevale. I would tike to return this property, once the centrepiece of the Hamlet, to the level of splendour, dignity, and reserve that is owing. With regards to the proposed development and its compatibility with the Whitevaie Heritage Conservation District, consider the following excerpts from The Hamlet of Whitevale, Heritag~ Conservation District Stud .y_,_Z.The District Plan, June 1990. 3.3.5 Construction of New Buildings: "Tine introduction of new buildings into Whitevate must be seen as part of the continuing change that al!. communities experience" "Contemporary design is encouraged but with a view to utilizing traditional building formsr" 3.3.5.1 Buitding Height: "Building height of new structures should maintain the building height of adjacent properties" .~ ~ PI] ~)i ~ TO 3.3.5.2 Building Location: "Every effort should be made to respect the predominant gable roof within the district.' "Garages in particular should not form part of the front facade of a new building and are best located towards the rear of the building." 3.3.5.5 Exterior Walls "Walling material for new residential building should reflect the district's traditional building material of wood, either clapboard or vertical board and batten." The new building which has been proposed for this property respects ail of these important guidelines. It has been .designed to reflect the characteristics of a small, late 19th century commercial building; this is in keeping with the historical pattern of usage for this property. It is similar in style to 19th century commercial buildings in the nearby communities of Cherrywood, Brougham, Ciaremont, Green River, and Greenwood, as well as Whitevale's commercial buildings as depicted in the Ontario County Atlas of 1876. The proposed design utilizes a gable roof two-storey structure with a frontal measurement of 30 feet; this distance reflects the most common size for a building width in the Whitevale and surrrounding area during the 1860 - 1880 period. While residences were often one and a half storeys in height, commercial buildings were typically two storeys in height. (Some commercial structures, such as mills, were often four or more storeys in height.) Additions to the rear of these buildings were common, as the need for space increased with the growth of business. The intended design takes this into account, and utilizes an 'L' shaped footprint, the most typical form of addition during the late 1800's. "Impacts of the proposed application on the Seaton Trail, considering the subject property's past relationship with the Seaton Trail." In reviewing this comment, it is crucial to understand the relationship of this plot of private property in relation to the public lands that it abuts. The Seaton Hiking Trail is operated on a path that is accessed from Whitevale Road. This path leads onto the Ontario Realty Corporation's lands abutting the west property line, and continues along the O.R.C.'s holdings that are north of the subject property. The Ontario Realty Corporation, as an agent of the Crown, maintains ownership of all the lands surrounding Whitevale, having obtained them by means of purchase or expropriation during the 1970's. Each and every piece of property in Whitevale, including the subject property, was at one time owned by the Crown during the 1970's. When the Crown chose to sell the subject property in the mid 1990's, it did so without providing a right of way or easement across the property. Thus, there exists no right of way or easement across this property; this is acknowleged by the Ontario Land Registry Office, the Solicitor for the City of Picketing, John Reble. The Government of the Province of Ontario, and the Ontario Realty Corporation. The property has been clearly and continuously posted 'No Tresspassing'. The vast majority of people using the Seaton Hiking Trail respect the private ownership of the subject property and use the Hiking Trail as it is intended. There is a concern among some that they would prefer to have level access to the Trail; this can be easily provided by accessing the Trail from Mill Street, as the Trail does abut Mill Street. A small footbridge would likely be required to assist in crossing the old mill race. This solution has been suggested on prior occasions by a number of individuals, as well as members of the Whitevale Resident's Association; City of Pickering staff have acknowledged the feasibility of this idea, but no action has been taken to date. To summarize, this proposed application has no bearing on the operation of the Seaton Hiking Trail; the Trail will continue to operate exactly as it presently does. Public lands surround the subject property on alt 4 sides; O.R.C. property to the north and west, Whitevale Road to the south and Mill Street to the east. It is difficult to imagine a similar piece of property that has public boundaries on all four sides. 140 ATTACHMENT # ~ TO "The impact the proposed use/site changes may have on the character of the neighbourhood.' When the subject property was last being used as part of the mill operation, the City of Pickering received numerous complaints regarding the mill operation with respect to noise, truck traffic, pollution and other issues. This was a considerable factor in the decision to cease operation of the mill. It was quite clear that many of the residents of Whitevale did not want a mill operation in their community. The requested use rights are the same use rights that are enjoyed by the majority of the residential properties in Whitevale. This is much more in keeping with the desires of the vast majority of Whitevale's residents. The proposed improvements to the site will greatly enhance the visual appeal of the subject property, and more closely replicate the pattern of the rest of the hamlet. "The impact the development might have on the existing vegetation on the subject property." The proposed application has been carefully considered and planned to ensure the existing trees on the property will remain. Sound horticultural practises will be used to ensure the ongoing health of these trees. The west and north-east boundaries of the property are also characterized by a growth of wildflowers; these too will be preserved. The remainder of the property is largely a gravel surface. This will be improved by means of planting lawns and gardens, as well as specimen trees, that replicate the patterns set forth by the residents of Whitevale in their own landSCaping. o ATTACHMENT # /~ .TO REPORT # PD 0,( "D ,'~ Conclusion This proposal has been well researched and thought through in order to best reflect the historical uses of the subject property and the Hamlet of Whitevale. Careful consideration has been given to the recommendations of The Hamlet of Whitevale, Heritage Conservation District Study, The District Plan, June 1990. It is with the solid background of this knowledge that the proposed application has been made. The subject property, at the present time, detracts from the beauty of Whitevale. The proposed changes will serve to create a property which adds to the strength of the community, both visually and in its character and purpose. The changes represent a logical and beneficial progression of use for this piece of land. ~43 ;/ O45 ALLOW'A ~OF ONTARIO LAttO SLIRVEYOt~S 1081563 TltlS Pt~ff IS NOr f 46 PICKERING o I- Excerpts from the Statutory Public Information Meeting Minutes Pursuant to the Planning Act Thursday, September 20, 2001 8:00 P.M. Chair: Councillor Holland The Manager, Policy Division, provided an overview of the requirements of the Planning Act and th, Ontario Municipal Board respecting this meeting and matters under consideration there at. (II) ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 19/97(R01) CHRISTOPHER SPEIRS LOTS 15, 16 AND 17, PLAN 21 430 WHITEVALE ROAD o Cathy Rose, Manager, Policy Division, on behalf of Ross Pyro, Principal Planner - Developmen Review, provided an explanation of the application, as outlined in Infornmtion Report #24-01. Chris Speirs, Applicant, stated his wish to live in Whitevale in the proposed home. tqe advise~ that this home has been designed in keeping with the surrounding area and existing trees am swales will not be affected by this proposal. Gordon Willson, 445 Whitevale Road, advised that the proposal does not indicate the use of th, existing buildings. He provided a history of the properly, which has been unfavorable tbr th, area and stated his concern with lack of access to the trail and parking. He suggested that resolution be brought forward which would assist residents. Jim Thompson, 437 Churchwin St., stated his objection to the application, outlining that there outstanding matters which need to be addressed prior to any action with respect to this proposal He advised of his concerns with respect to the closure of the right-of-way to the trail, unfairnes of the rezoning application and the inappropriate addition to Whitevale. He requested that th. City either defer or deny the application. Charles Sopher, 440 Whitevale Road, stated his opposition to the application and advised that h, has the same concerns as previously outlined. This application will not enhance th, neighbourhood and will change the streetscape. The structure on the property is being used for non-conforming use and the scale of the proposed building is not compatible with the area. structure is proposed for the high side of the property which will make it quite prominent Access will be required onto Mill St. and a problem already exists with traffic. o Chris Speirs, Applicant, stated that the proposed home will have a 30' frontage which is typica in Whitevale. The property is heavily treed and no trees will be destroyed. Traffic will not be concern as this is a one car, single-family dxvelling. The present structure is being used for legal non-conforming use. 4 7 September 18, 2001 Ms. Anne G~_.~tree, Deputy Cler, C~kerin§ Pickering Civic Centre One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 NICKERING. m _JN. AR,',., Dear Ms. Greentree: Re: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A19/97 (R01) Christopher Speirs Lots 15, 15 and !7, Plan 21; 430 Whitevale Road City of Pickering CFN 29358.01 Staff have received the above mentioned application and have the following comments. TRCA staff commented on the subject application on February 16, 1998. The purpose of the 1998 application was to permit redevelopment of an existing building and construction of a parking lot. The proposed works were not completed, and the application has been recently revised to permit a proposed new structure on the eastern portion of the subject property. Authority staff have no objection to the application, but offer the following information. Enclosed please find a part print of the Authority's Duffins Creek Map No. 31 on which we have plotted the subject property, the flood line, and the Authority's fill regulation limit. The subject property falls partially within the fill line and in accordance with Ontario Regulation 158. a permit ~s required from the Authority prior to any works taking place within the fill !ine In addition, the subject property is adjacent to the DuffJns Creek valley corridor and the Whitevale Corridor Environmentally Significant Area (ESA). The TRCA does not support works that tnave negative impacts on ESAs or within a valley corridor. In light of the fact that there are no proposed works in a reguiated area, and the proposed works are on the east side of the property, not adjacent to the valley corridor or ESA. we have no objection to the application. If future works are proposed on the subject property, piease co?it&ct this ^' +~---~" We trust this is satisfactory. Should further discussion and/or clarification be required, please do not hesitate to call either Patti Young at extension 5324 or the undersigned. Yours tr-,ply, Russel White Plans Analyst Development Services Section Ext. 5306 PY/fa Encl. F:\PRS~CORRESP'\PiCKER]N\CFN29358.01.: ::: , 5 Shoreham [3ri~e. D~wns~ie,,~ QntarioM3N 354 n48 t;TTACHI,;ENT #_ ~ TO Part Print Flood Plain Mapping ~t~? Sheet ,~o Appl~c;;io~n no.J~ [~ ~(~ --/ Scale: [.- _2.~0 Subject Property .......... Regional Storm Floodline *' ~ Fill Regulation Line Date Floodline Revision Pending. Hydrologic update study is complete and hydraulic update study is complete / pending. May result in revised flood elevations and flood plain limits. The Regional Municipality of Durham Planning Department Box 623 1615 Dundas St. E. 4th Floor Lang Tower West Building Whitby, Ontario Canada L1N 6A3 'q: (905) 728-7731 ax: (905) 436-6612 A. L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP Commissioner of Planning September 21,2001 Ross Pym, Principal Planner Planning & Development Department One the Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 Dear Mr. Pym: Re: Zoning Amendment Application A19/97(R01) Applicant: Christopher Spiers Location: Lots 15-17, Plan 21 Municipality: City of Pickering We have reviewed this application and the foJlovv'ing comments are offered with respect to compliance with the Durham Regional Official Plan, the proposed method of servicing and delegated provincial plan review responsibilities. The purpose of the application is to amend the existing zoning to permit the construction of a detached dwelling on the subject property, while retaining the existing building. The applicant has applied to zone the subject property 'HMR3' to permit a detached dwelling and a domestic business use. The lands subject to the rezoning are located in Whitevale. a designated Hamlet in the Durham Regional Official Plan. Hamlets may contain commercial uses that meet the immediate needs of the residents of the hamlets and the surrounding rural area. The proposal would appear to be permitted by the policies of the Durham Plan. Municipal services (water supply and sanitary sewers) are not available to the subject lands. The site is presently serviced b~/a well and septic system. The Durham Health Department is unable to comment on this application until the owner provides a detailed site plan that shows the existing and proposed location of all structures, well(s) and private sewage disposal s?stems/s). This application has been screened in accordance with the terms of the provincial plan review responsibilities. N,o prc'.'incial interests appear tc be affected. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me. Yours truly, Ray Davies, Planner Current Operations Branch CC. Karl Kiproff, Region of Durham Health Department Rob Roy, Region of Durham Works Department R ;rs ning~-a'zonlng~,p^a-19-gZ-R01 dOC Post Consumer ~50 THE DURHAM DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD Facilities Services 400 Taunton Road East Whitby, Ontario L1R 2K6 Teiu ~ne: (905) 666-5500 1-800-255-3968 Fax: (905) 666-6439 September 5, 2001 SEP I ? :ZOO] GIT','" "~' i:IC -.,,- KEF{iNG DIEVELOPMEt, ~ i?~PAF~TMENT The Corporation of the City of Picketing Planning Department Picketing Civic Centre One The Esplanade Picketing, Ontario L1V 6K7 Attention: Mr. Ross Pym Dear Mr. Pym, RE: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A19/97 (R 01) Christopher Speirs Lots 15, 16 and 17 Plan 21 430 Whitevale Rd., City of Pickering Staff has reviewed the information on the above noted application and mandate of the Durham District School Board, has no objections. Yours truly, Christine Nancekivell, Flanner CN:em under the I :\P R OPLANkDATA\PLNG\ZBLLA 19/97 (R01) Pyro, Ross Sent: To: Subject: Kearns, Debbie Wednesday, December 05, 2001 9:54 AM Pym, Ross Spiers Property- Whitevale Ross; I am writing to advise that the Local Architectural Consep,,atior~ Advisory Committee (Heritage Pickering) discussed the application submitted by Mr. Christopher Spiers of Whitevale at their October meeting. After a brief discussion the Committee concluded that they had no objection to this application. Thanks for giving the Committee Members an opportunity to respond to this submission by Mr. Spiers. Debbie Kearns, Committee Coordinator 007 ..-3 ZLIL/1 September 29, 2001 Planning Department City of Pickering One The Espanade Picketing, Ontario Attn: Ross Pym Dear Ross, Unfortunately, we were unable to attend the city hearing for the Mill zoning change but we are acquainted with Chris Speir's plans for the Mill site in Whitevale and feel that his proposal is quite complimentary to the hamlet.. We are not aware of any negative impact this proposal would have on the community and agree that his request should be granted. Yours truly, Michael and Shirley Curran 459 Churchwin Street Whitevale cc:David Pickles O53 Charles Sopher PO Box ~- 14 W'hitcv~I~, Ontario L0H 1 MO September 27, 2001 City of Picketing Planning & Dcvcloprn0nt Department One Esplanade Pickenng, Ontano [.1V 6K7 Re: Zoning By-law Am~endn~trl Application A 19/97(R01) Lerl, 15, 16, and 17, Plan 21 4~0 Whlteval, Road Whlleval~ Dear Sir: Fax'005-420-9685 D E'V E ~ Z,~;i,. ::, ; ,.13NT We have received and reviewed the recent C. iw of P/ckenn~ documentation with respect to the above noted app cation We have also attended fire lh~blic Xhtcbltg of'September 20. 2001 and made cornmeal This lett~r will confirm our concc~ and regist~ our 4~ppo~it]oT~ r,~ the pr(~¢osed amm~dmem f')mmg thc September 20. 2001 meeting fl~e co~ccm of most rcstda.s of%~Jtcvalc and many prope~, diminatmg access Ibr thc public [,> lbo hiking tail :~ii{i parking area 1o thc north oFthe prope~y. '~Us action took place ~Ih(Hl[ cons~fltad{m (~fthe mai(lents ;u~<l the CiW of Picking 'H~e City h~ reviewed thc legalities of flus action ~Us issue must ~ ad()essc(t as prionly h~ any consideratSon the 7~nlng By-law AmmK~t The City has an ohligafim~ to consider the consequences ofc~mccding to the llni~[st consequences of the preset situation ~l~e }tamlet is un~r ~eat pressnrc as a dcs~na~ion by the areah~r c~mnmni~ parhng t}mf was available to Gsilr~ '~Us has mmactcd o~r communilv and ~ill ,rely N~come mine acute under more ~essnre ~th the development ofstu~ounding lar~cl The recent changes to the south null site have tcsulrc, d m ad(lilional viqihsr accommodation at the south mill to dr:a} wil}l parking 'II~e rein(wa[ of thc no~h null silo ace.s and l)~kmg combined afith its commercialisalion wdl nor he a pr)strive benefit t,~ ,~r The applicant is currently Ilsillg the lltil] tmilding m ~a II()I1-COIlt'(H [lllI]?, 1, k'kC, fi, storage l~ara~c This is no! permitted under thc currant ×orang noi thc xcqucsted amended :.:omr~-~ 'Fht: sm~' ~.~'st/cwn w~th sm~tcgicatlv placed wire, rocks, chain link i~nce, snow Fence and si~mare sc,mc ,>r' which is tikeh' on ('~r5, propen5, 7?~ applicant's amm~pts to con~ol access Io the prope~y ~n~er ~}]tL~tIzite the pi,)biem'crcuted wh~l the gov~ent ~d~out consultation ca consideTahOn removed thc access Far the Selden Tnnl ~d parking 054 :E:EF'--2:E;--200 J 07 : 2~ ~f'l [-:t-, o.r I ,~_= C:,_-,F 1-[ er' C: ,_-, r-, ~. ,_l I r . L-'O.'2q ,4 ~' 1. E.~;--: 7~ Charles Sopher PO Box 5-14 WNt~rvale, Ontario L0H IM0 One of the joys of visiting our commumty ~s the natural surroundings of the Seaton Thd dong West Duffins Creek. The nmd setting of the historic Hamlet is pleasant and a desmable place to hve and visit. The commun/ty is a Hehtage Conservation Area. This does not tmply that the City should approve ehmages that will commercialme Whitevale and contribute thronging nar I-tamlel into another Unionville or Nmgara- on-the-Lake These commurkities have lad most of the original characterisncs that conmbuted to their tmiqueness mid now cons*s~ ora Gbricate¢t series of commercial veantures lhat bear htfle resemblance to the original commmfity fabric The proposed amendment wilt result in disruption to a significant hmitage feature and archaeological s~tc. The proposed dwelling is Io be constructed on the mill chase. This is contrary to the Objeclives of thc Comservation District. The dwelling combined with rear aclctit~on and altaehed garage is approximately 100' long. There is no precede~t in the ki'arnlct tot' Otis dwellm~_, ~l~e attached garage ts not respectfi~l of the Heritage gnidehnes. ql~e proposed location of the dwelling vdll reqmre access onto Mill Street. This will alter the street and will impact street trees ~[he site presently has 200' of fion~agc on ~'hitevale Road and does not require additional vehicle access I() Mill Street parficnlarly iflhe commercial use of the property wilt result in increased/yallqc onto Mill Sired. 'What prov~,qon has been made to accommodale the proposed commercial use of Ibc property and parking required ~mder HMR 39 The ttMR 3 7,ontng al~o indicates that the gross floo~ area oCall domestic business shall not exceed 25 percent of the detached dwelling on the lot_ How does the existing mill structure relate to this reqttirement9 The localion of the proposed dwelling may also smggcst speculative ;~spirafions W~th respect to thc mill site, ,~s the next step would be to request a severance and addifonal bttilding lot~. The proposed uses amemtmcnl should not proceed. There i5 rea,xonable oppositnon to approval from our communily. Let the City hake positive step.5 to protect the mill site and associated landscape as tt~e Obtectives of thc Conservation Disthct recommend and the commtmity ha~ requested The CiW should explore ways lo provide another location lbr the applicant and rdum this site to thc commtm~ty to ber~efit of all. The City must eled to preserve our comm~m/W 7ve~ly, CtmrlTfld Brigitte Sopher n55 SEF'-2~ 20131 i ~ :46 IIESE:ITT ~4ALIFA F'.Oi 02 To: The City of Pickehng Dep:lrlrncnt of Planning ,k' Development From Date: RE: Mrs. Marion Thompson 437 Churchwm St. Whitewde, ON L0H iix (905) 294-826(5 Septe~nber 17, 20611 (sent from Haliffix on Sept Zonino By--i,aw An~endr[len; Application A 19'97 (R01) Chrislopher Speir's Lots 15, 16and 17P~ankl 43(~ Whitevale Road, X5%tevalc Having been unexpectedly called out of tox~ n, [ am unable to attend the Sept. 20, 2001, public meeting on the above ma~er. Howcve:. as a direct neighbour of~. Speirs and as a concerned citizen of the Historic Mantlet of Wqfitevale, i w~sh my views on this application to be on record and to be taken into considerat cm in your dc:liberations. As a nei~%ounng resident homcowmer wh,_, will bo directly aff%cted h,, Mr. Speirs' plans, I musl voice my strong objections to his application, both ils \'i,e u::derstarxl :t h.wailv and as pr~:~entcct m your documentatio~t. From Lhe footprint shown on the site survey, il appuars t}~at .kit. Spears ph:.us to ere(:[ an enommus building that will cover most of the eastern side ,)I",he i'ot. Whereas as nci~hbom's facing tim property in question, we coexisted happily with thc mill operaUon thai reflected Aqutevale's agr/culnu.al roots and that honoumd the right-of-way 1o Ibc ~t:alOll Hiking Trail, tins new development presents a very dismal l:uospect 7'o this time. we have been dismayed and angei'ed by thc to:al failure ,>f' thc ('/tv of Pmkariu~ pe~its ~d thc obvious and continuing storxgc (,t' fliels and f]arunuablc marema',s m the sheds. Such tla~ant disregard of existing By-Law~ ;u~d Zonins~ ~xhiclt remain unenff,'ccd b5 Picketing), apart i?om being illegal, poses a very real l~re hazard to the who~c }tamler itlld its predon~anlty wooden century-old strmuurcs. Mr. Spelts has fenced off iris propeFty in :.~ vet: t!fzix' rx:x:ncr and has r)osted c~de warning signs on ail sides. He has flnlher placed iar? :oclcs aion~, thc roadsides s{) fha'. the public wi}t n,nt pm'k on "his" prope~y. ,~< over the last 5'car. he has flci/bera:elv letS. or pml)osely placed, large fallen tree limbs on the eastern verge u) tic.her deter those wSlo xk ould park on the shoulder beyond his eastern fence. These and the i~ge roc~. many of them c,xxc~.~led by ~ass or sn,>~x. pose a real danger to people and cars. ti am smpnsed fha.: Pickcr:ng has not removed this sIIlIT while busily mowing the rest of the verge~] CiEF'-.dl-2001 11:46 tlE~E;]~:ITT HALIFA::i 'Ju.2 421; ?011 F'.02 02 We do not believe that Mr. Spebs, who is currently a resident of Scarborough, has any inclination to be, or interest in being, sensitive to the Heritage l-lamlet concept. On the contrary, he has plans for a Yery large house in a dominant position m the very heart ot-Whilevale and has held himself apart from the residents in all matters. While, it is accepted that he owns the property, hc must understand that he does not have carte blar~che in tts use, that he must conform to local standards and not be a jarring and wildly inappropriate note in the streel~cape. The siting of the proposed building on the site survey, which Picketing sen! to us as direclly- af¥cctcd t~omeowners, is totally uninformative as to the nature of the ~'new st~amture". Its very presence will furdmr negatively affect the priceless m~d ~rreplaceable character of ~,Vhiteval~,. We deplore the loss of the Sealon Hi ~king Trail righbof-way (thanks to the reprehensible actions of the Ontario Realty Corp. and its agent, Geoff Spring, and thc total lack of action on the pan of The City of Pickering and our politicians at every level. 1Vh-. Speh's clearly has no wish to in way help the public, the school children, the elderly, the fishermen, who love ~'o visit Whitevale for many reasons and whom we xvelcome. Th,ranks to his intractable position, all those who were Fonnerty able to access the north Trail and the publicly-owned parking from the road, are now effectively cut off. The only route now is a precipitous flight of wooden stairs, installed by The City of Picketing, and i~npassablc to the mother w~th a stroller, the elderly, or the infirm, and even more so in winter. Rather than permitting Nh-. Speixs It) have his way, unchallenged, on the very shores of the West Duffin Creek, 1 implore The City of Pickering to buy the property ('expropriate' ~s a nme word...) and turn it into parkland with an education center either on it or nearby in the old blacksmith's shop. Tilts would be ,ma asset to the area and a positive benefit to all the school groups especially who continue to try to use the north Trail. We have been badly serve& indeed, betrayed, by The City of Picketing and its Councillors to whom we have appealed a~rain and again since 1994-95 For a solid and positive response to very real concerns. We also note, increasingly cynically, lhul where there is a will, there is a way, and Councillors can make things happen if they feel ~t is in thmr ow]~ mterest to smaply forge ahead. Why can't some of that creative energy bc brought to bear on our dilcmna? We demand much more detailed information about this application so that we ~nay bener judge the dubious merits of an action that would change forever the essentia'l nature of Whitevale. And. in case, the point has been lost, I remain totally opposed to it. Yours truly, Mahou Thompson Janet Eeker, M.P.P. Wayne Arthurs Prick Johnson David Pickles TOTihL F'. 02 The Corporation of the City of Picketing Chic The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario LIV 6K7 Attention: Ross Pxnl Catherine P, ose Rea Taylor Planning and Dcxclopmcnt l)cp~wlmcnt I write with respect to tile application lbr Zoning [].~-Law amel~dmcnt application A 19/97(R(}I ) Christopher Speirs. I am a resident or \Vhitevale, 385 Whitevatc P,d I do not object to Mr Stx~ir<' request. I would like to address a few points presented bx those residents who do object m hopes that connnon sense will prevail. Historically, lhe properly was part of Wilsons Mill Since 1973 when I ~novcd inlo X, Vhitexale. it was a maintenance facility for mill vehicles and cqtupnlent. 1t contained tile weigh scale, it contained drvcrs tbr grain, and mill relaled equipment was stored on lite site. Coincidentalls. prex ~ous ox~ nets of both-Mr. Sopher's and Mr. Thompson's homes voiced strong objeclions lo thc operations of the then operating mill, most of the objections stemming from operation of tile ,zrain drxcrs, x chicle trafiSc. ,alld storage of fertilizer equipment on this veO' property. A considcn~lc amo~n-it of ~zncl' was created for the Wilson family who operated thc mill, who nonetheless x~orkcd to tn' and rcnlJd~ tile situation while trying to run a business which had been here long before those objectn~g-indix iduals. - Not only did the Wils~ns attempt to please, but the property was alx~,a\ s open and available for access lo the Nonh't liking trail. I am personally sad that the mill is no longer a part of tills x illage but change is inevitable So. if I call remain focused here, these indMduals need to look at x~ hat has happened to the north Mill property in a more positive light. No longer do thc', haxc x~ hat some considered objectiormbte aspects of mill operation happening in their faces, instead tile', have an individual x~ ho has purchased the propert?' with intent to build a home and reside there. I belicx e it is his intent to keep lite present buildings. bringing them tip to better condition. These buildings really, do not seem lo have much architectural significance, ---they were maintenance and storage buildings---, hox~evcr on a sentimental basis, they are a part of Whitevalc and Mr. Gordon Willson, who objects to tilts application, parth on tile basi's of' sentiment when he speaks of this as being thc core of our x i Ilagc. needs to kccp ~n n'lind that these buildings will likely remain as reminders of part of our hcn ta~e ;is opposed lo another oxx ncr who could easily demolish lhcm. Now the first owner of Ibis propcrh ptl-rchascd from CRC appeared unapproachable and uncooperative with other residents of tile x illaae x~ ilh respect to Ins ilttcnllons for tile propen? which did not seem xcr3' condusivc to thc "plans" for o~r much studied x ilkmc Hence I understand Mr Thompson's reference to thc 'attitude" of thc prcx ~ous ox~ ncr. but I do not 7nlderstand his reference to" attitude" of thc present ox~ ncr who has cleaned up thc prolx~rl5. keeps It maintained, and is frcqucnll> on the site, approachable and l'ncndl,, I commend Mr Spcirs lbr what appears to be exceeding amounts of tolerance towards thc three residents lhal I haxe heard x cite formal objccnons and who themselves could usc some attitude adjustment. ] find Mr Thompson's suggestion that Mr. Speirs bc offered another property by one of thc goxcrnments invoh cd or that ho Hixo up a portion of the property for an access to thc North Trail totally out of line considering the present' ox~ net's retentions. Perhaps t~is would'ye worked with the previous owner whose intcnnons were dilferent The sloppy procedure oF not considenng past access to the trail was done when OP, C imtialh' sold the property. In conversation x',ith Mr. Spcirs. his attitude is not one of "...could care less. ". but si}npl,, "..tills was not my doing..." It seems unfair to hinder Mr. Spiers with a problem created b5 another party who certainly could do something to address the situation. Mr. Sopher, another propcrtx ex, ncr x~ ho o~iects, made reference to the physical aspects of the proposed house to be built, size. hcightl location, t0r example. I ant impressed with the considerations that Mr. Speirs' plans show for the Heritage designation which Whitevalc has and also for his ncighbours. There is considerable mature tree cover which would appear to provide a good visual and sound buffer. There are othcr two storey dwellings and his design would not appear out of place to me. As to increased traffic on Mill street, arc we not talking of one residential propcm.' here as opposed to what used to be considerable commercial traffic when the mill operated, and should there still be a parking lot lbr north trail use, would there not be much more vchicular traffic than Mr Spcirs will contribute?? There is some merit to having access to thc property behind for parking. In a perfcct world, schoolbuses or physically challenged individual's vehicles could have easier access to the relatively easier to travel portou of the trail which runs along the nfill race and back to thc dam area. And this would diminish the problem of roadside parking which is a valid concern for Mill Street users and residents. However, one need only live next to the existing parking lot for the trail and community centre as I do to realize that this is not a perfect world m~dthere arc often times when parking lot nsc and abuse is objectionable .... car alarms going off, gravel spinning, late and early visitors, loud music and partying... I think neighbonrs and residents would do well to think carefully before objecting to a driveway to a residence and in the next breathe considering a vehicle accessible access to that property and part of the trail. I do support strongly the issue of resolving access problem for the North Trail however not at Mr. Spcirs' cost with respect to delay or unreasonable proposals and objections. In your capacity as a Planning and Development Department, and as part of this vet).~ progressive City of Picketing which has such a wonderful mixture of new and old, histoneal and technological, and a good track record of moving forward w]th respect to preserving what we have and reasonably controlling what we will have, I would suggest that you could be instrumental in reaching a solution to North Trail access_ You have heard some of the attempts we as residents have made in the past in our approaches to the governments and government departments involved_ In mY opinion, it is easy for municipal ~ conservation authority, and province to pass it off as the other's problem and very little progress is made but a lot of frustration created. I urge you to continue to please and mn~e us with your planl and solutions...:.we can work towards that idealistic perfect world ..... how about an antique culvert and a heritage style footbridge, accessible by wheelchair, stroller, etc., to cross the mill race ~nd enmr the North Trail from Mill Street and then pleasing, natural impediments such as plantings, wooden fences, to discourage parking on the street?'??'?'? Thankyou for heanng my concerns. 1 hope that the Speirs' rczoning application will be approved and that sensible progress be made quicldy on thcse properties in the continuing process of presenting a proud pleasant Hamlet in the City of Pickcring. C.Co Ronald E Dawe, resident 385 Whitcvalc Rd Whitevale, Ont L0H 1 M0 Mayor Wayne Arttmrs Members of Pickering City Council Member of Provincial Parliament, Janet Ec~er Toronlo Region Conservation Authority The Clerk Clerks' Department City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering Ontario RECEIVED SE? 2 1 200] CITY OF PICKERING 19 September 2001 Regarding Zoning By-law Application #A 19/97 (R 01) Concerning the north Mill property in the Hamlet of Whitevale Dear Sir I do do support this application for a number of reasons: 1. This application does not describe the proposed use of the existing heritage buildings or the rest of the property. 2. The historical, industrial, social and political signifance of this property to the Hamlet of Whitevale does not seem to be considered by the applicant, or by the Municipality. 3. It is unforunate, to say the least, our locally elected politicians have not yet resolved the situation made by the Government of Ontario who created the Seaton Hiking Trail, including its access points and public parking etc., and the subsequent unresolved mess-up devised by the Ontario Reality Corporation before giving leave to Mr. Spiers to make this application. 1. Considering the importance of the applicants heritage property to the village I fail to see any description of what he intends for the land or the existing buildings. As one of many here who have fought for the presc,-,,ation of this village, during the 'airport years' and for the prolonged and great difficulties in establishing the Heritage District Designation we now have, this is of prime interest. Aisc in respect to this heritage property the applicants proposed structure appears to measure 30 feet by 100 or more feet. Other than the existing mill buildings themselves, tt~is would easily be the largest structure in the village. As this is a historic property of particular signifigance to the Hamlet of Whitevale and to the City of Pickering I am frankly surprised at the size and scale of the house proposed. And surprised too at the location he proposes considering the hidden concrete emplacements. In brief; without any description of intended land use and and description of intended use of existing buildings, this application should not be approved. continued 12 TO Page 2 2. The intersection of the Fifth Concession Road crossing the West Duffin Creek is at the heart of.our history. On the applicants property o.r immediately north of it was Major's Saw Mill, the first industry of Majorville (later'Whitevale). It is on this property that T.P. White built his Wool Mill and where he got the idea of 'workers rights' and where he started the Green Party* and where he was elected and served as MP in the Ontario Legislature. Since the naming and promotion of the Seaton Hiking Trail as a public resource by tl~e Ontario Ministry of Housing in 1976, there has been a growing discovery and enjoyment, of this wilderness trail .and the village itself. After the purchase of the mill properties, the existing right-of-way, on the north side, registered on title, was conveniently assumed bythe province as the level assoss to the north Hiking Trail and which also provided access to the public parking area which the Ministry of Housing established behind the existing buildings. This.parking area can hold as many as 30 cars on occasion. However, the sale of the land, the unilateral extinguishment of the right-of-way by ORC and its subsequent sale of the land to a junk yard merchant, cannot be regarded as anything but a perverted act to screw Whitevale which it is continues to do, apparently with Pickering's acquiescence. Both villagers and visitors now must contend with a stupid arrangement where mom's with youngsters, strollers and baby carriages or people with limited climbing ability can no longer access the north Trail which features the only extended flat portion in the entire Seaton Hiking Trail system. This is unexceptable. Because ORC severed access to the public parking area visitors must and do pack on the road, on people's lawns or anywhere when there is an overflow. We have lost a major public parking facility which has halved our capacity to accommodate visiting trail users in school buses and private cars. Film crew vehicles can greatly exacerbate the parking problem. Now there is discussion about a proposal to revitalize our old Blacksmith Shop, a worthy project. If successful, it may further impact our existing parking problem too. We're going backward, not forward. Residents and the visiting public did not create this situation, nor.will it improve without action from council. The Hamlet Plan should be reviewed to examine impacts on the village including public uses of existing natural and built resources, emerging trends, the projected impact 407 will have, and to anticipate a plan to meet the village needs now and for our future. In brief; without some kind of overall planning review by the municipality, for the reasons outlined above, this application should not be approved. (*No known relationship to todays political party by the same name). Continued/3 Page 3 Continued/3 Regarding Zoning By-law Application CA 19/97 (R 01) 3. The failure, so far, of our locally elected representatives to address the political situation created by the Government of Ontario (creation of the Seaton Hiking Trail and the present unresolved mess-up devised by Ontario Reality Corporation), before granting leave to make this application is unfortunate to say the least. As such no remedy can happen without the asssistance of our locally elected politicians. This is a wholly political matter. Staff, who have looked at this p[roblem and who I believe understand our concern, frustration and annoyance. They have identified a workable compromise; - by c~'eating access along the edge of the bank of the creek to the now landlocked public parking area behind the existing buildings and the restoration of a level access to the north Hiking Trail. This seemed like a good compromise, considering all the factors. When in a meeting of staff and neighbours at City Hall, this was proposed to Mr Spiers, he declined to accept this compromise. He did not create this situation nor did he consider it his responsibility to-accomodate the interests of residents, visiting trail users, the municipality or anyone else. As a land owner, I guess this is probably his perrogative. But it does point out the need for our council to help remedy this on-going, festering problem. This unfortunate legacy of ORC has at least one workable remedy but can only be made to happen with the assistance of our locally elected representatives. In brief: Until a review of the hamlet plan in this respect the claims made here has been undertasken I oppose this application. David. I hope this explains my strong oppositon to this application, and I hope you will take some leadership to initiate a Hamlet Plan review toward finding an equitable solution that serves community interests now and in the future as welt as respect the property rights of Mr Spiers. Sincerely G d~o~ and Anna Gordon & Anna Willson, 455 Whitevale Road, Whitevale Ontario. LOH 1MO t-Z~-ORT ,~ PD 15' ,TO 437 CHUi~CHWIN STI~EET ~VHITEVALE, ONTAI~IO, L0H To: From: Re: The City of Picketing - Planning and Development Department City Clerk's Department Dr. James C. Thompson Zoning By-law Amendment Application A19i97 (R 01) Christopher Speirs Lots 15, 16 and 17 Plan 21 430 Whitevale Road Whitevale 20th September 2001 $£P '2 0 2001 CITy OF PICKER/N ~- PLANNING AN (~i 1. I wish to record my objection to the above application for reasons stated below. 2. I wish to be informed of the decision on this matter, whether it involves the passing of any zoning by-law amendment or not. 3. I wish to be informed of any future meetings related to this matter. 4. I state my interest in this matter since I am a resident of Whitevale and my property, at the comer of Mill Street and Churchwin Street overlooks the subject area. My wife is away this week, but I know she shares my views on this matter and would have brought her own concerns to this meeting, perhaps with even greater vehemence. 5. Since my belief is that this is as much a political matter as it is one for the City Planning and Development Department, I am sending copies of my remarks to our M.P.P., our Mayor, our Regional Councillor and our City Coundllor. I object to the applicant's proposal on ;.he fol!owing grounds: a. There are outstanding matters that have been raised by residents of Whitevale since the time of the sale of the Mill by the Ontado Realty Corporation (ORC) in 1995. These matters have been raised with our MP.P., the Management Board of Cabinet, the Mayor and Councillors of the City of Picketing, and members of the Staff of the City of Picketing. These matters are not resolved and, until they are, to a reasonable degree of satisfaction, no action whatsoever should be taken on the matter of re-zoning. These matters relate to: the sale of the Mill by the ORC; the arbitrary closure of the right-of-way access to the Seaton Hiking Trail and parking area north of the Mill; the wishes of residems of Whitevale expressed many times both in wdting and in nub!!c meetings; the interests and needs of visitors to Whitevale, including flshe'rmen, toudsts and school groups; and the refusal of the previous and current owners of the Nodh Mill property to make any effort to try to meet the serious concems of the community in which they seek to live and work. Hence, this or any application for re-zoning is premature and should not be entedained until these sedous and important matters have been resolved. This is unfinished business which must not be diveded by this zoning application. b. The current zoning allows for use as a "Mill, Grainery and Fertilizer' establishment. Neither the current nor the previous owner has used the property for those purposes. It has been used for storage of surplus building materials, cars and other non-conforming uses. In spite of numerous complaints made to the City, no action has been taken to enforce proper usage. We have no confidence whatsoever that there will be any greater compliance with City By- Phone: 905-294-8266; FAX: 905-294-1213 laws or the Hamlet Plan in the future, no matter what may purport to be permitted by any zoning amendment. c. An application for re-zoning by the previous owner in 1998 was solidly opposed by a large number of residents. This application was either withdrawn or refused. Subsequently, the property was sold again. It is not clear how much was made clear about the status and permitted uses of the property at the time of this sale. We suspect that there was very little disclosure of the facts. d. The notice of this meeting, dated 28TM August 2001, provides no detail of the proposed use of the existing building, once the property is re-zoned. The Mill property is listed as part of the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District. No indication is given of how any new use or modification of the existing building would be consistent with the Heritage guidelines. Since the latter are just guidelines, and given the attitude to date of the current owner, there can be little confidence that the heritage aspect WOL~ld be maintained. In addition, the scale of the proposed residence, being some 30 feet by 100 feet, is totally out of keeping with nearly all residences in Whitevale. It would be a singularly inappropriate addition to the architecture of the community. I have a voluminous file of correspondence on this matter. While I shall not take the time of this meeting to go over all of it in detail, I would be quite h~ppy to provide copies of it to the City for its consideration of this matter. I will, however, make the following points. a. The first letter in my file was written to our then newly-elected MP.P., Janet Ecker, in September 1995, at the time that the Mill was first put up for sale by the CRC. After several more letters, the great lady herself actually visited Whitevale in September 1997 and saw for herself the problems created by the then owner and ;he c!osure of the right-of-way access. She took a close look at the property, incidentally trespassing on what was by then private land, and said she would do everything possible to help resolve the issue. That was the last we heard from Janet Ecker, either on this issue or on anything else of concern to the residents of VVhitcva!e. b. Aisc in 1997, we had correspondunce with Mr. David Johnson, Chair ofthe Management Board of Ccbinet, and Ms. Michele Noble, Secretary of that body. They sent me a map showing the existence of the right-of-way, but said that it had been relocated as part of the sa!e. Our questions about the lack of consultation with residents on this change, and on possible alternatives to try to resolve the problem, remain unanswered. c. Over the last six years, we have had much correspondence, written and electronic, with the elected and appointed officials of the City of Picketing, including, especially, Nell Can-oil, Tom Melymuk and David Pickles. As recently as this spring a meeting was convened by Tom Melvmu,k at which the concemed and interested parties stated and exchanged their views. A number of suggestions were ,n'~a~ which ~eeme(] worthy of further serious consideration. These included: i.) Provision of level access to the hiking trail on either the east or west side of the Mill property, the land being purchased if necessary by Pickenng from Mr. Speirs. ii.) A land exchange, whereby Pickering would purchase an appropriate and non-contentious piece of land for Mr. Speirs, taking possession of the Mill property from him in exchange. The fact of the cun'ent application seems to indicate that no further effort has been made to pursue these or any other options, and/or that they have all be rejected by Mr. Speirs. Nonetheless, the fact that there are such options indicates that the matter is not a finished business and, hence, that the application is premature. The very recent proposal that the old blacksmith's shop be restored and brought back into use focuses even more importance to the Phone: 905-294-8266; FAX: 905-294-1213 'centre' of the village, on either side of the bddge, including the area around the Community Centre on the west and the Mill on the east. It is now too late to do anything about the south Mill properly, which is in pdvate hands. However, that owner did at least come and discuss his plans with the residents and established some degree of understanding and support before his application for re-zoning. However, returning the north Mill to public ownership, as in ii) above, and making it into a resource centre for the Hiking Trail and a focus for the historic middle part of Whitevale would act a strong reinforcement for the heritage character of the village. 8. These problems became prominent with the original, unprincipled and dishonest sale of the Mill by the ORC. For that, the Government of Ontado is responsible, but it has abdicated its responsibilities. The fact that a second sale was then made without the issues being resolved shows fudher disregard of the sedous concerns expressed by residents. While the current owner may not be responsible for the misdeeds of previous owners and their agents, these misdeeds must not be condoned by allowing this re- zoning before the wrongs have been made dght. However, in spite of numeroas requests, complaints and suggestions, Picketing has stood back and permitted this situation to go from bad to worse. Now, Picketing has one last chance to sort it out, by denying this application and taking imaginative and constructive steps towards a solution. Picketing must not follow the sordid example of the Province and abdicate its responsibility. 9. I hope that our expectations for wise action by the City will not be confounded. It is time this business was finished, but it must not be finished by further betrayal of the Whitevale community. Thank you. James C .Thompson Whitevale, Ontado Janet Ecker, M.P.P. Wayne Adhurs Rick Johnson David Pickles Phone: 905.294-8266; FAX: 905-294-1213 Picketing Planning 8,: Development Department One,The Esplanade, Picketing,Ont. 3 t 81 ,Byron St., Whitevale, L0H 1 MO Sept. 7.'01 Dear Sirs, re Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 19 97 (R 01 ) Whitevale We cannot be present at the Sept.20 Public Meeting so we would like our comments to be given consideration and we would also like to be informed of any subsequent meetings on this matter. In reference to the proposal to construct one new detached dwelling on this property, to use up to 25% tbr domestic business, and presumably to also use the existing mill shed for a commercial purpose: we would like to know what use, or uses, the applicant is planning for these two sites. In xiew of the VChitevale Heritage Desi~znation of the Hamlet, obtained after long and difficuh negotiations by many of us in W~itevale, we consider it important that not only the letter of the new Municipal Plan, but the spirit or'the heritage designation be honoured The existing building, which is after all a replacement ibr the original building, burnt in the 1950's. is only acceptable because of its historical origins. To see it adapted for some unsuitable use such as a truck repair yard or a service station, would destroy our community. We are also concerned that access to the North Section of the Seaton Hiking Trail is lost to beings like us who have used it for years but who are too old and grey to negotiate all the steps of the alternate new access the city put in when the occupant shut offthe original path. This would also apply to parents with young children. Mr. Spears would not be too inconvenienced if he were to leave a path about a metre wide which could run on the west and north perimeters of his land. This could be fenced off. We know that the O.R.C made a mess of the original sale but would hope Mr. Speirs would have the goodness to consider re-opening access to the traiT, which would certainly be appreciated by his new neighbours and those seeking a peaceful walk in the country. And incidentally much more easy to navigate in winter weather! Yours truly, Tommy Thompson cc. Clerk's Department Councillor David Pickles RECEIVED SEP 1 1 2001 CITY OF PICKERtNG PLANNING ~DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HCKF, RING RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/99, submitted by Angelo Mattacchione, on behalf of E. Mattacchione and M. LaPosta, on lands being Lots 14 and 15, Plan 489, City of Pickering, to amend the zoning on the subject lands to permit the establishment of 24 townhouse dwelling units be APPROVED AS REVISED, to permit the establishment of a maximum of 20 townhouse dwelling units, subject to a (H) Holding provision to ensure that the development related conditions outlined in Appendix I to Report Number PD 05-02 are met. That City Council direct Planning & Development Staff to commence a City-initiated zoning by-law amendment for lands generally located on the north side of Kingston Road, west of Pine Creek, east of "The Townhomes of Walnut Lane" development, and south of existing dwellings fronting Storrington Street, to establish compatible residential zoning on those lands generally in keeping with the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines adopted by Council in June, 1994. ?ICKERIN_G REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM: Neil Carroll Director. Planning & Development ~ o00'~ DATE: Januaryo,. . REPORT NUMBER: PD05-02 SUBJECT: Zoning By-lay, Amendment Applicazion A 13 99 E. Mattacchione and M. LaPosta Lots 14 and 15, Plan 489 1210 and 1218 Kingston Road (Noah side of Kingston Road, cast et'Walnut Lane) City of Picketing RECOMMENDATION: That Zoning By-lay,' Amendment Application A 13 99, submitted bx Angelo Mattacchionc, on behalf of E. Mattacchionc and hi. LaPosta, on lands being i.ots 14 and 15, Plan 489, City of Picketing. to amend the zoning on the subject lands to permit the establishment of 24 townhouse dxxellin~j units bc APPROVED AS REVISED, to permit the establishment of a nqaximum of 2~) toxvnhouse ctx~elling units, subject to a (H) Holding provision to ensure that thc development related conditions outlined in Appendix I to Report Number PD 05-~)2 are met. That City Council direct Planning & Dexelopmcnt Staff to commence a City-initiated zoning by-law amendment t'or lands generally located on the north side of Kingston Road. west of Pine Creek, east of "The Townhomes of \Valnut Lane" development, and south of existing dwellings fronting Ston'ington Street. to establish compatible residential zoning on those lands generally in keeping with the \Vatnut Lane ,Area Development Guidelines adopted by Council in Juno 1994. ORIGIN: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A lo9:) submitted to the City' o£ Picketing. AUTHORITY: The Pla~,n'~g Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P. 13 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. Technical environmental reports required in support of tiao ~'ocommended broader City-initiated zoning by-law amendment application would be t'unded b~ the Citx. and have been budgeted (approximately $10,000) in the 2002 Planning & Dex elopment proposed Budget {Consulting and Professional). Report to Council PD 05-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/99 Date: January 3, 2002 Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant originally proposed the establishment of 24 tmvnhouse d~velling units providing minimum unit widths of 4.4 metres. The proposed townhouse units would front onto an internal laneway accessed from Kingston Road, and provide future laneway connections to abutting properties to the east and west. Through comments received from surrounding residents and Staff, the applicant revised the original plan on numerous occasions. The conceptual development plan now proposes 20 townhouse dwelling units with unit widths ranging from approximately 4.4 metres to 7.4 metres. Staff supports the establishment of a maximum of 20 townhouse dwelling units on the subject lands. The proposed townhouse dwelling units could be designed in a manner that is compatible with, and sensitive to, existing surrounding development while providing opportunity for the introduction of high-quality design buildings, oriented to~vard Kingston Road. A Draft Plan of Condominium is anticipated in the future to establish townhouse dwelling units on the subject lands. Typical conditions of development can be established through the condominium application process and appropriate agreements can be entered into with thc City to secure required works. Approval of this application may act as an incentive to other landowners to initiate development of the area. It is recommended that any implementing zoning by-law forwarded to Council for consideration contain a (H) Holding provision. This (H) would require various technical issues and design matters to be addressed by the applicant, to the City's satisfaction, prior to development proceeding. Through the review of this application, Staff identified the need to examine abutting properties to facilitate development on lands fronting Kingston Road in a coordinated manner. A broader review of all lands located generally west of Pine Creek, east of "The Townhomes of Walnut Lane", and south of existing residences fronting Storrington Street is necessary to address access limitations, future road connections, servicing issues, grading and drainage, mitigating impacts on abutting residential properties and protection of Pine Creek. The Walnut Lane Area Guidelines, which are applicable to the above-noted lands, provide a foundation from which a comprehensive zoning by-law can be formulated to address development. It is recommended that City Council direct Planning & Development Staff to commence a City-initiated zoning by-law amendment for properties within the Walnut Lane Area. Affected property owners, Ward 2 Councillors and the Liverpool West Community Association have been consulted, and no objections respecting the initiation of a City rezoning have been received. Resultant technical reviews and stakeholder input through the recommended broader zoning by-law amendment will assist in completing a comprehensive zoning by-law for the Walnut Lane Area. 1.0 Information Meeting A Public Information Meeting for this development proposal was held on August 5, 1999. Information Report No. 15-00, which summarizes the applicant's proposal and outlines the issues and comments identified to that date through circulation of the application, was prepared for that meeting. The text of that Information Report is provided for reference (see Attachment #6). Prior to the Information Meeting, one additional comment was received from Teresa Zanata of 1773 Storrington Street, objecting to this proposal. The concerns expressed by Ms. Zanata include loss of privacy; potential noise originating from the proposed development, potential traffic conflicts where vehicles would exit onto Kingston Road and a decrease to her property value (see Attachment #11). At the Public Information Meeting, two area residents and a representative of the Liverpool West Community Association expressed concerns with the proposal, including: Report to Council PD 05-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application .4 t 5 90 Date: January 3, 2002 Page 3 · the t.vpe of privacy barrier to be installed around the proposed development: · the impact of the proposed development on drainage patron,s on the subject lands and adjacent lands, considering current drainage problems within tile immediate area: · the increase in traffic originating from tt~e proposed development, the future road pattern and traffic controls for abutting lands, and suitable on-site parking; · the height of the proposed dwelling units: and. · the resultant treatment along Kingston Road (including tl~e establishment of a sidewalk on the north side of Kingston Road and :thc orientation of dwelling units "flanking" Kingston Road). Thc applicant representing the owners was presen~ at tile Meeting. and provided comments in response to tile concerns raised by surrounding landowners. Minutes of ttmt Xlcctinl detailing those commems made b~ residents and tine applicant arc provided for reference (see Attachment #7). 2.0 Additional Information Since the preparation of h~lbrmation Report No. 15-99. the Ibllowing comments tnavc been received: Pickering Hydro (now Veridian Connections) advise that tt~e applicant must increase building setbacks from Kingston Road or pay for ~he burial of ox erhead lines, and ensure that grade changes do not impact existing polos and pa5 for tile resetting of these poles, ii' necessary (see Attachment #8). The City's Supervisor, Developmenl Control. noted tha~ technical matters such as stonnwater management and soils intbrnmtion must bc addressed. Further. tine frontage of the site requires urbanization, including the installation of a sidex~alk along thc north side of Kingston Road, and a grading and drainage plan is required Idrainage will be contained on the subject lands, and match or improve current drainage patterns). I Sec :Mtachment: 1 ~ t The Region of Durham Planning Department noted ttnat the proposal contbnns to the Region of Durham Official Plan, and confirmed that no provincial interests appeared to be applicable to tile proposal. The Region further offered servicing, transportation and additional comments, including recommended sanitary sewer improvements, a restriction of t~vo permanent access points onto Kingston Road serving the subject lands and adjacent lands and noting that a noise impact study should be completed (see Attachment #9). N. and B. Aroukatos, of 1222 Kingston Road, expressed opposition to this application. Reasons cited included that the subject lands and immediately surrounding lands could support better-designed uses and act as a gatexvay feature for the City's dov, ntown, that tiao living environment along Kingston Road for children is unsuitable, and that an large increase in people living in such a small area will negatively impact on surrounding properties, includin~=; tile loss of privacy and an increase in local traffic (see Attachment: 12 ). S. and D. Howard, of 1775 Storrington Street. provided comments respecting this proposal. They noted that the proposal is too dense, not compatible with existing surrounding development, would result in increased activity and noise in the area. would reduce privacy in existing abutting rear yards and could impact surrounding property values. Alternative development recommendations were provided {see Attachment = 13 ). 3.0 Mattacchione and LaPost~lication (A 13 99) Appropric~te Dex'e/opmen t The current proposal to rezone two properties (see Location Map Attaclnnent =1) for the development of townhomes was reviewed against the policies and principles of tile Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines. These guidelines provide appropriate direction respecting building location and design. Report to Council PD 05-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/99 Date: January 3, 2002 Page 4 The application initially proposed the establishment of 24 townhouse dwelling units with unit widths of approximately 4.4 metres. A property location is provided for reference (sec Attachment #1). The original submitted plan proposed dwellings fronting onto a private, intemat laneway north from Kingston Road, terminating at a "T" - intersection where access could be extended easterly and westerly onto abutting lands (see Attachment #2). The applicant, in responding to comments and input from both surrounding residents and Staff, completed numerous revisions to the initial plan. The latest revised plan proposes 20 townhousc dwelling units, providing minimum unit widths ranging from approximately 4.4 metres to 7.4 metres, and providing varying heights ranging from one to three-storey units (see Attachment # 3). A few proposed townhouse dwelling units appear to be four-stories in height, with garages located at grade and three functional stories (the highest storey being "loft-type" living space) above. Future access connections to abutting properties are proposed in three locations, and a children's play area is proposed within the northwest comer of the subject lands. Townhouse units may be established on these lands in a manner that is sensitive to, and compatible with, abutting residential uses to the north, while providing the opportunity for significant building massing with appropriate architectural design along Kingston Road. It is recommended that a maximum of 20 townhouse dwelling units be permitted on the subject lands, to ensure that additional land area is available for laneway access connections to abutting properties, to maintain an adequate area on the subject lands for both private and shared amenity areas and to maintain an appropriate maximum residential density (see Appendix I). The applicant proposes to establish minimum dwelling unit widths of approximately 4.4 metres for the internal units. This narrow width of unit, when also accommodating a garage, is dominated ~vith doors and provides limited architectural treatment opportunities. However, the dwelling units proposed by the applicant fronting Kingston Road would provide garage access at the rear of dwelling units, allowing the full front width of units to support appropriate upgraded entrance features. Consequently it is recommended that the proposed minimum unit width of 4.4 metres be permitted only for townhouse units fronting Kingston Road that support garages at the rear of those units. All other townhouse dwelling units should provide a minimum unit width of 5.4 metres. This increased width will allow townhouse dwelling units internal to the site to maintain appropriate front facades to support upgraded architectural features. Recommended height limitations of two stories (12 metres), at least 26 metres from the rear lot line for dwelling units internal to the site may result in wider dwelling units (to increase the functional gross floor area of those units). Townhouse dwelling units on the subject lands could be designed in keeping with direction provided in the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines. Further review is required of the units that appear to provide four functional building stories to determine whether they will conform to the intent of the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines (limiting heights of buildings located closer to Kingston Road to a maximum of three stories in height and 12 metres, inclusive of the roof). Further discussion is required to determine if applicant's proposed dwelling units are actual four-storey structures or dwelling units providing three functional stories with limited "loft" space within the roof structure and/or only garage space within the ground level of those units. Although all site matters have not been resolved, enough information is available to determine that the site may be developed in conformity with the Walnut Lane Area Guidelines. Initiation of a rezoning on these two properties may be the impetus for other developments in the area. Co-ordinated development may begin to appear once this rezoning is completed and followed shortly by the recommended City initiated rezoning for the remainder of the area. Those matters outlined in the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines not addressed in the implementing zoning by-law would be incorporated into future architectural design plans and/or statements, secured through required agreements with the City. Report to Council PD 05-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13 99 Date' Januarv 3, 2002 Page 5 071 The applicant's rezoning application is supported. It is recommended that the implementing zoning by-law applicable to thc subject lands maintain the general building siting, setback and height standards provided in the Walnut i_ane .Area Development Guidelines. It is f'urther recommended that the Zoning By-law contain a holding provision (bi) to address matters such as co-ordinated stormwater management, area drainage plan, site servicing, grading, and property access. /,f'alnut Lane .,trea De~'c/o/;me~; (,:uidclme,~ /9~'o/2o,s'ed ('zn'-mz~i~lted Zoning B~'-hiw Amendment The Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines. adopted by Council in June, 1994, provide building location and design standards tbr dcvelopnlent on the subject lands and surrounding properties. A zoning to implement the guidelines is tile initial step to begin redevelopment of tile area. The existing zoning acts as an impediment to development and encourages "piece-meal" proposals. An overall approach to zoning in the area between '"File Toy:ri\crees of \Valnut Lane" and Pine Creek will remove any uncertainty tbr future purchasers and may spark an interest in the area for co-ordinated development. Zoning of the broader area is a natural step i'ollowing Council's adoption of the Guidelines and encourages "smart growth". Consequently Staff' recommend that City Council direct Planning 8: Development Staff to commence a City-initiated Zoning Bv-laxv amendment fbr lands generally located on the north side of Kingston Road, west of Pine ('reek. cast ot' "Tile Walnut Lane Townhomes" and south of existing dwellings fronting StozTington Street/the \Vah~ut Lane Area) to establish compatible zoning on those lands in keeping with the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines adopted by Council in June, 1994 I scc :\ppendi× iii). A Map identifying those lands that v, ould be subject to thc proposed City-initiated Zoning By-law amendment application is provided/see Attachment ~5). Thc suggested time frame for the processing of the City initiated application is included in Appendix Ii of this Report. In May, 2001, Pla~ming & Development Staff met v,'itlq propert.v oxvners xvithin the Walnut Lane Area and a representative of the Liverpool \\'est Community Association /LWCA) to discuss Staffs recommended approach. Ward Councillors were also briefed on Staffs recommended approach. No objections to Staffs recommended approach to a comprehensive zoning by-law amendment application were received at that time. Technical Matters The Region of Durham has advised that access to the various properties along Kingston Road, in this area of the City, will be controlled through txvo future access locations. Although tile subject property is not intended to provide a permanent access location, there ,,','ill be an opportunity to discuss temporary arrangements for access to the site. Tile site may still be developed independently, subject to more detailed site design. Site access and other site design matters will be addressed through the requirement /'or an executed agreement with the City, prior to the removal of the (H) Holding provision of the inlplcmenting zoning bx-laxv. It is recommended that prior to tile removal oi' file IH) that tile applicant satisfy the City's Director, Planning & Development respecting the detailed design and architectural treatment of dwelling units, and to address site design matters, including, but not limited to: · landscaping of individual properties and rear buffer areas betv, ecn tile subject lands and abutting residences to tile north (including f'encing, sodding, tree plantings and other landscaped features); · adherence to the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines: · laneway and access details (both vehicular and pedestrian): · high quality architectural treatment and design of buildings: · the provision of private amenity areas for each dv, elling unit, and details respecting shared public amenities (including thc proposed children's play area); O72 Report to Council PD 05-02 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/99 Date: January 3, 2002 Page 6 · the intended future use and treatment of that portion of the temporary access to Kingston Road once alternative access to the site is achieved; and, · site lighting and the location and placement of utilities; · the future treatment and/or additional development anticipated on the lands abutting Kingston Road supporting the proposed temporary laneway; · a stormwater management plan that considers abutting properties (and potential future development on those lands), including anticipated impacts on Pine Creek, if any; · a site servicing plan that addresses matters raised by the Region of Durham, and considers abutting properties (and future potential development on those lands); · a comprehensive grading plan (including proposed driveway alignments and utility placements); and, · a noise impact study that recommends appropriate abatement measures for traffic noise originating from Kingston Road. · the provision of any necessary easements for future access to, from and across the subject property from abutting properties and/or Kingston Road; · urbanization of Kingston Road. Other matters of development to be addressed include, but are not limited to, the provision of required parkland dedication contributions, a detailed construction management plan and the provision of appropriate performance and maintenance securities to guarantee certain required works. Rezoning the subject lands at this time provides the necessary step to implement the Walnut Lane Area Design Guidelines, while providing some assurance that development may proceed on the property. Encouragement of development in this area may assist in the remainder of the area being considered for development in an orderly, co-ordinated manner. Report to Council PD 05-02 Subject: Zoning By-law .~Mnendment Application A 13 99 Date: January 3, 2002 Page 7 ATTACHMENTS: 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0. 11. 13. Property Location Map Applicant's Original Submitted Plan Applicant's Latest Revised Plan Applicant' s Proposed Building Elevations Walnut Lane Area Proposed Zoning Standards Information Report No. 15-99 Minutes of August 5. 1999 Statutory Public Meeting Agency Comment Picketing Hydro/nox; Veridian Connections) Agency Comment Region of Durham Planlm2g Depanmem Staff Comment Supervisor. Development Control Resident Comment - Teresa Zanata. 1 .', _~ Storrington Street Resident Comment- M. and B. Aroukatos, 1222 Kingston Road Resident Comment- S. and D. Hoxvard, 1775 Storrington Street Prepared By: :\pprovcd Endorsed by': Lvnda Taylor, M('IP. RPP Neil Ca~. Manaoer= , Current Operations RST LDT,'j f Attachments Cop5': Chief Administrative Officer Director. Planning & Development Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Th~a~'J. Quin~(~zChief Ad. rfiinistratix~ APPENDIX I TO REPORT NUMBER PD 05-02 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 13/99 That the implementing zoning by-law: (a) permit townhouse dwelling units to be constructed on the subject lands. (b) include, but not be limited to, the following performance standards and requirements: viii) ix) i) a maximum of 20 townhouse dwelling units; ii) minimum townhouse dwelling unit widths of 5.4 metres; iii) despite ii) above, minimum unit widths of 4.4 metres only for those townhouse dwelling units fronting onto Kingston Road that support private garages within the rear of those units iv) a 6.0 metre build-to-zone established along Kingston Road; v) a minimum of 40% of a building face (or group of related buildings) to be sited within the build-to-zone; vi) building heights, considering functional building stories as defined by both the City's Zoning By-laws and the Ontario Building Code, to a maximum of three stories and 12 metres, inclusive of the roof, and minimum two-storey building heights abutting Kingston Road (building 12 metres in height must be located at least 26 metres from the rear lot line); vii) a minimum 7.5 metre rear yard depth for buildings, and a minimum 3.0 metre rear yard depth for one-storey accessory structures; building entrances to face Kingston Road; maintaining a minimum 3.0 metre continuous landscape strip along the rear of properties. (c) provide for a (H) Holding provision, such provision not to be removed until appropriate agreements have been entered into, between the owner and the City (and/or Region of Durham) to address matters, including, but not limited to: i) ii) iii) iv) v) vi) vii) viii) ix) landscaping of individual properties and rear buffer areas between the subject lands and abutting residences to thc north (including fencing, sodding, tree plantings and other landscaped features); adherence to the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines; laneway and access details (both vehicular and pedestrian); high quality architectural treatment and design of buildings; the provision of private amenity areas for each dwelling unit, and details respecting shared public amenities (including the proposed children's play area); a maximum of six (6) risers (steps) above finished floor elevation at the main front entrance of the dwelling unit, fronting the street the intended future use and treatment of that portion of any temporary access to Kingston Road once alternative access to the site is achieved; and, site lighting and the location and placement of utilities. the future treatment and/or additional development anticipated on the lands abutting Kingston Road supporting the proposed temporary laneway; x) xi) xii) xiii) xiv) -2- a stonnwater management plan that considers abutting properties (and potential future development on those lands), including anticipated impacts on Pine Creek. ii' anx: a site ser~'icing plan that addresses matters raised by the Region o£ Durham. and considers abutting properties t and future potential development on those lands): a comprehensive grading plan t including proposed driveway alignments and utility placements)' and. a noise impact stud',' that recommends appropriate abatement measures for traffic noise originating from Kingston Road. urbanization details for Kingston Road improvements. exchanoe of easements neccssarx to provide future access to the subject property fron~ abutting properties. APPENDIX II TO REPORT NUMBER PD 05-02 RECOMMENDED WALNUT LANE AREA CITY-INITIATED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION DRAFT PROCESSING SCHEDULE TIMING ACTION January, 2002 February, 2002 City Council directs Planning Development Staff to commence a City-initiated zoning by-law amendment application for the Walnut Lane Area. Notice is sent to landowners, surrounding residents, the LWCA and appropriate agencies for comment on the application. March, 2002 A Statutory Public Information Meeting is held respecting this application. March, 2002 to April 2002 May, 2002 to June 2002 August, 2002 to September 2002 October, 2002 Appropriate technical reviews are carried out and additional Stakeholder Meeting(s) held (if necessary). A Staff Recommendation Report is drafted and landowners and interested stakeholders are provided an opportunity to review recommendations and comment. Staff Recommendations are considered by the City's Planning Committee, and Council (if forwarded by Planning Committee). Council considers an implementing zoning by-law. Please note that this recommended processing schedule is meant to be a gcncral guid&:'~c to anucipated timing of the recommended Walnut Lane Area City-initiated zoning by-law amendment process. Proposcd tmnclmc~ could bc subject to change depending on issues raised through the review process and priority of other items to be considered bx thc City's Planning Committee an&'or City Appendix Ili TO REPORT NUMBER PD 05-02 GENEtL&L BUILDING SITING. SETBACK AND HEIGHT STANDARDS PROVIDED IN THE V~'ALNUT LANE AREA DEVELOPSIENT GUIDELINES ADOPTED BY PICKERING COUNCIL. JUNE 1994 · a 6.0 metre build-to-zone established alon,, Kinzston Road: · a minimum of 40% ora building face (or group of related buildings) to be sited within the build-to-zone: building heights to a maximum of three stories and 12 mewes, inclusixe of thc roof, and minimum txxo-storcx building heights abutting Kingston Road (a buildin2 12 metres in bei,,ht must be located at least 20 metres lkom the rear lot line); a minimum ,'5 metre rear yard setback tbr buildings, and a minimum 3.0 metre rear yard setback ibr one-storcx accessory strtlctures: building entrances to l~cc Kingston Road and minimize the view of' parking areas from Kingston Road; · maintaining a minimum 3.0 metre contlntious landscape strip along thc rear of properties tbr Fencing and tree planting: aild. · a residential design theme for buildings. ATTACHMENT # / TO REPORT # PD ~- 0 / GLENANNA OLENANNA ill CULROSS AVENUE MEADOW PICKERP* WAYFARER LANE BAYLY POPRAD [ATRA S~RE~T AVENU[ DRIVE RAOOM GRENOBLE STREET City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LOTS 14 AND 15, PLAN 489 OWNER E. MATTACCHIONE; M. LAPOSTA DATE NOV 26, 2001 ~, DRAWN BY RC APPLICATION No. A 13/99 SCALE 1:7500 CHECKED BY RT FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY PN-8 PA- ATTACHMENT ,~ ~ TO REPORT ~ P~, ~/~- ~' / 070 APPLICANT'S ORIGINAL SUBMITTED PLAN A 13/99 K~.ngs~.en n S 0 /~TTACHMENT # ~ TO APPLICANT'S LATEST REVISED PLAN A 13/99 ol K:ng~hon Rd, 0 ?H/~ ~AP WAS PRODUCED BY FHE CIFf OF PLANNING ~ INFARCTION ~ SUPPORT ATTACHI.,",EIJT # ~ .TO REPOR"r ¢ PE,~~ APPLICANT'S PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS A 13/99 ...... ELhVATIO:, 511 FRONT EL?iii ....... :' - hie': 2:2:2 <=~o .LnN'IYN~ :INV'I UJ ATTACHI?,ENT REPORT INFORMATION REPORT NO. 15-99 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF AUGUST 5, 1999 IN ACCORDANCE V~'ITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PI,ANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Zoning By-lay, Amendment :Xpplication A 13 99 E. Mattacchione & M. LaPosta Lots 14 & 15, Plan 489 (North side of Kingston Road: east of Walnut Lane) Town o f Picketing 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION tile subject site is located on thc north side of Kingston Road, east of Walnut Lane, and v, est of Liverpool Road {see Attachment ~1 t~r location map): the site consists of txxo lots which have a combined fi'enrage of 60.% metres on Kingston Road, and an area of {).450 of a hectare; both subject lots are vacant, generally level, grassed, and thc xx'esternmost lot is treed, whereas the eastern lot has ti'cos only around thc pcriphcr>: detached residential development exists to the north, east. and xx est of the site: to the south across Kingston Road there is a mixed multi-tenancy plaza. 2.0 APPIACANT S PROPOSAL tile owners are proposing to build, oil the subject site. 24 - 3~ _,-storey tov,'nhouse units xvith a minimum unit width of 4.42 metres: the applicant's submitted preliminau~ site plan and bt~ildin5 elex'ations are included as Attachments fi2 and-~-" a draft plan of condominium application or application Ibr common-element condominium, if appropriate, is anticipated subsequent to thc processing of this rczoning request; the proposal includes a 7.3-metre-x~idc internal road acccssin~ Kingston Road, which provides an opportunity lbr extension into adjoining properties from a "T" intersection located at thc rear of the site: the proposal has a net site density of approximatel> 53 units per hectare. 3.0 3.1 3.2 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING Durham Regional Official Plan designated "Living .&rea"; lands so designated are to be used predominantly for housing purposes: the proposal appears to conform; Pickering Official Plan - designates the site "Mixed Use Areas - Nlixed Corridor": - these areas are to have the highest concentration of actix'itv and the broadest diversity of community services and facilities in tiao Toxkn: Information Report No. 15-99 ATTACHMENT #, '~ TO REPORT ~ PD ~/~' £ ( Page residential, retailing of goods and services, offices, restaurants, community, cultural, recreational, and special purpose commercial uses arc permitted within this designation; the Plan establishes a maximum residential density of 55 units per net hectare for these lands and others located on the north side of Kingston Road, abutting existing low density residential development to the north (proposal's net site density is approximately 53 units per hectare); the proposal appears to conform to the Pickering Official Plan; the site is located within a Detailed Review Area in the Town Centre Neighbourhood; the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines were adopted by Council in 1994 for this area, involving properties along the north side of Kingston Road from Walnut Lane, east to Pine Creek; the site is also located within the Town Centre West Precinct of the Kingston Road Corridor Development Guidelines, adopted by Council in 1998; 3.3 Zoning By-law 3036 - the site is zoned Residential Detached Third Density "R3" by By-law 3036; - this zoning permits detached dwellings on lots xvith a minimum frontage of 18 metres; - amendment of the zoning by-law is required in order to permit the proposal. 4.0 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION (see Attachments #5 & #6) 4.1 Resident Comments - one letter was received from the owner of a northerly-abutting property; - the concerns expressed can be summarized as follows: · loss of privacy if 10 townhouses face her backyard and her rear windows; · numerous kids will play in the private road located near the common rear lot line, creating impacts of noise, balls, etc.; many cars will use this private road, and no traffic signals onto Kingston Road are proposed; · her property will lose a minimum of 30% of its value; · she wants the zoning to stay as it is; 4.2 Agency Comments The Durham Catholic District School Board - indicates that the 5 students generated from the proposal would fall within the catchment area of St. Isaac Jogues Catholic Elementary School located on Finch Avenue, and has no objection to the proposal; No Objections or Concerns: - the Durham District School Board; TransCanada Pipelines; 4.3 Staff Comments 4.3.1 Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines these guidelines provide direction for future uses and buildings to be compatible with the low density residential area to the north while also presenting a scale and character of development appropriate to the Kingston Road frontage; the Guidelines require that development be limited to a maximum height of three stories and 12 metres; that the maximum height and the setback from the rear property line be limited by the 17 degree angular plane; that at least 40% of the building face next to Kingston Road must be within 6 metres of the front property Information Report No. 15-99 ATTACHMENT REPOWr ,* Page 3 O85 4.3.3 4.3.4 line; and a 3-metre-v,'ide landscaped strip must be provided along the north (rear) property line; the buildings are proposed to flank raffler than actually face Kingston Road, and their height is approximately 11 metres and 3!2 stories Irather ttnan 12 metres and 3 stories); therefore, deten'nination of compliance with tile guidelines is required; Road Corridor Develo£mcn; Guideh'ues one objective of the Tov,'n Centre West Precinct of fine Kingston Road Corridor Development Guidelines is to encourage the creation o1' a neighbourhood which represents a transition betxxeen tine \Vhites Road corridor to tine \vest, the Liverpool neighbourhood to the north, and the Dov, ntown ('ore to thc east: residential uses are generally encouraged, with commercial intensification at intersections, and a distinctive character is to be established through appropriate streetscape treatments, such as reduced building setbacks along Kingston Road, and tile provision of sidewalks on both sides of Kingston Road to provide direct and convenient access to buildings fi'onting the street: on-street parking xvill be encouraged m this specific area of Kingston Road in the future, once buildings are constructed closer to tile street: the internal "T" roadv,'av proposed }las an approximate maximum width of 7.3 metres; tile width of this proposed road limits it to being developed as a private road, as it is below the minimum 20-metre width ora public local road: staff must determine x','lletller this site and abutting parcels v, ould be better served through the provision of a public ready, ay, and whether a public roadway width could be accommodated efficientlx in this area: tile applicant has suggested that tile l\~ture redevelopment of abutting lots could connect with the private road proposed, as illustrated on the submitted plan included as Attachment #47 discussion with the Region of Durham regarding the number of entrance/egress points along this portion of Kingston Road is required: this site is approximately at the mid-point of tile lots located between Walnut Lane and Pine Creek which have redevelopment potential: the applicant's broader-area site plan includes two other eventual access points to Kingston Road - one further east and one further west; staff must determine whether it is appropriate tbr future rede\ clopmcnt to connect to a private road network: staff must assess whether fine proposal could function independently and in redevelopment schemes with abutting properties: staffmust also assess whether the future de\ elopmcnt of abutting properties xvould be negatively impacted bv this proposal: Site Design attd Functio~z there may be alternative site designs which would be more efficient or more appropriate; for example, a redesign x~herc the southernmost units would actually front onto Kingston Road may better meet tile true intent of both the Guidelines: the northern proposed units located along thc top of the "T" intersection have reverse frontage and face the rear of tine detached units located north of the site: there could be alternative designs which would allow the units to flank rather than front the rear lot line, while still permitting the depth of thc road\var to constitute much of the required distance of setback necessary to conlbnn to the angular plane height limitation for the northernmost units: a redesign which provides bulbing at thc ends o1' the internal roadway to allow for the turn-around space needs of vehicles, and which provides lbr the parking of visitors may also be desirable; Information Report No. 15-99 ATTACHMENT REPORT ~ PD Page 4 - alternative designs must be explored by the applicant. 5.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning Department; oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Recommendation Report prepared by the Planning Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; if you wish to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision, you must provide comments to the Town before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal; if you wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding this proposal, you must request such in writing to the Town Clerk. 6.0 6.1 6.2 OTHER INFORMATION Appendix I those whose comments on the proposal were received at time of writing are listed; Information Received a full-scale copy of the applicant's submitted plan is available for viewing at the offices of the Town of Pickering Planning Department. 0RI01NAL SIGNF. D BY ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Valerie R. Rodrigues, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Lynda D. Taylor Manager - Current Operations Division VRR/ph ATTA 0 kt!,:i ~',~-[ ¢_"-7 Excerpts from Statutory' Public Informatin Meeting Minutes of STATUTOR5~ PI. BLIC INFORMATION MEETING MINUTES A Statutou' Public Information Meeting was held on Thursday, ,August 5, 1999 at 7:00 p.ln. in the Council Chambers. (i) ZONING BY-LA'9,' AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 13/99 E. MATTACCHIONE AND 5I. LAPOSTA LOTS 14 AND 15, PLAN 489 .(,NORTH SIDE OF KINGSTON ROAD EAST OF WALNUI LANE Lvnda Taylor, Manager, Current Operations Division, provided an explanation of the application, as outlined in Information Report = 15-99. Angclo Mattacctnionc. representing tt~e applicants, commented on various aspects of the Planning Repo~ noting thai: a) the proposed iownho=sc units are not 3 1/2 stories but 3 stories with a bascmcnL b) a prexious application was no~ approved which would have allox~cd liar 3 lots with frontages each of 20.32 metres and would have been within the requirements of By-law 303~: c~ thc north property line is heavily treed and privacx lbr abutting ncighbours should not be aflL'cted. Lee Morgan, Lot 12 and 13, outlined his concerns regarding: a) the barrier to be placed between Lots l\ and 14 and the property in question, b/ a problem presently exists xvith the water level, if the elcxation is raised, further problems will be created, c) water drainage. Mary Aroukatos, outlined her concerns to include water, the placement of a barrier, the number of units - xvil] be far more children than 5 as indicated by the agent, parking, traffic and the design. Joyce Iterzog, representing the I,iverpool \Vcs~ Community Association, advised that the Association is happy with residential but concerned with the proposed height. The development is not aesthcticalh' pleasing with the homes flanking Kingston Road. They are concerned with thc road patterns and their de\ elopment. There should be a more consistent road pattern and a review of the optimum placement of traffic signals, ltow are residents of the proposed dcxclopment to access the northern area, traveling to school, shopping, etc. with no northern linkage. Sidewalks should be extended along the north side of Kingston Road to Glendale Drive. Angelo Mattacchione, representing thc applicants, advised that a barrier will be placed between the proposed development and present lots, The Works Department will address elevation and water will be self contained. A left hand turn land presently exists on Kingston Road and should alleviate traffic concerns. Sufficient parking has been created within the development with each unit providing for txvo cars. 1920 Bayly Street Pickering, Ontario LIW 3R6 905-427-0791 905-427-4998(Fax) Commission: J. I. Mason, Chair L. A. Hodgins, Vice-Chair W. Arthurs, Mayor R. Johnson, Councillor R.F. Sutton, Commissioner J. Wiersma, P. Eng. General Manager July 19, 1999 .TO ~Neil, Carroll Director of Planning Town of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Dear Mr. Carroll: Re: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 13~99 E. ,~,qattacchione & !V!... La Posta Lots 14 & 15, Plan 489 (North side of Kingston Road, east of Walnut Lane) We are very concerned with this application for the following reasons: · Insufficient setback from Kingston Road to provide for adequate clearance from our overhead 44 kV and 13.8 kV circuits (see letter of April 23, 1999, copy of which is attached, which requests 7 m setback from road allowance). · Insufficient detail on grade changes on Kingston Road (we do not permit our poles to be buried above the pole butt treatment level). The developer has the choice to: · Increase the setback, or · Pay for the burial of the overhead lines. If the developer wants to raise the grades around our poles, the developer will be required to pay for the re-setting of these poles. If there are any questions about these comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, V G eneral Manager :dhm :dhm:S:\General Manager Files\1999 FILES\Government\07199 Carroll Zoning By Law A13 99.doc The Regional Municipality of Durham Planning Department Box 623 1615 Dundas St. E. 4th Floor Lang Tower West Building Whitby, Ontario ';anada L1N 6A3 reh (905) 728-7731 Fax: (905) 436-6612 A. L. Georgieff, Mc~P, RPP Commissioner of Planning November 22, 1999 Valerie Rodrigues, Senior Planner Town of Picketing Planning Department Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Dear Ms. Rodrigues' Re: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A13/99 Applicant: E. Mattacchione & M. Lapasta Location: North side of Highway No. 2 Part of Lot 23, Concession 1 Municipality: Town of Pickerin9 In accordance with your request, we wish to provide the following comments with respect to compliance with the Regional Plan, delegated Provincial plan review responsibilities and the proposed method of servicing. The applicant has proposed a 24 unit townhouse complex on 0.456 hectare parcel of land. The Regional Plan designates the site "Living Area" which permits a full range of housing and encourages intensification in appropriate locations. No Provincial interests would appear to be applicable to this application. Servicing A sanitary sewer crosses Highway 2, approximately 1 20 metres west of the site and in order to provide a gravity connection to this existing sewer, substantial fill would be required on the northerly one-half of the subject property. It is suggested, that in order to avoid this requirement, the site should be serviced by an extension of approximately 110 metres in length running easterly in the north boulevard of Highway 2, connecting to the existing 600mm diameter trunk sanitary sewer crossing Highway No. 2. .Municipal water suppy (300mm diameter main) is available from an existing 300mm diameter main on the south side of highway No. 2. The Works Department requires that the watermain connection cross~ng Highway 2 will have to be undertaken by tunnelling or bore and jack operations. Open cutting of Highway No. 2 will not be permitted: Please refer to Attachment No. 1 for the servicing items described above. Transportation The Works Department has indicated that their review of the application was based on the potential for re-development of the site, as well as the two properties containing residential units to the east and the three properties containing residential units to the west. They have indicated that based on the total frontage of the total 100% Post Consumer ATTACHMENT #, ¢ REPORT ~ PD z/,.,,~._ ~ TO land holdings, a maximum of two access points could be permitted. These two points of access would be offset from the existin9 commercial access on the south side of Highway No. 2. such that left turn traffic movement conflicts for each of the sites, would be avoided. However. the Works Department would be willing to accept the proposed access point to the subject property in the interim, provided that the entrance be closed at such time as the lands to the east and/or west are developed, in order that connectivity between properties, is achieved and the desired entrances are established. Please refer to Attachment No. 2 for the transportation items described above. Otherlssues It is our understanding that the implementation of this proposal is to proceed by means of a plan of condominium. We suggest that the applicant be advised to submit an application as soon as possible, specifically prior to site plan approval, in order to address the requirement for the abatement of traffic no~se from Highway No. 2. This will require the submission of a no~se impact study for review and acceptance by the Town and the Region, prior to a Regional decision regarding this proposal. It is also anticipated that any other Regional concerns, financial and otherwise, will be addressed through the subdivision/condominium process. Yours truly, Tom Cadman, Planner Current Operations Branch N:\PIM\TC\DEVAPP~ZONINGgAPPLICAT~PICKE~XW~A13-99.WPD /~TTACHMENT # / REPOR'r # PD ~'--':' ~'' ~ TO INTICRI)I,;I'.\ I,tT~,II,;N'i'.\ 1. (2( P[il~l,i(_' X~'()I,tI(S I)I~I'.\I,UI'~,II':NT TO: ~'alerie Rodrigues Senior Planner 1).\TIC: Octol)er 19, 1999 l,tE: l{.ol}crt Start l)evelopment Control Super¥isor Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 13/99 E. 51attacchio~e & M. Laposta Lots 14 & 15, Plan 489 (North Side o1' Kingston l{oatl, l<ast o1' ~5'alnut l.anc~ Town of Picketing FIECEIVED 0Cf 2 1 1999 TO','/~'~ C= PICKERING P,. ~:;~,,~NL~ DEPARTMENT \Vt huvc rcvic~x cci thc abovc noted ui~t~llc:ttit~'t 'Ji~d t)rovidc thc I,~ll~',x ~n3: cornn~cnt>. A Storm'water Manasemcn~ lhcpo~'t l~ ~ccluircd For ~hc ~tc. The proposed short-term solutioi~ t~i Moron scwc~- disch;u'~c ~o thc existing ditci~ on Kingston Road should bc i-c~ ic~ cd t~ct~ cch thc 'l'o~k n und tho Region of Durham. A contain their drainage. Thc road proposed for access Ii'om KinSs[c)u b?,oad, ii proposed :ts u Town n~mntained turning circle at the north linait haxing un 1~ nict~'c radius, depending on whether the roads are anticipated to Ki n7ston Road. Some works on Kingston Road will be ct_)xct'cd hx thc t ov, n'5 cu~-~'cnt IOcxelc)t)i~ent Charge Bv-Lax~. Robert Start RS/ch Cot)y: b. Thompson, Dcx'clopll~ci~t ,-\t)l)lt)x ui> tfc)<ndinatt;r pwfilcs/a 13- ) )m Teresa ZANATA 1434 Altona Rd. Pickering. Ont. L1V 1M1 tel. 905 509 6999 to : Mr. ATTACHMENT # / / TO REPORT ,~ PD '7z'~ ~ i' Bruc~lor , A.M.C.T. ~ew~ Clerk The Town of Pickering , Ont. Re : Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 13/99 E. Mattacchione & M. La Posta Lots 14, & 15, Plan 489 (North side of Kinston Rd., east of Walnut Lane) Town of Pickering RECEIVE TOWN OF PICKERING JUL 4 1999 CLERK'S DEPARTMENT RECEIVED ,JUl 1,5 !99 Dear Sir, as you can see on the little schematic included in this letter, with the proposed construction of 24 townhouses behind the backyard of my property , located on 1773 Storrington St. I'm going to lose all my privacy because 10 townhouses of the proposed Plan 489 will look directly in my backyard and at the windows of my "ack house withouth any protection. _ne 24 townhouses of 3 or more bedroom· will be occupied by families with a total of circa 40 children and teenagers. This youngsters , will inevitably play games on the private road wich serve to enter the houses , specially at the end part of it, facing my backyard's fence. You can imagine the consequences : noise , balls that will pass over the fence and will fall on my property exct...exct.. The private road access on the Kinston Rd , of only 21 ft. wide , will provide for the passage of circa 30 and plus cars of the houses' -wner and more for the visitors No segnaletic is provided and the _~ildren will be exposed to the danger of the heavy traffic on Kinston Rd. When I did buy my property, I did have a look at the zone By-law This clearly state that on the back of my property will be permitted only construction of single dwelling and not of 24 townhouses in fact you need to change, to amende , the By-law , to accomodate the demad of Mr. Mattacchione. can understand Mr. Mattacchione's demand to maximize profit aut of his ±and but what He is doing is at the espense of my property's value. Only for the lost privacy , my house will lose almost 30% of it's value. Sorry , I oppose firmly the Plan 489. Yours truly, Pickering.. ~ ~. ~.~.. ! ~/..~..~ ~ ATTA~,H[.iEt~" ~ _TO REPORT t PD ~/' - ~ ~ ,' // / / f 96 ATTACHMENT ~ /~ TO August 3, 1999 THE TOWN OF PICKERiNG ZONING DEPAR~NT RE: ZONING BY LAW AI6END~F. NT APPLICATION A 13/99 DEAR SIRS, WE ARE THE OWNERS OF 1222 KINGSTON RD. PiCKERING, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE PROPOSED PL~q FOR THE 24 FREEHOLD TOWNHOUSE UNITS. WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE PROPOSED PLAN FOR ~Z~NY REASONS. FIRSTLY, AND MOST FOREMOST THE PROPOSAL WiLL TOTALLY DESTROY ANY FUTURE DESIGN THE TOWN MAY HAVE FOR THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR. AS YOU DRIVE INT0 PICKERING FROM WHITES RD. GOING EAST THE TOWN iS BOMBARDED WITH UNSIGHTLY STRIP PLAZAS ~qD NEW TOWNHOMES. THERE IS NO FORlVLAL "ENTPoXNCE" TO OUR TOWN. THE STRIP OF LAND WHICH IS PAt~T OF THIS APPLICATION ~qD THE ADJOiNING 2 PROPERTIES ONE 0F WHICH IS OUR OWN COULD PROVIDE ~q AESTHETICALLY PLEASING LOOK OF WHICH THIS TOWN IS IN DiRE NEED. SECONDLY, WITH THE UNDERSTAI4DING THAI' THE OWNERS HAVE BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL IN SELLING THEIR PROPERTY 1N THE PAST iT iS OF NO SURPRISE THAT THEY WOULD ATTEMPT TO "CRAPI" AS MUCH LIVING SPACE AS POSSIBLE ON THEIR LAND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FUTURE OF THE SITE. WE DO NOT NEED SO MANY PEOPLE LIVING ON HIGHWAY 2 ESPECIALLY CHILDREN. WALNUT LAlqE IS SUFFICIENT iT HAS A SIDE STREET LEADING TO OTHER RESIDENCES AND PROPER STREET SIGNAL LIGHTS. THIRDLY, THE AREA DIRECTLY BEHIND THE PROPOSED SITE ~D BESIDE IS RESIDENTIAL. THE 24 TOWNHOlq_ES WOULD MOST LIKELY HOUSE FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN WHICH WOULD CAUSE NOT ONLY SAFETY CONCERNS BECAUSE OF HWY 2, BUT ALSO TPoXFFIC ~qD PRIVACY FOR THOSE AROUND THE AREA. OUR PROPOSAL IS THIS. SHOULD THESE OWNERS WISH T0 BUILD ON THEIR PROPERTY LET THEM DO SO WHILE CONFORMING TO SOME SORT OF "FUTURE LOOK" THAT THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN ATTEMPTING TO DEVELOP. THE PICKERING VILLAGE SITE , ALTHOUGH AN OLDER VERSION, iS A GOOD EXAldPLE. iT HAS THE VICTORI~ DESIGN HOUSING SMALL SHOPS RESIDENTIAL UNITS. WE PROPOSE THIS TO THE OWNERS f~0WING THAT IT WILL NOT ONLY PROVIDE THE g-REA WITH A "CLASSIER" DOWNTOWN LOOK BUT ALSO PROVIDE FOR OFFICE SPACE AND SF~LL CAFES, BOUTIQUES ATTACHP, Eh~T # /~ TO ETC., (ALL THESE COMPONENTS ERiilJ~ii~G i'HEi.i EYEN [dORE FiNAi{CIAL GAIN THEN WPLAi' 'rMEY ARE PROPOSiNG~ . Si'0RES CHOSE Al' NINE THEREFORE THE ONLY 'r~AFS'iC WOULD h.r~ 'i'i~Ai' ~b 2HE PEOPLE LIVING ASOYE THE S'i'ORES NHiCH hE PROPLS~_ ',','$lLi~ PiE ADULTS OR SENIORS. YES, PICKERiNG HAS STORES AND RmSiDEN.2E$ P3UT i'HE DAYS OF THE STRIP PLAZA ARE SLOWLY ~'ALiNG AS rile COi.ii.iUNi'i'Y iS LOOKING FOR A LOOK TO TlS TOGE'rHER LIVING .AilD NORtqliiG AS 'i'½ESE l'..,~O i~AVE BECOME INSEPAP~ASLE C0~4PONENTS OF 'OUR DALLY LiYES. HAVING BEEN RESiDENi~$ iN NiCKERiNG FOR OTER i$ 'fEARS AND HAVING ONNED A BUSINESS iN THE AREA 0~ 'i'H~ rr.~r~o~ o~E NE P~E PLEASED T~T TONN COUNCIL ~-S BEE~ PUi"ili~ 30 flUOR ES'FORT iNTO THE FUTURE 0P' PiCKERiNG DEVELOP~.~NI'. NE hO~h i'0',','i{ COUL~CiL NiLL NORK P1CKERING. REGARDS, AROUiJ~'i'OS AROO' di:ds ATTACHMENT ~¢ / ~ .... TO REPORT # PD ':/.~ o ( Attention: Dear Valerie, Valerie Rodrigues Picketing-Senior Planner August 10, 1999 We have received and reviewed the proposal regarding the potential development on Kingston Road on lots 14 8: 15, plan 489. As well, we attended the preliminary meeting on August 5th, 1999 at the Town Hall. We live at 1775 Storrington Avenue and our entire backyard backs on to the property being considered for development. We would like to offer our support, concerns and recommendations with respect to the proposal. We recognized that when we purchased this home that there was a potential for future development on the above noted property. With that in mind, we investigated the current approved zoning bylaw. We found the zoning to be acceptable and felt that our investment would be safe, so we purchased our home. The proposal to build freehold condominium townhomes, in our opinion, would be an acceptable use for the land. That is assuming the planning and buildings match the existing architecture and blend into the surrounding natural landscape. We have outlined our concerns with the proposal below: The reduction of the minimum allowable width of each home to 4.42 metres will allow too many homes to be constructed on that property. On these 2 lots alone, there could potentially be 24 families, 72 people, 48 vehicles and numerous pets. We are very concerned about the increased activity and noise levels as well potential parking issues. We have invested in our home and have long term plans to stay here. As well, we are planning on installing an inground pool next year. Wc are concerned about the roadway, which will run along our entire fence line. We/'eel that it will attract loitering and infringe on our personal privacy. There is also a potential that cur home will reduce in value, a,'; it will become less attractive to future owners if we need to sell. The current design of the buildings do not blend well into the surrounding space. They will look awkward and out of place, they are not very attractive. We are concerned that 10 homes and families will be facing directly into our back yard with the current configuration of the lots. ATTACHL'.E",J'r # /'ff TO REPORT ~. PDm '7'~ .' / Our recommendations include the I'ollox~ in~: Reduce the quantity of homes alloxved to be consu-uctcd bx tncrcasing the size of each lot. This will also encourage a home of greater value and attract homeox~ nei's that are interested in a long-term purchase. Re-design the property layout so that a roadway dc)cs not butt up against our property. Allow for a greenbelt of some sort to separate thc traffic from our backyard. With this many kids potentially Iivin~ in thc homes, some ~ort of park-space should be inco~orated into the plan. A similar attractive design as the units located at the comer of Walnut Lane and Kingston Road would be very acceptable. The design of thc home:; changed to blend the architecture to the sun-ounding space. End units should have softer elements, possibly lower level rooflines and entrances to lessen the harshness of the design. Units that face the existing properties should have a stepped elevation again to soften thc look of the homes and eliminate some of the privacy concerns. We would like a reduction in the number of floors, the homes should not be more than 2 stories with attached garage. We arc very concerned about the current design, as we will lose our privacy completely, they would hover over our property. A combination of an attractive privac5 fence and tree line to appropriately block the view of the homes to our backyard.(25 ft hish trees) Consider relaying out the plan so the ten homes wilt not face our backvard. We trust that you will consider and accept our concerns and reco[nmendations as you pursue this proposal with the current oxvners and the Town of Pickcrin~. We understand their need to expect a respectable return on their investment, how cxcr. thcx arc potentially asking for it at the detriment of the community amd >urr~,unding property values. We would like to recommend that the owner schedule a i~cet~ng with thc interested neighbors to discuss this project. I am sure xvt can z~ll x,, ,>~'k t,,<cthcr to develop an acceptable solution for all involved. Please do not tao~itz~to u) call us directly if you have any questions. Sinccrcls, Stacv and Doug Howard 1775 Storringum Street Picketing, Ontario LIV 2X2 Phone ~ 905-420-6098 CC: Angelo Mattacchione ~ Prosum Engineering I00 HCKF;RING RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2001-05 submitted by Marshall Homes (Altona) Ltd. on behalf of M. J. Mitchell and M. L. Pyper, on lands being Lot 6 and Part of Lots 3, 4 and 5, Plan 506, City of Picketing, to permit the development of a plan of subdivision, be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix I to Planning Report Number PD 06-02. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/01 submitted by Marshall Homes (Altona) Ltd. on behalf of M. J. Mitchell and M. L. Pyper, on lands being Lot 6 and Part of Lots 3, 4 and 5, Plan 506, City of Pickering, to establish performance standards to allow the implementation of draft plan of subdivision, be APPROVED, subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix II to Planning Report Number PD 06-02. That in accordance with section 34(17) of the Planning Act and notwithstanding that the rezoning proposed in the public meeting notice, public meeting report and at the public meeting differs to some degree from that presented in the report of the Director, Planning & Development, dated January 7, 2002, Planning Report Number PD 06-02, such difference are not substantial enough to require further notice and another public meeting. PICKERING REPORT TO FROM' Ncil Carroll Director, Planning & [)evelopmcnt 101 COUNCIL DATE: January T, 2002 P, Kt'ORT NUMBER: PD 06-02 SUBJECT: DraI\ Plan of Subdivision Appliccition 5P-ni}i!l-¢~5 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14 {)1 Marshall Homes ~Altona) Ltd. on betnalf of NI. J. Nlitchcll and NI. L. Pypcr Lot O and Part oflot~ 3.4 and 5, Plan 5~)(, 314 350 Finch Axenue (North side of Finch Avenue, east ofA ltona Road) City oC Picketing RECOMMENDATION: That i)raft Plan of Subdix i~ion .-\pplicatioi~ ,"-;1~-2(~(/1-(/5 ~ubmitted toy Nlar~hall {Altona) Ltd. O11 bohalI'of NI. ,1. \lit&ti] alld NI. L. t))pci', oI~ ]aEd> [~CillZ Lot (~ aiR] })Zli-t of It)ts 3. 4 and 5. Plan 5()(>, C'itx' OI' Picketing, to permit thc dcxclopmcnt of a plall subdixision, be APPROX'EI). subject to thc condition> t~kltlillcd ii1 Appendix I to Planning Report Number PI) That Zoning By-law Amendment Applicaticm A 14{~1 submitted by Marshall Homes (Altona) Ltd. on behalFof XI. J. Nlitchdl and N1. L. P>pcr. on lands being Lot 0 and Part of lots 3, 4 and 5, Plan 5~)0. C'itx of Pickonnn. to establish perform'anco standards to allow thc implementation of dralk plan of subdixi~itm, be APl'IleX'El}, subject to thc conditions outlined in Appendix II to Planning Report Number P[){}(,-~C. That in accordance with section 34(1-) t)/' thc Plann~n,~2 Act and notxx ithstancting that the rezoning proposed in the public mooting notice, public mcctin~g report and at the public meeting differs to some degree from that presented in tine report of thc Director, Planning & Development, dated ,lanuarx _00,, Plannin~ Report Number PD 06-02, such difference are not substantial cnou?2 to require further not,cc and another public meeting. ORIGIN: Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2001-05 submitted to thc R, cg~on of l)Lli'haln2 aiid circulated to the (2ity of Picketing fbr comment, and Zoning Bx-law Amendment .Xppllcation A I4 I)l submitted to the (2it>, of Picketing. AUTHORITY: The Phmm',X :tc'~', R.S.O. 1990, chapter P. 1 ~ FINAN(2IAL IMPLICATIONS: No direct costs to the (2ity are anticipated as a ro>ult of thc pz-tq3o>cd dc\ clc)pmcint. The City will be responsible tk)r thc cost of thc construction ora sidcx~alk along thc north side of Finch Avenue, a4jacent to thc plan. This sidexxalk is idcntiI}cd as a dc\ clopmcnt charge project. Report to Council PD 06-02 Subject: Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2001-05 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/01 Date: Januau' 7, 2002 Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to develop a draft plan of subdivision consisting of 35 detached dwellings lots fronting onto a new public street, north from Finch Avenue. The proposed plan of subdivision consists of lots having a lot frontage of 9.0 metres. The applicant proposes to amend the current zoning to allow the proposed detached dwelling units with modified performance standards, to permit the implementation of the draft plan. The proposed plan of subdivision represents appropriate residential development. The proposal conforms to the policies of the Picketing Official Plan for lands designated "Urban Residenzia!- Low DettsiO, Area" All interests of the City will be appropriately addressed through an associated subdivision agreement. BACKGROUND: 1.0 Introduction The subject lands are located on the north side of Finch Avenue, east of Altona Road. Aproperty location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1). The subject property is currently used as a detached dwelling lot, with the majority of the property currently vegetated. The original draft plan of subdivision that was submitted was tbr a lot mix of 43 detached dwelling lots having a minimum lot frontage of 7.5 metres. This is the proposal that was presented at the public meeting and described in the public meeting information report (see Attachment #2). Since the public meeting the applicant has revised the draft plan of subdivision. The revision to the draft plan relates to the lotting. The road configuration remains the same as originally proposed. The revised lotting is now tbr 35 lots having a minimum lot frontage of 9.0 metres, for the development of detached dwellings. (see Attachment//3). The following is background information on the subject applications: Proposed Development Detail Gross area of draft plan Net residential area of draft plan Number of residential lots Net residential density Detached dwelling lot frontages minimum 7.5 metres minimum 9.0 metres Original Plan Revised Plan (Attachment 2) (Attachment 3) 1.77ha - 1.77ha 1.42 ha - 1.42 ha 43 - 35 30.3 units/ha 24.6 units/ha 43 0 0 35 2.0 Information Meetin~ A Public InIbnnation Meeting for the subject applications was held on August 9, 2001. Information Report No. 20-01, which summarizes the applicant's original proposal and outlines the issues and comments identified to that date through circulation of the application, was prepared for that meeting. The text of the Information Report is provided for reference (see Attachment #5). At the Public Information Meeting, four area residents commented on the applicant's proposal. Comments included: · Question on construction impacts, including pollution, noise and servicing; * Fencing location to ensure privacy from the new development; · The density is too high and should be reduced: · impact of the development on the private sen'ices of adjacent properties; Report to Council PD 00-02 Sub]oct: Draft Plan of Subdivision Application Zoning By-law Amendment Application A I4 Date' Jzinu'~lrx-. 2002 [)age 3 1:,'-,3 · Structural impacts of tine subciivision construction x~ oulct ha\ c oiq adjacent buildings: and, · Impacts on ttne adjacent wildlife corridor. Minutes of tine ALIULISt 9. 2{){)1 reference (sec Attaclnment --O }. ~tatutot'x Public Intbmnation Nleetino are provided 2.1 Public C'omrnent Pt'nor to tine public meeting one written connlnqcnt xxas veceix'ed form an area residelnt. Laurie t tumptnries, _0,0 Altonu Noad advises that she is co~]cci*~lcd x~ith: thc plannin~ process given the historical planning process Ik)r this area: tho proposed development does not lend itsc~lf to the vision of a villa,ge concept: tho proposed design results in a small enclave of houses with a xxall et' I~ncc situated alon,g Finch Avenue' the intended design will not meet the envisioned Nei?nbourhood Focus: thc negative environmental impact the proposed subdivision will have on thc open space t~ouge-lDul'llns XVildlitD Corridor: the density of thc original drat5 plan exceed the OtUcial Pltua linait: and. thc increase traft~c on 2.2 Comments tn'om Other [tydro (_)nc has advised tlnat tlacx huxc ~o objection to the applicatio~aN. Veridian Connections has advised that thc\ tnax'c laO ob_icction to tills proposal, and request a copy of the proposed civil design plans to prepare u prclinainavx dc~i,zn and estimate to service tile proposed subctixision and has advised or' ccrtai~7 responsibilities tho applicant ~vill have to :satist? (see Attachnacnt :N ). Canada Post has requested conditions of '~iDprox'al bc i~7ai~c)seci on their behalf respecting the boulevard and curb works set\in< the mailbox I scc Attachnlcnt =t)). [?,ell Canada has requested conditions of draft ',ipproxal bo imposed on their behalf addressing tile location and installation of underground servicing {see Attactnment #10). Durham District School Board tna~ adxised that approximatel5' 22 elementary pupils could be generated by tine development, ttnat ttnese students x~ ill be acconnmodatcd xvitlnin existing school facilities and therefore, have no ob ection to tile ~pplication. ! .,,cc Attachment #1 1). Durtnam Caltnolic District School Beaird has 'adx i,~cd that tilt: proposed development is witlnin thc catchment area of St. Nlonic:i C'titholic School and tilt: projected student yield will be 8 students and therefore, trove no ob3ect~on to thc upplic',~tion, t Nec Attachment 012). Toronto and Region Conservation Authoritx {TRC'A} ha> adx'iscd tile subject site abuts a tableland xvoodlot to the east and backs onto thc Rouge [)ut't]ns %Vildlir~ ('orridor. An edge management plan will bo rcctuircd to tho sat~slk~ctic)n of Ti<C'.X. Thcrclerc, TRCA advises that they have no objection to the application> sub]oct to cer'tai~n conditions of draii approval being imposed on their behalf addressing edge I21U~2tiZCnlCnt and stormx~atcr management. (see Attachment =13). Region of Durham Planning Department tna~, udxiscd that Durhann I<cgional OFficial Plan designates the subject lands as A/x'//L~z .4~'c'~z. xvtncrc dcxclopnacnt is intended to be lands designated as "Open Space hinkancs", xx hich recognizes thc }<ouuc-[)tlI'Iln~ Corridor. Thc proposed applications contbrm to thc Durham [~c?onaI Ot'IScial Plan. The applications have been screened in accordance with thc tem~s of thc proxincia] plan review responsibilities and a noise and vibration stud\ as xxc]l tis aln ',H'clnticological study were required. Report to Council PD 06-02 Subject: Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2001-05 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/01 Date: Januau 7, 2002 Page 4 Matters related to Regional servicing and financing will be addressed in a required agreement between the developer and the Region. In summary, the Region has no objection to the application and has requested certain conditions be incorporated into the conditions of approval (see Attachment # 14). 2.4 Comments from City Departments 3.0 3.1 The Development Control Section has advised of the following: · The development will need to extend the storm sewer from the limit of draft plan of subdivision 18T-98018 to the subject property. · The developer will be required to contribute to shared service costs for stormwater management purposes installed downstream of the proposed development. · A stormwater management report for the internal site will be required. · A sidewalk will be required on one side of the proposed new street as well as a sidewalk along Finch Avenue. · Appropriate noise fence will be required in accordance with an approved noise report. · Engineering drawing shall be prepared to the City's satisfaction. · The developer shall enter into a subdivision agreement to ensure the fulfilhnent of the City's requirements, financial and othemdse. Discussion Subdivision Design Considerations Tine overall subdivision design is somewhat limited on the subject property due to the abutting property constraints. Lands to the north and east are not developable, given their environmental significance. Lands to the west form part of the Neighbourhood Focus and therefore, a different form of development is anticipated on these lands. The resulting subdivision design, as submitted by the developer, is one that would permit the maximum lot yield. The applicants revisions to the subdivision dealt with lot frontage and did not have a significant impact on the overall subdivision design. The street configuration has not been altered and the draft plan still proposes reverse lot frontages. The resulting subdivision design incorporates noise attenuation fences adjacent to Finch Avenue. In the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines of the Pickering Official Plan, Section N1.9.3 states the following in relation to appropriate streetscape/subdivision design along Finch Avenue. Finch Avenue is expected to maintain its role as thc kO: street or "backbone" o./' the communiO,. This may involve a continuation o/' thc historic development pattern along Finch - that of homes and other buihlings./i~cin~4 the street. New Development along Finch Avenue and Altona Road should employ innovative architectural and urban design techniques to humanize the street, mitigate the effect of traffic, and present an attractive Jhontage along these roads. Development with reverse fi'ontage and noise attenuation devices such as sign(ficant fencing and earth berms is strongly discouraged. However, given the constraints of the size of the subject properly and the fact the subdivision is an independent, self contained parcel, the subdivision design is acceptable subject to a slight modification. It is recommended that lots 28 and 29 be extended to Finch Avenue and the developer convey to the City of Pickering, a 3.0 metre block of land along the rear of lots 26 to 29, both inclusive to be used tbr landscaped purposes. Report to Council PD 06-02 Subject: Draft Plan of Subdivision :\pplication SP-2001-05 Zoning By-law Amendment Application .A 14/01 Date: January 7, 2002 Page 5 105 Conveyance of a 3.0 metre block of land ad_intent to Finch >Xvenuc t'or landscaping will provide an opportunity to reduce tile impact of tt~c required noise attenuation fence along Finch :\venue through the introduction of landscaping. It is rccomnlcnded final funds made available t'roHq boulevard trees that cannot be acconlmodatcd on Street '.-\'. bc applied to coniferous plantings on this block, as part of the .~ppticant's street tree plantino plan .~ Staff Recommended Plain }las been prepared that includes tile proposed landscape strip block, Block. 39 on the plan {see :Xttactmnent =z. I. Tile required noise fence is a direct result of tiao applicants proposed rear lot design. The recommended block (3.{} metre-Block 39 of the Staff Recommended Plan} for landscaping is essential to address thc Citx's polio> to discern'age noise attenc~ation IL'acing. Tile fence ',','ill be limited in lon?a and tile landscape will add to thc strcetscapc. Tile conveyance of the landscape block does not constitute conveyance el'parkland as per Section 42(1 ) of the Planning .'Act. This coax cxance of land ix a rcquircmcl~t ii2 order tbr t}~c (_~tx to accept the proposed reverse lot I¥onta,,c and docs not constitute or contribute to tlqc conveyance of parkland as per Section 42~]} of the Planning :Xct. l-urTher, the subdixicter MaaI1 provide a fixed payment satisa~ctorv to the City to provide tbr lc)ag-term naaintcnancc and replacement of the plant material. Thc implementation of tine ltnadscapc strip xxill r-educe tiao negative impact of tiao noise attenuation fknce that i~arequircmcnt ofthcnoise studx. (Six cn thc noise tbncc is a requirement that results fi'om the applicant'q st~bdixision design anti given thc C'itx's policy that discourage noise attenuation Iknces at this location it is reasonable }hr thc subdivider to bear the cost Ibr the landscape strip as this is tho only xkax to "soficn" the impacts of thc noise attenuation Fence and provide a streetscape along Finch ~:Xvenue that is not just a noise Ibnce. This is considered a balanced compromise that allows the subdivider to develop the draI~ plan without the loss of any It)ts. which XXoLdd result il' the subdixision had to be redesim~ed to eliminate the noise tbncc alone Finct2 ..XVCllttc. Tile applicant does not support the creatioH of a landscape block, or thc llnancial fixed payment to secure long term nlaintenuncc. 3.2 Urban Design Considerations The development of the proposed detactned d~x oiling on small lots must be carefully planned and controlled to avoid a monotonous streetscape, minimize the negative aft~cts of garage projections at the tkont of the houses and reduce lot access conflicts. These potential problems can be mitigated through the application of ~ood urban desion. = techniques. The modulation of Ikont yard depths and eliminating garugc projections beyond the main walls of dxvellings can visually improxc a ialOI1OtOIIOLI5 5trectsca[3c. XV}aei'e lot depths alld widths permit, house designs can Dc chosen that clinainate full garage pro.jcctions. Incorporating habitable floor space above garage extensions or tine L~sc of hip roofs on the garage extensions also improve thc strectscapc. Tine t',xinnin~ of drivcxvays provides tbr increased curb space :tbr visitor parking, reduces lot access coniSicts and the amount of driveway asphalt in tkont yards and may facilitate tiao [3]anli~2~ of trees. In considering a streetscape, the design elcn~cnt t}¥at contributes the most to tile appearance of the dxvclling is how the garage is trc'atcd. This inclL~dc~ bolla tiao projection of thc garage and thc size of the garage/garage door. Thc 5~zc of thc gara,ze enrage door' also relates to tine amount of asphalt/drivexvay in thc IS'oat xard. ()n plans of 5ubctivisions tlaat l~qCou3orate small lots (having a lot tkontage of less tlaan l I)naetres) 1¥oi2t viii'd5 zirc compronaiscd xvllei1 thc drixcx~av takes on a high priority duc to its size. In thc subject subdix ision ttac lot have a lot I¥ontaoe= of 9.0 metres. Ifa two(') cur_zara~e~ xxas pcriqnittcd thc result xxould be that almost 2 3 of the fl'oat yard would be drixcx~ax. Fu~7}lci'naorc. xxith a two (2) car garage on a 9.0 metre wide lot there is not enou,,h roon~ lclk to on thc main wall of the house to accommodate both a front door and a t?ont window tlnat both tinct thc street. 1 Report to Council PD 06-02 Subject: Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2001-05 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/01 Date: January 7, 2002 Page 6 Therefore, it is recommended that the width of the garage and garage door be controlled in the architectural design statement. The applicant has advised that a 'stepped bungalow house design' has been developed approximately nine of the deeper lots within the proposed development. Some of the lots will be considered for one and one half garage door openings (12.5'/3.8 metres). Based on the forgoing, this Department recommends that prior to the registration of the plan and/or the issuance of any model home permits, the applicant prepare a report to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development, outlining siting and architectural design objectives for the draft plan of subdivision that includes streetscape/architectural guidelines. These guidelines will include restriction of garage projections, garage width and model types at certain locations. In the architectural design objectives the models that are chosen for the lots that do not have 9.0 metres at the street line will have to have specific controls on the driveway widths to ensure an appropriate space is available lbr an appropriate streetscape that is not all driveway. 3.3 Appropriateness of the Proposed Development The proposed development is considered compatible with the character of existing surrounding development. Typically this Department encourages a mix o£ both lot sizes and housing product type, given the relative small size of the draft plan and the road configuration the proposed plan is appropriate provided subdivision/ architectural design considerations are incorporated such as the landscape strip along Finch Avenue and quality architectural design objectives are adhered to. With the revisions to the draft plan that reduced the lot yield from 43 to 35 lots for detached dwellings, the draft plan has been brought into confom~ity with the density requirements for Urban Residential - Low Densi(v Area. The revision to the draft plan reduced the density from 30.3 units per hectare to 24.6 units per hectare. The recommended design features as outlined in this report will enhance the streetscape and result in an appropriate design for the subdivision. Quality urban design that creates a more livable, and therefore more vibrant comnmnity is an important aspect of the Smart Growth concept. All tbrms of development should be encouraged to achieve a high level of urban design that will provide a benefit to the greater community. In considering this draft plan, this Department considered the impact of the development on the ability of the resulting land at the north-east comer of Finch Avenue and Altona Road to achieve the Neighbourhood Focus as outlined in the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Guidelines of the Pickering Official Plan. The resulting lands are of sufficient size to accommodate the form of development that ~vas envisioned for this location. Therefore, the approval of these applications will not have a negative impact on the ability for the lands at the north-east comer of Finch Avenue and Altona Road to achieve their development potential. Conditions of Approval recommended in Appendix I to this Report include provisions to ensure that the above-mentioned design features are implemented, and respect City standards. 3.4 Zoning Requirements The applicant has requested zoning requirements similar to the zoning that was adopted to implement plan of subdivision 40M-1969 located at the northeast comer of Whites Road and Finch Avenue. The one variation that the applicant has requested is a reduction in the mininmm side yard width. The current City standard for small lot detached dwelling is 1.2 metres on one side and 0.6 metres on the other side. The applicant has requested a minimum side yard of 1.2 metres on one side and 0.0 metres on the other side. This Department does not support a side yard width of 0.0 metres. Report to Council PD 06-02 Sutyect: Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-£t Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14 Date: Jai~uarx- £002 ] Currev~t construction styles of detachect dx~clling arc not buih to a ~.() metre setback to thc main wall off the building duc to tt~e ik~ct ahno~t all houses arc dcsi<ncd and built with perinittcd tm~Fcctions into a minimum side x 'ards such as x~ indox~ 5ills. cantilevered portions of rooI[,, caves, gutters, chimney breasts and X elqt p~pc5. Therefore. a m~nimum side xard xx idth on bo:h sides of thc house is considered I'ea>oilablc and appropriate and the current minimum standard is recommended. It is anticipated that the amending zonin2 bv-lax~ will be brought t'orx~ard to Couiucil after the submission of an acceptable drat't 4t)NI plan. Technical Matters fi`t°ll( The subject draft plan will require thc ma. iorit> of thc perimeter- of thc site to be I~Hccd. :N noise attenuation Ibncc is required along thc cnt~rc no~'thcrn boundary, including rap-a-rounds on thc conqcr lots. Thc Noc~t}acr~2 pori~xaotcr xxill also require a noise thrice along the rear yards that abut Finch Avenue, including rap-a-founds of the corner lots. Tlnc eastern perimeter, cxcludin-~ thc lots that ha\ c noise attenuation I~nces. will require a black vinyl chain link t~nce. Thc western pcr'in~ctor, excludin2 thc iot> that have noise attenuation IUnccs. will require a privacy tbnce a> thc\ abut a pn~pcrt> that will eventually developed Ibr a land usc other that detached dx~elli~qz5. It is recommended that all rcqclii'cd pCl-linctor I'ClqC]n~ bc in,tailed bx thc owner prior to any proposed dxvcllin~ units being occupied i~q this pre)jeer. Prior to thc installation of thc permanent tbncc, a tclnpon~ry constt'uct~ot2 t~ncc x\ ill bc erected and maintained. Conditions of Approval recommended in :XppcndiN [ to this IAcport include provisions to ensure that both temporary and pcri12allcnt l~ncing xx ill be installed aroLlild thc perimeter of the subject lands. Subdivision Agreement A future subdivision agreement bctxx cch thc C'it', a~qd thc ox\ ncr oI'the lands xxill be required to ciIsLII'c that all matters of interest to thc C'it', afc pr'erected. This required agreement, and several other' development implcmc~ntation naat:cr>, arc incorpo~'ated into thc rcconqincndcd conditions of approval Ibr this proposal Ibund in Appendix I to this Rcpor7, Park/and As no park blocks tbrm part o/' thc draft plan. thc City will accept cash-in lieu fi'om the subdivider in order to satist\' Section 42{ 1 ) of tile Planning Act. 4.0 A~2pl'cant s Comments The applicant has advised that thc\ xxould prct'cr not to pro\ldo thc 3.() metre landscape block, adjacent to Finch Ax enue. APPENDICES: APPENDIX 1' APPENDIX II' Recommended Conditions o~' .-\ppr'ox al for SP-£(*~ Recommended Conditions of..XplWOX al I'or A 1 Report to Council PD 06-02 Subject: Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2001-05 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/01 Date: January 7, 2002 Page 8 ATTACHMENTS' 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Properly Location Map Applicant's Original Submitted Plan Applicant's Revised submitted Plan Staff Recommended Plan Information Report No. 20-01 Minutes of the August 9, 2001 Statutory Public Meeting Resident Comment - Laurie Humphries, 2026 Altona Road Agency Comment - Veridian Connections Agency Comment - Canada Post Agency Comment - Bell Canada Agency Comment - Durham District School Board Agency Comment - Durham Catholic School Board Agency Comment - Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Agency Comment - Region of Durham Planning Department Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed by: ~-ooss Pym, MCIP, RPP ~- Principal Planner - Development Review Neil Carr6ll~c~, ~ Director, Plan~r/rrg'& Development Lynda D. Taylor, MCtP, RPP Manager, Current Operations RP/j£ Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer [Recommended,forthe consideration of Pickering City Counci/1/f' /~ .----~ . ,c~., Tfi~s ~' ~n~ Chio~Administ~Ye Of~cer APPENDIX I TO REPORT NUMBER PD 06-02 l ("9 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPRO\-AI~ FOR DI~-~FT PLANS OF SUBDIVISION SP-2001-05 110 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION SP-2001-01 1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1.1 That this recommendation apply to the draft plan prepared by Design Plan Services Inc., revised date of September 19, 2001 (Revised Drawing Number 0119/9), for Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2001-05 submitted by Design Plan Services on behalf of Marshall Homes (Altona) Ltd., on lands being Part of Lots 3, 4 and 5 and all of lot 6 Registered Plan 506. City of Pickering, to permit the development of 35 lots, all tbr detached dwellings as shown on the Staff Recommended Plan included in the Planning Report Nmnber PD 01-02, bearing the City's recommendation stamp. 2.0 PRIOR TO THE REGISTRATION OF THE PLAN: 2.1.1 That the owners submit a Draft 40M-Plan to be approved by the City Planning & Development Department that includes the modifications to the plan as outlined the Planning Report Number PD 06-02. 2.1.2 That the implementing by-law for Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/01 become final and binding. 2.3 That the owner enter into a subdivision agreement with and to the satisPaction of the City of Picketing to ensure the fulfillment of the City's requirements, financial and otherwise, which shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the tbllowing: 2.3.1 Storm Drainate (a) satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development Department respecting a stormwater drainage and management system to service all thc lands in tiao subdivision, and any provisions regarding easements; (b) satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development Department contributions for down stream stormwater management xvorks. 2.3.2 Grading Control and Soils (a) satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development Department respecting submission and approval of a grading and control plan; (b) satisfaction of the Director, Planning and Development Department respecting the submission and approval of a geotechnical soils analysis. 2.3.3 Road Allowances (a) satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development Department respecting construction of internal roads with curbs, storm sewers, sidewalks and boulevard designs to maximize front yard space without impeding services or the sate operation of the streets: and, (b) That all streets be named to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering. 2.3.4 Sidewalks (a) That the owner construct a sidewalk along the south and west side of the new public street to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development Department. 2.3.5 Construction / Installation of City Works & Services (a) satisfaction of the City respecting arrangements for the provision of all services required by the City; _: Itl satisfaction of the appropriate authorities respt?cting arrangements ibr the provision of underground wiring, stret?t lighting, cable television, natural gas and other similar services: that the cost of any relocation, extension, alteration 02' extraordinary maintenance of existing services necessitated by this dcx elopment si:all be tht? responsibility of the subdivider. Dedications Transfers Conveyances (a) tile dedication of all road allowances with tht? proper comer roundings and sight triangles to the City: (b) that the owner convey to the City. at no costs: (i) (ii) (iii) Block 39, on thc Staff Recommended Plan being a three (3) men't? xxide landscape block at the rear of lots 20 to 29. both inclusive: any easements as required: and, any reserves as rt?quired by tho City. (c) that tile subdivider convey any easement to any utilitx to facilitate tht? installation of their services in a location{s) to t12o satisfaction of the C'itx and tile utility. 2.3.7 Construction Management Plan (a) that the owners make satisl'actorv an'angcments v, ith the City respecting a construction management plan, sL:ch Plan to contain, alaloi1g other things: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) details of' t?rosion and sedimentation controls during all phases of construction and provide n:aintenance requirt?ments to maintain tht?se controls: addressing tile parking of vehiclt?s and tht? storage of construction and building materials during servicing and t:ouse construction, il. nd t?nsurmg that such locations xvitl not impede the fioxx of traffic or emergenc.v vehicles on either existing streets or the proposed public street: ensurance that the City's Noise Bv-laxv will be adhered to and that all contractors, trades and suppliers are advised of this By-law; the provision of mud and dust control on all roads within and adjacent to the site. type and timing of construction I'c::ci:lg location of construction trailers 2.3.8 Development Chargg5 (a) satisfaction of the City financially with respect to tht? Development Charges Act. 2.3.9 Co-ordinated Development (a) satisfaction of the City with respect co-ordination of services and roads development that inav bt? required. to arrangements necessary to provide Ibr with adjacent lands and any phasin~g of 2.3.10 Fencing (a) satisfaction of the City with respect to tile provision of temporary fencing around the entire perimeter of tile subject lands during construction, prior to the commencement of any works; (d) satisfaction of tile City with respect to tine provision of a 1.2 metre high black vinyl chain link fence along the eastern perimeter of the subject propt?rt.,, xxere there is not a 1!2 -3- need for a noise attenuation fence, to be installed prior to the first occupancy of any dxvelling units contained in this Plan; (e) satisfaction of the City with respect to the provision of noise attenuation fencing as per a noise report approved by the City of Pickering. 2.3. I I Street Tree Planting (a) the submission of a street tree planting plan to the satisfaction of the City, such plan to include plantings in the landscape Block adjacent to Finch Avenue. 2.3.12 Design Plannint the satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development Department respecting a report outlining siting and architectural design objectives for the development, and the submission of site plans and architectural drawings identifying how each unit meets the objectives of the report, prior to the issuance of any building permit Ibr the construction of a residential unit on the lands; (b) the report outlining siting and architectural design objectives fbr the development must address building envelopes, house designs, siting, and streetscapes as well as garage designs, locations, massing, width, and projection from the main dwelling; tiao report outlining siting and architectural design objectives tbr the development must place special emphasis on the model to be built on lots that have a front lot tine at street line, of less than 9.0 metres, on lots proposed lbr a ~stepped' bungalow foundation, and a minimum of four lots to provide dwelling with a maximum one and a half garage door face. the report outlining siting and architectural design objectives for the development must address driveway placement and curb cut location on the proposed public road to ensure adequate room is maintained to accommodate street furniture and boulevard landscaping; (g) that the owner satisfy the City respecting the provision of appropriate aesthetic details and design of all boundary fencing and noise attenuation fencing adjacent to Finch Avenue. 2.3.13 Noise Attenuation (a) that the owners satisfy the requirements of the Ministry of the Environment regarding the approval of a noise study recommending noise control features satisfactory to the Region of Durham, and the City of Pickering. 2.3.14 Engineering Drawings (a) that the owner satisfy the City respecting the submission of appropriate engineering drawings that detail, among other things, City services, roads, storm sewers, sidewalks, lot grading, streetlights, fencing and tree planting, and financially-secure such works. (b) that the engineering plans be Co-ordinated with the architectural design objectives and further the engineering plans shall co-ordinate the driveway width, street hardware and street trees in order to ensure that conflicts do not exist, asphalt is minimized and street trees are accommodated. 2.3.15 Other Approval A~encies (a) that the subdivider satisfy all the requirements of the Region of Durham: (b) that the subdivider satisfy all the requirements of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; and, that any approvals which aro roquir'cd iS-onq d~c Rogion o~' Durhann or ~he Toronto and Region Conservation Autl~oritx Ibi' t}~c dex elopn~cnt of this plan be obtained by the subdivider, and upon request x~t-~tten coni]nllation bc pr-ovidcd to thc City of Picketing as verification of tt~esc appi'c)x als. .3.10 Parkland Dedication that tine subdivider proxidc to thc (_'ltv ca,~h-in-licu of parkland dedications, to the satisfaction of thc Director, Planninz ,k Dexelopn2cnt. ~t~ order to satist\' Section 4£il ) of thc Planning Act. 114 APPENDIX II TO REPORT NUMBER PD 06-02 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 14/01 That the implementing zoning by-law: (a) permit the establishment of detached dwellings in accordance with the following provisions: (i) minimum (ii) minimum (iii) minimum (iv) minimum (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) (x) (xi) (xii) lot area of 250 square metres; lot frontage of 9.0 metres; front yard depth of 4.5 metres; rear yard depth of 7.5 metres; minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres on one side and 0.6 metres o12 the other side; minimum flankage side yard width of 2.7 metres; maximum building height of 12.0 metres; minimum ~oss floor area of 100 square metres; maximum of one d~velling unit per lot; maximum lot coverage of 48 percent; minimum one private garage per lot, any 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; wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit, except where a covered and unenclosed porch or verandah extends a minimum of 1.8 metres from the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit, no part of no part of any private garage shall extend more that 3.0 metres beyond the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit; or where a covered and unenclosed porch or verandah extends a minimum of 2.0 metres from the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit and where second story habitable floor space located above the garage is set back no more than 2.5 metres beyond the vehicular entrance of an attached private garage, no part of any attached private garage shall extend more than 6.0 metres beyond the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit. ATTACHMENT ~ / TO REPORT # PD~ c' ~ 1!5 T~UNK FINCH ~ AVENUE City of Pickering SUBJEC; Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LOT 6 AND PART OF LOTS 3, 4 AND 5, PLAN 506 OWNER M. PYPER AND M. MITCHELL DATE JUL 13, 2001 DRAWN BY RC APPLICATION No. A 14/01 i SCALE 1:7500 CHECKED BY RP FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY PN-14 PA- ATTACHMENT # ~ TO REPORT ~ PD D ~ - ~, ~ INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANT'S SUBMITTED PLAN M. PYPER; M. MITCHELL A 14/01 n 0 7 0 L \ 31.6 26 28 ~ 29 FINCH AVENUE 36 32.0 ~7 ~2. o38 39 4O 32,0 41 3g.5 11 32.0 ' 32.0 32.0 ~ 73'51'00"E ~.4~0 BLOCK 46 ROAD WIDENING 0.01 ha I-H/$ /¢¢~1tt,4~, P/~ODIJCED ,~'y ~E O/~ OF P/C~ING INFOR~ON ~ SUPPORt S~CE~ dULY I~ 2001. A'f-TAuHh rE~',, T ¢¢ TO PC, ~? c- - = 3_ 1 1 '? ,APPLICANTS REVISED DRAFT PLAN Draft Plan of Subdivision S-P-2000-05 0 z O ._J k ~Q 27 21 23 ° g,O 3C 31 32 go % s ~ o ~ ca_ 320 26 27 2~ BLOCK 36-- -- FfNCH AVENUE 32.1 32,1 32.2 BLOCK 38 ROAD ~OENING -BLOCK 37 0.3m RE~R~ 2002. REPOPT # PD /'~ c;~ ' C ~ (..,, STAFF RECOMMENDED PLAN Draft Plan of Subdivision S-P-2001 -O5 0 rY <~ z 0 J 'x %. %_ 21 22 32.~ ~ 23 b 24 39 BLOCK O.3m RESERVE N73'51'OO"E 92.960 FINCH AVENUE ~ ST~TEET A 32.0 55 ~ 34 ~ 52.0 35 ~ 10 9 32.1 52.2 N73"5¢OO'E 29.450 BLOCK 38 ROAD WIDENING 0.01 ha - BLOCK 37 0.Sm RESERVE ,ATTACHUP? ~ ~' TO REPORT ,' PICKERING INFORMATION REPORT NO. 20-01 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 2001 IN ACCORDANCE WITIt THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2001-05 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/01 Marshall Homes (Altona) Ltd. oil behalf of M. J. Mitchell and M. L. Pyper Lot 6 and Part of Lots 3, 4, and 5, Plan 506 314 - 350 Finch Avenue (North side of Finch Avenue, east of Altona Road) City of Pickering 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.1 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION the subject lands are located on the north side of'Finch Avenue, east of Altona Road; a property location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1); the subject property is supporting a detached dwelling; the majority of the property is cmxently vegetated; Sun-ounding land uses arc: north - York-Durban~ sewer con-idor and CPR rail line; south - on the opposite side of Finch Avenue are residential properties and a commercial property at the south-east comer of Finch Avenue and Altona Road; east vacant lands and wooded areas; west existing residential property and vacant land. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL Marshall Homes (Altona) Ltd., on behal£ of the owners, have submitted an application for approval of a drail plan of subdivision and an application to amend the zoning by-law in order to implement the proposed draft plan; the applicant's proposed subdivision plan is provided for reference (see Attachment #2); the draft plan proposes tile creation of one new municipal street, extending north from Finch Avenue and curving westward before terminating in a cul-de-sac design; all of the proposed lots ,,',,ill front directly onto the proposed new street; the proposed lot mix includes 43 lots for single detached dwellings having a minimum lot frontage of 7.5 metres; tile draft plan design does not propose any lols that have direct frontage on Finch Avenue, but rather reverse lots that will back onto Finch Avenue or lots that tim3: onto Finch Avenue; all lands within the subject property arc proposed to be developed as part of the draft plan of subdivision, and no part of the subject lands are to be developed with abutting lands. OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING Durham Regional Official Plan - the Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as Living Area, where development is intended to be predominantly for housing purposes; Information Report No. 20-01 Page 2 3.2 - the draft plan appears to be in close proximity to lands designated as Open Space Linkages, which recognizes an east-west ecological linkage known as the Rouge-Duffin Corridor; - Finch Avenue where it abuts the draft plan is designated as a Type B Arterial Road; the proposal appears to conform to the designations; Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as Urban Residential Area - Low Density Area; permissible uses within this designation include residential uses, including detached dwellings units; the Plan establishes a density range for residential development within this designation of up to' and including 30 units per net hectare; the proposed development would provide a net site density of approximately 30.28 units per hectare (based on 43 lots being developed on approximately 1.42 hectares of land); the applicant has advised that they will be making modification to the draft plan to ensure the density requirements of the Official Plan will be achieved; - the subject lands abut lands to the north and east designated as Open Space System - Natural Areas; the exact boundaries of the Open Space System- Natural Areas will be determined with relevant agencies and considering the results of a required environmental report; - through the settlement of an appeal to the Pickering Official Plan, it has been determined that the boundary of the Open Space System - Natural Areas desigmation is coincident xvith the north and east property limits; any additional land required for buffers or edge management will be determined through the review of the required environmental report; - permissible uses within the Open Space System- Natural Areas designation include conservation, environmental protection, restoration and passive recreation; - Schedule 17I of the Picketing Official Plan- "Transportation Systems" designates Finch Avenue where it abuts the draft plan as a Type B Arterial Road; - Type B Arterial Roads carry moderate volumes of traffic at moderate speeds, with some access restrictions; they generally have a right-of-way width of between 30 - 60 metres; - the proposed new public street serving the proposed development would function as a Local Road; - Schedule 111 of the Picketing Official Plan - Resource Management designates lands in close proximity to the subject lands as Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor and Shorelines and Stream Corridors; Section 10.17 of the Official Plan clarifies that the boundary of the Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor coincides with boundary of the Open Space System - Natural Areas designation; this section of the Plan also requires an environmental report to address setback, buffers, edge management, and stormwater; the exact boundaries of the Shorelines and Stream Corridors will be determined in consultation with the relevant agencies, and in consideration of an environmental report that is required in accordance with Official Plan policies; the proposal is within the Rouge Park Neighbourbood and a Detailed Review Area, for which Council has adopted the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines; the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines plan identifies a potential access location on the subject lands in the approximate location of the proposed street that intersects with Finch Avenue; - the guidelines identifies a Neighbourhood Focus at the comer of Finch Avenue and Altona Road that extends onto the subject lands; the subject applications will be assessed against the policies and provisions of the Picketing Official Plan during the further processing of the applications; Information Report No. 20-01 --~__TO Parc 3 1 o 1 3.3 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 5.0 Zoning_B_y-law 3036, as amended the subject lands are currently zoned "A" - Rural Agriculture Zone, by Zoning By-law 3036, as amended; the existing zoning permits a range of agricultural uses, one detached dwelling, some recreational and community institutional uses, and selected agricuhural commercial uses; an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to allow tile development of' the proposed draft plan of subdivision. RESULTS OF CIRCULATION Resident Comments no resident comments have been received to-date; A_gencv Co~nments - no comments from anyofthe circulated agencies have been received to date; Staff Comments in reviewing the application to-date, tlne tbllowing matters have been identified by staff for further rcview and consideration: · ensuring that the proposed development is in compliance with the density requirements of the Official Plan; · ensuring that the proposed clevclopinent is compatible with, and sensitive to, surrounding lands; · ensuring that the proposed street, lotting pattern and dwelling designs maintain a high qualitY residential streetscape; · reviewing the appropriateness of the reverse lot frontage proposed along Finch Avenue; · reviewing required supporting technical submissions and reports to ensure that adequate information is provided, that teclmical requirements are met and that the proposed subdivision design does not impact on the ability of abutting properties to develop in an appropriate fashion; and, · reviewing the draft plan to ensure sufficient lands remain at the northeast comer of Finch Avenue and Altona Road in order to achieve the Neighbourhood Focus as prescribed in the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines. further issues may be identified following receipt and review of comments from the circulated departments, agencies and the public. PROCEDURAL INFOILMATION written cormnents regarding this proposal should be directed to tile Planning & Development Department; oral comments may be made at thc Public lntbrnmtion .Meeting; all comments received ,,',,ill bc noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by tile Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; if you wish to be notified of Council's decision re~arding either thc proposed plan of subdivision or zoning by-law amendment appli~'ation, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk; if you wish to reserve the option to appeal Cotmcil's decision of the proposed zoning by-law amendment application, or the Region of Durham's decision on the draft plan of subdivision, you must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law or before the Region of Durham issues its notice c~f decision for this proposal. Information Report No. 20-01 ATTACHMENT # ~ ,TO R£POR'r ,~ PD (3 0 - O ~,2 Page 4 6.0 OTHER INFORMATION 6.1 A_.p_pendices Appendix I - list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing this report; 6.2 Information Received full scale copies of the Applicant's submitted plan are available for viewing at the offices of the City of Picketing Planning & Development Department; the City of Picketing has not received any technical information/reports on the proposed subdivision. certain technical reports are required to be submitted and will be reviewed and reported on, as necessary; 6.3 Companv P tin cip__3_!! the current property owners, M. J. Mitchell and M. L. Pyper, have entered into an agreement of purchase and sale with Marshall Homes (Altona) Ltd. whose principal is Craig Marshall. Ross Pym, MCIP, Principal Planner - Development Review Lynda Taylor, MCIP, RPP Manager, Current Operations /jf/pr Copy: Director, Planning & Development Department 123 APPENDIX I TO 1NFORN1ATION REPORT NO. 20-01 COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS (1) none to date COMMENTING AGENCIES ( 1 ) none to date COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS (1) Planning & Development Department 124 /~'rq'fiCH~gkrr ,~_ (o REP0~'~ ~ vD_Od? Excerpts from Statutory Public Information Meeting Minutes of Thursday, August 9, 2001 STATUTORY PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING MINUTES The Manager, Policy Division, provided an overview of the requirements of the Planning Act and the Ontario Municipal Board respecting this meeting and matters under consideration there at. (IV) DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION APPLICATION S-P-2001-05 ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 14/01 MARSHALL HOMES (ALTONA) LTD. ON BEHALF OF M. J. MITCHELL AND M. L. PYPER LOT 6 AND PART LOT 3, 4, AND 5, PLAN 506 314-350 FINCH AVENUE (NORTH SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE, EAST OF ALTONA ROAD) o R. P3qn, Principal Planner, provided an explanation of the application, as outlined in Information Report #20-01. lan McCormick, representing the applicant, stated that he and Craig Marshall were available to discuss this application. Mary Stienland, 331 Finch Ave., stated that she and her family have lived on Finch Ave. for several years and she does not support this application. Ms. Stienland thanked Ms. Barber for her hard work, kmowledge and presentation, and confirmed that Ontario Realty Corporation owns the small strip of land. Jackie Sharp, 323 Finch Ave., questioned the City's guidelines on pollution, noise, sewage, and services. Ms. Sharp expressed that she wants to work closely with the Developer to ensure fencing and privacy will be afforded to the residents and she would appreciate significant lead-time in order to prepare for future meetings. Ms. Sharp indicated that she would like to see the density brought down, as it is not fitting to the area. She questioned what the three studies are which R. Pym referenced in his introduction. Phillip Stoddard, 2005 Altona Road, expressed that he' would like to have his concerns regarding wells addressed before the development is started as he does not have the option to hook up to Municipal water services. Mr. Stoddard questioned what measures would be taken to prohibit students from cutting through properties to attend the new school. His house was built in 1947 and Mr. Stoddard questioned what precautions could be taken to prevent damage to his (partial block) foundation. Eleanor Nash, 2645 Altona Road, stated that the area north of Rossland Road does not seem to have any allowance for the wildlife corridor. 7, 10. TO 195 in response to J. Sharp's enquiry, R. Pyro advised that tile three studies are: · Noise Impact Feasibility Study · Phase I Enviromnental Site Assessment · Geotechnical Investigation Report in response to E. Nasb's statement, C. Rose advised that tlae regionally approved Official Plan which required 10 m tbr the wildlife corridor was appealed bv the Province and as such, there is no specific limit, but the developer must submit an environmental report. This report remains outstanding at this time. lan McCormick, representing the applicant, stated that tile Envirorm~ental Report is coming shortly and will address tho wildli£e corridor issue. Hc also stated that the detail designs would address fencing concerns. In response to J. Sharp's request, Mr. McCon'nick agreed to approach the residents for input. Councillor Brelmer requested that further discussions regarding this item take place between Staff. the applicant, and area residents immediately following this meeting. lo6 ATTACHMENT REPORT # PD Mr. Neil Carroll Director of Planning and Development Pickering City, Hall Pickering, ON Laurie Humphries 2026 Altona Road Picketing, ON L1V 2P9 RECEIVED CITY OF PICKEF-;ING DEVELOPMENT DEPAF~TMENT August 8, 2001 Re: Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2001-05 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 14/01 Marshall Homes (Altona) Ltd. On behalf of M.J. Mitchell and M.L. Pyper Lot 6 and Part of lots 3,4 and 5, Plan 506 314 - 350 Finch Avenue (North side of Finch Avenue, east of Altona Road) City of Picketing Dear Sir; I am writing as a long time member of this community. My family has resided at fl~e above address for nearly twenty years. Although we have contributed to the Picketing conmmu%- by living, shopping, working and recreating here, I have found Par too frequently that our concerns have not been adequately addressed as we reside in that nebulous zone held by the Ontario Realty Corporation. In Pact, I would say that the saga regarding my continuing vociferous complaint regarding development within my community goes as far back as when this particular area was redefined as Urban Residential, from its previous designation as agricqllmral. It continues to rankle me that none of the tenants in the area were consulted during this process and only landowners. A community, as well as a democracy, ks made of more than landownersl That little piece of history aside, I feel compelled to write to express my objections to the above stated Application for the following reasons. Although I'm not so naive as to think that there will be no development in this area, given 'all the indicators to the south of me and the intentions stated in the neigbboud~ood study, it is my contention that the development proposed does not, in any way, lend itself to the vision of a village concept. As can be seen just east of Rosebank, on the north side of Finch, this sort of configuration actually creates a small enclave of houses with a wall of fence simated along Finch Avenne. In my opinion, based on the present information provided, the likelihood (if a very similar setup for this proposal ks very great indeedl Based on the knowledge gained from my attendance at numerous public meetings regarding the Rouge Park neighbourhood s md3-, it wa~ determined that development in the neighbourhood would proceed within the context of a village concept. With the present design in mind, I cannot fail to envision the intended "Neighboufllood Focus" corners falling sway to a fimctional strip mall and the presently vacant Robin Hood Inn becoming an ',ill night gas bar. Perhaps this sounds alarmist, however, without the entire neigbbourhood being designed within the village concept guidelines, it would stand to reason that there would be little compunction, let alone desire, to maintain this vision on the proposed comer lots. I respectfully request that we bah the erosion of the splendid vision for a village. I add my support to the staff comments with respect to ATTACH!,:Er.'? = '-7 .TO REPORT ~' p~,.____do (7 z_ 12'7 "ensuring that the proposed street, lotting pattern and dwelling designs maintam a high qualiu' visual streetscape." Ill "reviewing the appropriateness of the reverse lot froutage proposed akmg Finch Avenue" flus desaigu is not congruent with the villa~ concept. Fherefor, I strong,dy encourage the rethinking of this desigu as the streetscape should be part of and visible to }:inch Avenue. With respect to die "snbject lands [which] abut lands to tile north and east designated as Open Space System - Natural Areas... pem~issible uses within.., include conservation, environmental protection, restoration and passive recreation" I would assert that any development on these hits would likely have a negative in, pact on thc conservation, environmental protection or restoration of the abutting lands which includes the Rouge Duffms \Vildlife corridor Certainly an increase in human habitation and interference on dlese and adjaceut lands with tile potential use of pest~cidcs, dumping, littering, disturbing the soils for lmilding and sheer human presence will it%wade the present conditions, l strongly urge that the staff and City Council take thesc considerations into account when deciding upon this matter. Questions such as: \\hat measures will be taken to ensure d~at the environmentally sensitive Rouge- Duffins wildlife c()rridor remain u,fllarmed? \Vhat degree of setbacks, buffers and edge management will be required? Is it conceivable to restrict pesticide use in a future subdivision so as to not impact neb~atively on the surrounding halmat, keeping in mind that the eco-system provides not only passage but fi)od and shelter for wildlife. t 'also urge that the review of die Shorelines and Strean~ Corridors be reviewed with duc diligence and rigour as it has been detem~med that this area has linkages to ()ak Ridges Moraine to the northwest and the Ganaraska consen'ation region to the northeast. I can o~fly hope that we will respect the natural water purifying features of these systems and not set in place any measures that would potentially seriously degrade such. I addition to the above concerns I wish to draw auention to the densit7 guidelines. It is my hope that Council would strictly adhere to the guidelines determined that of 31~ units / hectare and not 'allow for the 30.28 units/hectare. The only justification 1 can see ~br expanding upon the reconm~ended 30 units is in the favour of the developers. You Mlow thc old saying "give "em an inch.,, ~ Of course, with new housing there will be increased traffic. An increase in traffic will degrade the environmental landscape which will indeed affect the abutting lands. Yhat aside, let tls consider traffic patterns and flow in this area. Already there will lie 52 new units on the south west comer of Finch and ¢kltona compound that with an additional 43 umts on the north east comer which will most assuredly increase the volume of traffic, potentially upwards to 200 cars if you co~Lsider the fact that many homes have at least to cars! Although we now have lights at this intersection 1 have concerns about the mm off required to get to either of these new locations especially due to the fact that both lie very close to the main intersection. Compound this traffic congestion with the proposal for a subdivision at Rosebank and Finch Oust a short block away)and the ensuing increase in traffic once the 407 becomes fully operational and franMy, 1 tmlv begin to wonder how it is fliat a village concept will be maintained. As an example (if a traffic nikdlm~are, wimess tile desigu at the end of Altona at Kingston road. It is a snarled mess, especi',dly during, but not linmed to, rash hour, due to a very similar road configuration. Finally, I would like to respond to a comment which Ross Pvm made "\Ve] the Planning Dept.] are in the business of building neigl~bourhoods and communities." Let's face it, it doesn't take a genins to understand that developers are in the business of building and selling houses. Therefi)r it is our responsibiliD, to see fllat the vision which was created is maintained. It doesn't seem 'all that krug ago that the front lawns of thLs neighbourhood were dotted with placards beggnng motorists to slow down and respect the fact that it is a neighbourhood and not a main thoroug)ffare. Thc design 1 ? 8 _TO RE'POR'T ¢, PD__ C'~ 4.~ - ~ which has been proposed will effectively cut off these very san~e neigbbours and over time the community will be decimated in the interest of the few. Though i can't take enormous issue with the desixes of landowners to mm their homes and properties into a commodity I remain astonished by the fact. Personally, I wish to preserve the beauty of this community, the reason why I moved here to begin with. Unfortunately, it becomes sorely tempting to lose hope and actually submit to applauding regretfully rite individuals xvho leave in disgust for greener pastures. \Vouldn't it be nice, if just once, we could kept the greener pastures, woodlots, ponds and xvildlife right here?! I ask the landowners who wish to sell, what attracted them to this place to begin with? Was it purely a cold blooded real estate speculation or did they make this community their home? I have no right to question financial motivations and yet I wonder are their needs so great? I plead to the decision makers to think well and thoroughly and to decide wisely. Proceed with extreme caution so that the original vision will be maintained and green spaces xvill prevail. One of the most frequent comments of visitors to the City of Toronto is in awe of all the green space. I hope that in our planned communities that we here in Picketing will be able to boast about ours! Please bear in mind when making your decisions the meaning of village. Village n. 1 country, settlement larger than a hamlet and smaller dian a town 2 self-contained village-like commnnity within a city etc. (Greenwich village). O~Jbrd Dictionary of Current Englis& ! 998 With this definition in mind, one must either keep the notion of countn, hence the prevailing landscape to remain conducive to wildlife. Failing that vision and adopting the concept of a village within a city, the focus shifts to self containment hence the building of stronger commtmity bonds. The proposed applications falls greatly short of either of these ideas and places us squarely within the confines of, well, a subdivision. We have already slipped once down that sltPpery slope by not paying more careful attention to the Bhopal plan (south west comer). Those developers benefited by the furore over Map Realty's proposal and therefor no one dosely scrutinized this application. It most assuredly does not appear to be designed with a village in mind, however, to their credit it does not appear that there will be a wall of fencing along Finch Avenue. The placement of housing lots provides something of a streetscape visible from Finch Avenue. Let us not continue our slide in deciding the future of this cherished community. In conclusion, let me state that, although I concede to the fact that there will inevitably be development in this neighbourhood especially given the Rouge Park Neighbourhood plan, I ask to not support the current application based on.what I consider serious design flaws and I truly llope that the council will have enough fortitude to reject this plan and send the developers back to fl~e drawing board. Please keep me apprised of future meetings and decision regarding this matter. I reserve the option to appeal Council's decision regarding the above stated zoning by-law application. Sincerely. ~ ~ Laurie Humpbries c.c. Ross Pym VERIDIAN CONNECTIONS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW MUNICIPALITY: Pickenng 1, Ei=ctric Sro,sec is available on the road allowance(s) touching th_is pmperts', Ser~'icing'4sll be flora the south side of Finch Avenue, An extension of the Corporamon's plar.~ is reqU-Lted on the road all~.v,anc¢ m order to service tbzs proicc~ O'amel:'s cost- Amount to be dct:rrmned, Ail such cxtcusions are nor_maiN' ua~dcrgrotmd, Indiv/dual metering for each unit is reqmrcd The following standard fi.xed fee costs ~.12 a?ply ,(~11 figures a.tc approXZmate): 10- 12- Service Cormecuon Fee $130,00 per mt lt~e Applicant must make direct ap?he:moa to mc Co.~o.'~on to obtain specific approval of the dectncal service arrangements and related work for this p:oject The a?pitcan* ~s cau~o~cd that tenders, contracts, ot xt~k initiated prior to obtaLeing specgSc ,npprovai ~ be s=bj=ct :o chang: A Servicing Agreement re=st be signed 'xath the Corpora=on m ordc-r to ob~x set'dome for this site, All work f~rom the publ/c road allowance to thc scrv%e enLta~ce and ti~e metering arrangements must comply with the Corporation's rcqu.irements and spectficat/ons Prior to enetg;tZing any new service, the Apphcan: sbmi5 apply to the Corporatxon's Customer Care Department to open an ex, orgy, account. Prior to obe. uning a building permit, the Ap?beane shall, by agreement, confirm acceptance of thc terms md condiuons of providing electrical service. Where crones or material handling cqmpment or -.verkers must work m proxm~3~ to e.,asmlg o~-=rkead ,;Xrcs, with thc capabili[5' of contact or coming ,~2thm thc krafts of ~pproach, the devciop=r/bm2der shall pay all costs for the temporary relocafon, bunal, or protectnon of thc -~-~res, or o~cr :tc=cn deemed necesszry by Venetian to promde for worker safeu' a~ad the security of the elecmcal system. Landscaping, specifically trees and shrubs, should be located a',~my from the Corporation's t-ransformers to =void intetferencc with equipment access. Will aot attend scheduled C~ts' of picketing DART .Meetxr. g for this deveeopmcnt 130 ATTACHMEh~T ¢_.¢ TO REPORT/~ PD_ C5 6, - 0 D- Page 2 VERIDIAN CONNECTIONS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATiON REVIEW 13. Vefidian Connec~ons has no objection to thc proposed development. Please forward a copy of first subrnissioa civil desigr~ so that a preliminary design and estimate can be completed. Technical Rep~csentat/ve - Dave Bell Tclcphone 427-9870 iExt. 3233 P?/df F:\Word Documr~V~:~idi~l~Engineenng & C~hn,efiC,h\bevnJopmeh~ App[iu~mm R~vim~'~Picke~ng\2/~l \M~u'~h~ll l-]ome~ (.A/t~,) r.~L - ).mt 32, Concision :Rev. Date: November 1, 1999 CN 'J FIT'~N ~'TN (~ND 'NIl VLJ.I [I!IT,-'1TM'-IA IT ! ~r·, Tn lit'M! f~t~-'J eT hNll 121 DELIVERY PLANNING 1860 MIDLAND AVE 2ND FL. SCARBOROUGHON M1P SA1 (416) 285-5385 (T) (416) 285-7624 (F) September 5, 2001 Mr. N. Carroll Director of Planning City of Picketing 1 The Esplanade Pickering On L1V 6K7 Dear Mr. Carroll, RE: Application for Approval of a Plan of Subdivision Durham Region File No: S-P-2001-05 Marshall Homes (Altona) Limited Lot: 32 Concession: 2 Ref. No.: 66112 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above noted application. As a condition of draft approval, Canada Post requires that the ownerdeveloper comply with the following conditions: - The owner/developer agrees to include on all offers or' purchase and sale, a statement which advises the prospective purchaser that mail deliveu' will be from a designated Community Mailbox. - Tile owner.'developer will be responsible tbr nofit'ving the purchaser of the exact Community Mailbox locations prior to the closing of any home sale. - The owner/developer will consult with Canada Post Corporation to determine suitable locations tbr tile placement of Community Mailbox and to indicate these locations on the appropriate servicing plans. -Thc owner, developer will provide the folloxving for each Community Mailbox site and include these requirements on the appropriate ser~,.cing plans: - An appropriately sized sidewalk section (concrete pad) as per municipal standards, to place the Community Mailboxes on. - Any required walkway across the boulevard, as per municipal standards. !32 ATTAOHi'C, EI'~T #_? _TO REPORT,¢ PD C~ L..-o~ DELIVERY PLANNING 1860 MIDLAND AVE 2ND FL. SCARBOROUGH ON M1P 5Al (416) 285-5385 (T) (416) 285-7624 (F) -2- -Any required curb depressions for wheelchair access. The owner/developer further agrees to determine and provide a suitable temporary Community Mailbox location(s), which may be utilized by Canada Post until the curbs, sidewalks and final grading have been completed at the permanent Community Mailbox locations. This will enable Canada Post to provide mail delivery to new residence as soon as the homes are occupied. I trust that this information is sufficient, however, should you require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me the above number or mailing address. Sincerely, Debbie Greenwood Delivery Planner Cc: Richard Szarek, Durham Region a:utildraw, sam Right of Way Fi 5 - 100 Borough Drive Scarborough, Ontario M1P 4W2 Tel: 416 296-6291 Fax: 416 296-0520 August 3, 2001 City of Pickering Planning Department Municipal Building 1 The Esplanade Pickering, Omtar~o L1V 6K7 GtT¥ OF P!OKERING ,AUG i U ATTENTION: Mr. N. Carroll RE: DP~AFT PLAN OF Subdivision File No: S-P-2001-05 Lot 32, conc 2-Finch Ave and Altona Marshall Homes (Altona) Limited Town of Pickering Thank you for your letter of July 12, 2001 concerning 5he above proposed Subdivision. Would you please ensure that the following paragraphs are/ have been included as conditions of Draft Plan Approval: 1 - Bell Canada shall confirm that satisfactory arrangements, financial and otherwise, have been made with Bell Canada for any Bell Canada facilities serving this draft plan of subdivision which are required by the Municipality to be installed underground; a copy of such confi_~-mation shall be forwarded to the Municipality. 2 - The Owner shall be requested ~o enter into an agreement (Letter of understanding) with Bell Canada complying with any underground servicing conditions imposed by the municipality and if no such conditions are imposed, the owner shall advise the municipality of the arrangement made for such se~Jicing. If there are any conflicts with existing Bell Canada facilities or easements, the Owner/Developer shall be responsible for re- arrangements or relocation. If you have any questions, please contacn: Sue Spataro 416 296-6599 Yo~s truly, Manager - Right of Way ATTACHU, Ek~T # / / Tn THE DURHAM t- iSTRiCT ,.: CHOOL BOARD kacilities Services 4r~o Taunton Road East Whitby, Ontario l 1R2K6 -ie: (905) 666-5500 1-800-265-3968 !:ax: (905) 666-6439 Auto,si 13. 2001 '['l~e Corporalion of thc Cily of Picl,:ering Planning Dopar~menl Picketing Civic Complex ()ne The Esplanade Picl<ering. Ontario 1,1V 6K7 Atiention: Mr. Ross l'ym Dear Mr. Pyro. RE: I)raft Plan of Subdivision Application S-P-2001-05 Zoning By-law Amendment Application (A 14/01 Marshall ltomes (Alt:ma) lad. (on behalf of M.J. Mitchell and M.I, Pypcr} l.ot 6 and Part Lot 3,4, and $, Plan 314-3S0 Finch Ave. (north side of Finch Ave., cas! of AIlona Rd.} City of Pickcring , tat] has reviewed the information on ll~e above holed application and has the following comlllClqls... Approximalely 22 elementary pupils could be generalcd by above noted application. It is intended that an3; pupils generated by the above noted plan of subdivision, be accommodated within an existing school facility. Under the mandate of the Durham l)is~rict School Board, staff has no objections. Yours truly. Christine Nancekivell. Planner CN:em I:',PI~I)PI ,\N,I),\ I,,V~PI N(i'Sl I1~,,5,['21~01-( '% ATTACHMENT REPORT F PD THE DURHAM CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD Catholic EJNcatior,: L~rtzing & Living m F~2zziz September 11, 2001 Richard Szarek Current Operations Branch Planning Department The Regional Municipality of Durham 1615 Dundas St. E., Box 623 4~h Floor Lang Tower, West Building Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 Dear Mr. Szarek: RE: APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAN OF SUBDMSiON S-P-2001-05 MARSHALL HOMES (ALTONA) LIMITED LOT 32, CONCESSION 2 CITY OF PICKERING REF. NO.: 66106 DE,'EL ,:" !' , ' ,~TMENT At the Regular Board Meeting of September 10, 2001 the following motion was approved: "THAT the Durham Catholic District School Board indicate in its comments to the Regional Municipality of Durham and the City of Pickering that the Board has no objection to Plan of Subdivision S-P-2001-05." The subject lands affected by this Plan of Subdivision fail within the catchment area of St. Monica Catholic Elementary School, located at 275 Twyn Rivers Drive in Pickering. The projected student yield from this development is 8 students. Sincerely yours, Gerry O'Neill Controller of Planning and Admissions cc: Nell Carroll, Director of Planning, City of Pickenng GON:SMR:smr Telephone 91)S)5704~lS~)Sm':',~r: Sc:',~ce~. F_,: ',[,~ ~=~ 1'~ GrantA. Andrews, B.A, M EJ 'e:';,' ;r ~.~;a:, q ~ AT'fAOHMEN¥ # /'-~ TO REPOR'r # PD O _~ - o ~z_ ' onservaOon TORONTO AND REGION November 1,2001 Mr. Ross Pym Planning Department City of Pickering Pickering Civic Centre One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 Dear Mr. Pym: Re: Plan of Subdivision S-P-2001-05, A14/01 314-350 Finch Avenue City of Pickering (Marshall Homes) CFN 32472 Further to our site walk on October 29TM, 2001 where TRCA staff walked the limits of the subject property, and after a detailed review of the provided supporting documents and plan of subdivision, we offer the follow comments. The site, is adjacent to a tableland woodlot tO the east currently Owned by the Ontario Realty Corporation and backs onto the Rouge Duffin Wildlife Corridor. In light of this special consideration must be given to the adjacent features during construction on the subject lands. At the site meeting staff discussed options for protection of the adjacent natural features given the current designation and determined that an edge management plan must be provided to the satisfaction of the TRCA. Staff also recognize that stormwater from the site will be treated through a pond proposed to be constructed on Altona Road and within a hydro corridor adjacent to the Petticoat Creek. The details of this facility have not been provided to date to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, however, we are confident that issues with the pond design and requirements will be addressed in the coming weeks. In light of the above we provide the following conditions of draft approval: That the applicant provide an edge management plan to the satisfaction of TRCA staff. The edge management plan must include: An identification of all hazard trees located at the edge of the property to be removed prior to the initiation of works on the site. Protective hoarding as required during the construction process. Grading details which confirm that the root zone of the adjacent vegetated areas will be protected (including drainage). Plans for the erection of a permanent chain link fence to be constructed prior to the initiation of grading on site. Plans for edge planting within or adjacent to rear lots backing onto the wildlife corridor or the adjacent tableland woodlot feature. .../2 ~/c~dh'et'HO' and (;ree~p,~ce ~ f-ducati,~ t~'.~r ' ~ ' ~ ~ 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, OntarioM3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www. trca.on.ca M~, Ross Pym -2- November 1. 2001 The promotion of restrictions to lighting within the rear yard of properties adjacent to the wildlife corridor. Prior to the initiation of grading on the site the applicant the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority must have reviewed and approved a stormwater management pond design brief demonstrating compliance with the overall stormwater strategy for the contributing developing area including: (a) The location and description of all outlets and other facilities which may require permits under provincial Iegislation. Proposed method of controlling or minimizing erosion and siitation on site and in downstream areas during and after construction; an erosion and sediment controt strategy which includes a description and plan to be prepared. (b) The plan be red line revised to accommodate the requirements of the Stormwater Management pond design brief report required above. That the applicant forward a copy of the executed subdivision agreement for each phase of the development to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. 4. That the owner agree in the subdivision agreement, in wording acceptable to the TRCA: (a) To cause to be carried out the works referenced to ~n conditions referenced above. (b) To design and implement on site erosion and sediment control, in order to meet the requirements of the Federal Fisheries Act. Any increase in concentration or suspended solids or sediment loading may be in violation of this Act. (c) To maintain all stormwater management and sediment control structures operating and in good repair during the construction period, in a manner satisfactory to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. (d) To erect a black vinyl chain link fence prior to the issuance of building permits on the site to the satisfaction of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. We trust that this is satisfactory. If you have any questions please contact the undersigned. Yours truly, Senior Planner Development Services Section Extension 5306 RW/gc CC: Richard Szarek, Region of Durham Craig Marshall, Marshall Homes ~AN 04 2-882 16:55 FR DURHAH PLANNING DEPT 905 436 6612 TO PICKERING F'LNG January 4, 2002 The Regional Municipality of Durhem Department. 1615 Dundas St. E 4th Floor, Lan§ Tower West Building RO Box 623 WhltDy, ON LIN 6A3 Mr. N. Carroll Director of Planning Planning Department City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade Pickering, Ont. I.lV 6K7 Dear Mr. Carroll: Re: Regional Review of an Application for Plan of Subdivision File NO.: S-P-2001-05 Cross Ref.: Zoning By'-IawAmendment Application A14/01 Applicant: Marshall Homes Ltd.-. LocatiOn: Part Lot.32, ConcesSion '2 Municipality: City of Picketing (905) 728-7731 Fsx: (905) 436-6612 Y~?zcw. reaion.du rham,on,ca A,L. Georgteff. Mc~. Commissioner .Planning "Se~~nce for-~ity" This application has been reviewed by the Region and the following comments are offered with respect to the Durham Regional Official Plan, Provincial policies, and the proposed method of servicing. Official Plan Conformity The subject prol3erty is.10cated within the "Living Area" designation in the Durham Regional Official Plan. The pre-dominant use of land within the Living Area designation is for residential purposes. The property is also in proximity to the Open Space Linkage, knowd as the Rouge Duffin Wildlife Corridor, which consists of natural areas andfeatures in order to provide for the migration of flora and fauna. The proposed plan of subdivision would appear to conform to the Plan. Provincial Interests and Delegated Review ReSponsibilitie~ The subject lands have been assessed as having a high archaeological potential due .to the proximity of a tributary of the Petticoat Creek, An archaeological assessment will be necessary. A sufficient buffer should be incorporated from the development area to protect the nearby Petticoat Creek tributary from any potentia adverse impacts. Any possible issues concerning stormwater management are to be addressed to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority. Potential impacts may result on the various environmental features and functions of'the Open Space Wildlife Corridor immediately adjacent to the .proposed subdivision 'development. In this regard, an Environmental Assessment has been.prepared which reviews the corddor edge conditions and provides comments'on' the appro ~date envi¢onmental management strategies for the oropertY boundaries, Further, in omer for this application'.to be considered for draft approval, the concerns of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority must be addressed 100% I~ost Consumer OEVELr' :7,' ' : ! 16:.55 FR DURHRi'I FL~,IF~Ir,IG DEFT )C'T, 456 ,.'-.~, :.~_~ · The submitted noise report, prepared by J.E. Coulter Associates Ltd., addresses noise impact on the p~posed ~sJden~at development from Finch Avenue and the nearby C.P.R. Appropriate ~oise bame~ and warning clauses are recommended for this development. The study was prepared in accordance with P~vincial.Cnte~a and Regional policy. A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment was prepared by Inspec-Sol Inc. for the subject property. The assessment indicated that environmental conditions at the site are considered to be generally satisfactory and no significant contamination is likely to be encountered during the development of the site for residential purposes. There are no other provincial interests or delegated review responsibilities applicable to this'application. Municipal Water Municipal water supply can be provided to the subject development from an existing 250mm. diameter Zone 2 watermain on Finch Avenue. Proposed Lots 10 to 29 may require oversized water service connectsons or regrading in view of the prevailing Iow water pressure problem. Sanitary.. Sewer Service Sanitary sewer service is presently not available. A 250 mm. diameter sanitary sewer is anticipated to be constructed on Altona Road from Sparrow Circle in conjunction with the development of Plan 18T-89018 (Petticoat Creek subdivision). Based on the foregoing, the Region has no objection to draft approval of this 'plan, The attached conditions of' approval are to be satisfied prior to clearance by the Region for registraticn of this plan Please call Richard Szarek/Planner, if you should have any questions. Yours truly, ~'~~m Blair, M.C~ Director, Current OPerations Branch Attach: Conditions of Draft Approval CC: Marshall Homes Ltd. Marlene Joan Mitchell & Marie Lorraine Pyper Regional Works .Department N:\pimb-s~-p-2001 ~Bl'4 04 280'2 16:56 FP.. DURHAM PLANNING DEPT 98_'3 438 6612 TO PICKERING PLNG Attachment to letter dated: January 4, 2002 Re~ Plan of Subdivision $-P-2001-05 Marshall Homes Limited City of Pickering Region of Durham Conditions of Draft Approval The Owner shall prepare the final plan on the basis of the approved draft plan of subdivision prepared by Design Plan Services Inc,, identified as Drawing Number 0119/7, dated June 28, 2001, which illustrates 43 lots for single detached dWellings, roadways, a road widening, and 0.3m. reserves. The Owner shall name any road allowances included within this plan to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Durham. The Owner shall grant to the Region, any easements required to provide Regional services for this development and these easements shall be in locations and of such widths as determined by the Region. The Owner shall submit plans showing any proposed phasing to the Region for review and approval, if this plan is to be developed through more than one registration. The Owner shall provide for the extension of such sanitary sewer and water supply facilities which are external to, as well as within, the limits of this plan that are required to service this plan. In addition, the Owner shall provide for the extension of sanitary sewer and water supply facilities within the limits of the plan which are required to service other developments external to this plan. Such sanitary sewer and water facilities are to be designed and constructed according to the standards and requirements of the Regional Municipality of Durham. All arrangements, financial and otherwise, for said extensions, are to be made to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Durham, and are to be completed prior to final approval. Prior to entering into a subdivision agreement, the Regional Municipality of Durham shall be satisfied that adequate water pollution control plant and water supply plant capacities are available for the proposed subdivision. The Owner shall satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Regional Municipality of Durham, This shall include, among others, the execution of a subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Region concerning the provision and installation of sanitary sewers, water supply, roads and other regional services. 2882 16:56 FR ~,,URHtZlFI PLHNNINL3 ~EFT _--o's, 456 6612 Page 2 The Owner shall agree in the City of Pickering Subdivision Agreement to implement the recommendations of the report entitled, "Noise Impact Feasibility Study", prepared by J.E. Coulter Associates Limited, dated August 7, 2001, which specifies noise attenuation measures for the development, The measures shall be included in the subdivision agreement and must also contain a full and complete reference to the noise report (i.e. author, title, date and any revisions/addenda) and shall include any required warning clauses identified in the study. The Owner shall provide the Region with a copy of the subdivision agreement containing such provisions prior to final approval of the plan, 74! The Owner shall cam/out a cultural heritage resource assessment of the subject property and mitigation and/or salvage excavation of any significant heritage resources to the satisfaction of the Regulatory and Operations Group of the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, No grading or other soil disturbance shall take place on the subject property prior to a letter of clearance from the Regulatory and Operations Group of the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, 10.The subdivision agreement between the Owner and the City of Pickering shall contain the following provision: a) The Owner agrees to include provisions whereby all offers of purchase and sale shall include information that satisfies Subsection 59(4) of the Development Charges Act, 1997. In order to facilitate the clearance of this condition, the Owner is required to forward a copy of the executed City of Pickering subdivision agreement to the Commissioner of Planning, Regional Municipality of Durham. H :'~-4Ls-p-2001-05conds RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That Report Number PD 02-02 be RECEIVED as the Final Report on the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study: and (a) That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 01-003/P, initiated by the City of Picketing, to: · Replace the Urban Study Area designation on lands on the west side of Notion Road with a Mixed Employment designation on Schedule I Land Use Structure; · delete Policy 3.17 - Urban Study Area: Notion Road Industrial Area: and · add new policies to Section 11.11: ['2llage East Neighbourhood Policy; be APPROVED, as set out in Appendix I to Report Number PD 02-02; (b) That the draft by-law to adopt Amendment 7 to the Picketing Official Plan be FORWARDED to Council for enactment as set out in Appendix I to Report Number PD 02-02; (a) That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/01, initiated by the City of Picketing, on lands being Part of Lot 17, Concession 1, on the west side of Notion Road in the City of Picketing, to permit a range of prestige and higher order mixed employment uses, be APPROVED; (b) That the draft by-law to amend Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a range of prestige and higher order mixed employment uses including related development standards, as specified in Appendix II to Report Number PD 02-02 be FORWARDED to Council for enactment: That the revised Notion Road Area Development Ouidelines, be ADOPTED as the City's strategy for detailed land use, urban design, transportation and infrastructure within the Notion Road Area, as set out in Appendix III to Report Number PD 02-02; That "Informational Revision 10 to the Picketing Official Plan" be ADOPTED, as set out in Appendix IV to Report Number PD 02-02; (a) That Picketing Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 87-002/P, submitted by Silwell Developments Limited & Berma Estates Limited (now the Metrontario Group), on lands being Part of Lot 17, Concession 1, City of Picketing, to amend the Picketing District (Official) Plan from Light Industrial to Medium Density Residential be REFUSED, and the applicant be so advised; ,) (b) That Zoning Bv-lax~ Amendment Application A 5/$,"~ submitted by Silwell Developments Limited & Berma Estates Limited. on lands being Part of Lot 17, Concession 1. City of Picketing, to amend Zoning Bv-lax~ 3036 to permit townhouse residential dwellings be REFUSED, and the applicant be so advised: 0'~ 0~ That the City Clerk be directed to forward a cop.',' of Report Number PD -- ,- to the Clerk of the Region of Durham, the Clerk of the Town of Ajax, the Toronto and Region Conser-vation Authority and to the Metrontario Group. 14/1 PICKERING REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development DATE: January 4, 2002 REPORT NUMBER: PD 02-02 SUBJECT: Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study Implementation of Study Findings: - Picketing Official Plan Amendment OPA 01-003/P (City-initiated) - Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/01 (City-initiated) - Amendment 7 to the Picketing Official Plan - Notion Road Area Development Guidelines lnfornmtional Revision 10 to the Pickering Of'ficial Plan Part of Lot 17, Concession 1 (West side of Notion Road, between Pickerin~ Parkway and Kingston Road, excluding the south-west corner of Kingston Road and Notion Road) City of Pickering AND Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 87-002/P Zoning By-law Amendment A 5/87 Silwell Developments Limited & Berma Estates Limited (now the Metrontario Group) Part of Lot 17, Concession 1 City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION: That Report Number PD 02-02 be RECEIVED as the Final Report on the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study; 2. (a) That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 01-003/P, initiated by the City of Pickering, to: · replace the Urban Study Area designation on lands on the west side of Notion Road with a Mixed Employment designation on Schedule I - Land Use Structure; · delete Policy 3.17 - Urban Study .4 rca: .¥otion Road Industrial ~4rea; and, · add new policies to Section il. 11: I¥lh~,c East Neighbourhood Polisv; be APPROVED, as set out in Appendix I to Report Nulnber PD 02-02; (b) That the draft by-law to adopt Amendment 7 to thc Pickering Official Plan be FORWARDED to Council for enactment as set out in Appendix I to Report Number PD 02-02; (a) That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/01, initiated by the City of Pickering, on lands being Part of Lot 17, Concession 1, on the west side of Notion Road in the City of Pickering, to permit a range of prestige and higher order mixed employment uses, be APPROVED; (b) That the draft by-law to amend Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a range of prestige and higher order mixed employment uses including related development standards, as specified in Appendix II to Report Number PD 02-02 be FORWARDED to Council for enactment; REPORT NUMBER PD 02-02 Date: January 4, 2001 Subject: Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study ~/ · (OPAOl-OOa,P;A1901 City-initiated) (ePA 87-002/P; A 5 87: $ihvell & Bcm~a inox~ Nletrontario Group]) Page 2 14,.5 Ttnat fine revised Notio~t Roud .-trc~ {)c~'ciW~,zc~zz (;zmich'~cs. be .ADOPTED as tile City's strateev for detailed land rise, urban design, transportation and infrastructure within tile ~' I),-I)_ Notion Road Area, as set out in Appendix III to Report Number PD '~ '~' Tlmt "inlbnnational Revision l~)to the Pickcrin-= Official Plan" be ADOPTED. as set out in Appendix IX.' to Report Number PD 02-02: (a) Tt~at Picketing Oflncial Plain Ametndment Application ePA S--01)2 P. submitted by Sih',:ell Developments Limited ~ Bcrma Estates Limited {now thc N1ctrontario ~roup). on lands being Part ori Lot 1 -. Concession 1. City of Pickcnng. to amend thc Picketing District ~Official} Plan from L(~/~z IJzdz~xzJ'kff to .Xh,&z~m Dc'~zsin' Roside~tmd be REFUSED. alqd the applicant bo so adx ised: (b) Ttmt Zonirm Bv-la~v Amendment Application A 5 87. submitted by Silwell DevelopmerTts L'imited & Bcrma Es:ares Limited. on lands being Part of Lot 17, Concession 1. City of Picketing. to amend Zoning By-law 3036 to pennit toxvntnouse residentr~al dxvellings be REFUSED: and tile applicant be so adx iscd; -['tmt tile City Clerk be directed to forx~ard ti cop} ori Report Number PD {)2-~)2 to the Clerk of the Region of Durham. the Clerk of thc Toxvn o~ Ajax. thc Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and to tine Nletrontario Group. ORIGIN: On September 17. 2001. Picketing City Council received the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study. initiated amendments to tile Picketing Official Plan and Zoning By-law 3036, adopted in principle Urban Design ©uidetines for the Notion P, oad Area and Informational Revisions to the Picketing Official Plan. and adopted a series ori associated implementation measures to improve the Notion Road Area. AUTHORITY: The Pin,thing Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P. 13 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed Orificial Plan or Zoning amendments or Urban Design Guidelines: hoxxcver, thc implementation measures identify various undertakings that will have ritltHI'C direct and indirect (slaty time} cost im-alications fbr the City. Specific implementation projects and their associated financial implications will be presented to Council For consideration m future budgets. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Tile joint City ofPickering Toxvn of Ajax "Notion Road Land Usc and Urban Design Study" xvas commenced in 1999 and completed in June 2(~t)l. A map shoxxing the location ori tho study area is provided as Attachment :1. In Juh' 2t)t)l. Ajax adopted zoning and official plan amendments and associated strategies to implement thc findings ori the Studx. Following two Planning & Development reports. Picketing Council reccnth' received the "Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study". adopted in principle tine urban design guidelines and associated strategies to improxc the Notion Road area, and auttnorized the City-initiated zoning and official plan amendments to implement the findings of thc Study. 146 REPORT NUMBER PD 02-02 Date: January 4, 2001 Subject: Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study (OPA 01-003/P; A 19/01: City-initiated) (OPA 87-002/P; A 5/87: Silwell & Berma [now Metrontario Group]) Page 3 At the October 18, 2001 statutory public infom~ation meeting, the public supported the proposed amendments. Staff have now made minor technical changes and present them in a format appropriate for adoption by Council to implement the "Notion Road Land Use and Design Study". Accordingly, Report PD 02-02 recommends that Council: · receive this report; · adopt Pickering Official Plan Amendment 7; · pass a by-law amending Zoning By-law 3036 to implement the land use component of the study; · adopt the Notion Road Area Development Guidelines; and · adopt Information Revision 10 to the Pickering Official Plan. In addition, in the light of the findings of the Notion Road Land Use and Design Study, it is recommended that Council refuse official plan and zoning amendment applications submitted in 1987 by Silwell Developments Limited & Berma Estates Limited (now Metrontario Homes) to permit townhouse residential development on a parcel of land on the west side of Notion Road (see Attactnnent #2) because such residential uses are incompatible with the heavy industrial uses across Notion Road in Ajax and do not conform with the land use conclusions of the study. BACKGROUND: 1.0 Notion Road Land Use and Urban iDesign Study 2.0 3.0 3.1 Pickering City Council considered the findings of the "Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study", Planning & Development Report Number PD 20-01 and Addendum to Report Number: PD 20-01 at its meeting held September 17, 2001, and adopted Resolution #105/01, Item #1, which (among other things) authorized a statutory public information meeting to initiate amendments to the Pickering Official Plan and Zoning By-law 3036 to implement the findings of the study. By Resolution #105/01, Item #1, Council also adopted, in principle, Urban Design Guidelines for the Notion Road Area and Informational Revisions to the Pickering Official Plan, to be brought back to Council for final approval in Spring 2002, following approval of the official plan and zoning amendments. A copy of Resolution #105/01 is attached (see Attachment #3). Statutory Public Information Meeting A Statutory Public Information Meeting for this application was held on October 18, 2001 to obtain the views of the public on this proposal. Information Report No. 28-01, which summarizes the proposal and outlines the issues and comments identified through circulation of the application, was prepared for the Public Information Meeting. The tcxt of the Information Report is provided for reference (see Attachment #4). At the Public Information Meeting, Planning and Development staff gave an explanation of the applications and their merits. In addition to staff, several other people were present and spoke at the meeting. The discussion that occurred is recorded in the Meeting Minutes (see Attachment #5). Additional Information Area Residents No new comments have been received from area residents since the Statutory Public Information Meeting. REPORT NUMBER PD 02-02 Date: January 4. 2001 Subject: Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study (OPA01-003/P;A 19Ul' City-initiated) (ePA 87-002/P; A 5'87: Silwell & Benna [now Metrontario Group]) Page 4 147 3.2 4.0 4.1.1 Agency comments The Ibllowing agencies provided written comments st~bsequent to the Statutory Public Information Meeting: Durham District School Board: Veridian Connections: NO COI1CCF[1S. No COI1CCFIIS. Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MI'O): No objection in principle. MTO asked for a12 assessment of the traffic impacts on the intersection at Pickering Parkxtax' Brock Road and the Highv,'ay 401 Brock Road Ramp Temdnal (see Attachment =0:,. After Picketing staff forxvarded traffic comments prepared by I-Trans consultants as part oi' the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study, no furttner comments haxc been received from MTO. Durham Regional Planning Department I~'erbal): The Durham Regional Planning Dcnartment tlave indicated verbally that tile proposed amendment to tho Pickenng Official Plan will not be exempt from approval by Durham Region. The anlendment to tile Toxvn of Ajax official plan adopted by Ajax Council in July 2001 that implements tiao findings of the Studx has been tbtxvarded to the Region of Durham for approval. It is not appropriate to CXclnpt either thc proposed Pickering or .%jax official plan amendments from approval bx thc Region of Durham because thc amendments implement thc Ilndings of a joint study that identified issues involving Provincial policies related to the compatibilit> of land uses that cross nmnicipal boundaries oFthe City oFPickcring and thc Toxxn of Ajax. Durham Planning staff indicated that once Picketing ('ounci] adopts an amendment to tile Picketing Official Plan, the Regional Planning Department will consider both the proposed Pickering and .~jax amendnlcnts togett~cr. Discussion The issues, study process, public consultation, I~ndings and recommendations of the -Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study" have been previously discussed in Planning & Development Report Number PD 2/)-~)1 and in tile Addendum to Report Number: PD 20-01. Copies of these reports may be obtained from the Planning & Development Department, upon request. Adoption of the following planni%, changes xxill implement the findings of the Study and finalize the matters previously adopted by Council. in principle, at its September 17. 2001 meeting by Resolution =105 01. Item =1. Official Plan Amendment Application A draft By-law for Council adoption of ©fficial Plan Amendment 7 to tile Picketing Official Plan is included in Appendix I to Report No. PD (12-t)2, Tile Bv-laxv recognizes that approval of this amendment to tile Picketing Official Plan is reqLlired from Durham Region before it will come into force. The proposed Official Plan Amendment, contained in Exhibit A to tile draft Bv-lax~, also in Appendix I to Report No. PD ()2-()2, replaces tine cu~ont C'r,h~zn 5'zztdx' ,4rc'~z designation with a Mixed EmplQwnc'~ designation, deletes cLzn'ent Pe:/zc'x 3.17 t)'h~z~ Study Are~: No~ion Road ]nduxD'ia/ Arc'c;. and includes ncxx policies Ibr the tV//age Eas; REPORT NUMBER PD 02-02 Date: January 4. 2001 Subject: Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study (OPA 01-003/P; A 19/01' City-initiated) (OPA 87-002/P; A 5/87: Silwell & Berma [now Metrontario Group]) Page 5 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 5.0 Neighbourhood for the subject lands. These amendments implement the findings of the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study by responding to the constraints and opportunities of these lands situated between residential uses in Pickering and heavy industrial uses in Ajax and by providing policy support for design guidelines to be contained within the Compendium to the Official Plan. Staff recommends that Council adopt Amendment 7 to the Pickering Official Plan as set out in Appendix I to Report No. PD 02-02. Zoning Amendment Application The proposed amendment to Zoning By-law 3036, contained in Appendix II to Report No. PD 02-02, implements the more general provisions of the proposed Mixed Employment designation and l?illage East Neighbourhood policies recommended for adoption in the Official Plan with a list of permitted uses and development standards that will foster compatibility with abutting residential uses and achieve a high quality employment area. The proposed amendment excludes waste transfer or management facilities and new automotive repair, sales and service establishments, includes a requirement for a landscaped strip along both the west edge of the industrial properties and along Notion Road and includes rear yard depth provisions that balance development rights of industrial property owners and compatibility with abutting residential dwellings. The proposed amendment contained in Appendix II has been circulated to the owners of the properties designated Urban Stud)' Area in Pickering. Although one question seeking clarification of the effect of the by-law on a particular property was received, no other comments have been received on the proposed amendment. Staff recommends Council adopt the proposed amendment to Zoning By-law 3036 contained in Appendix H to Report No. PD 02-02. Development Guidelines for the Notion Road Area The proposed "Notion Road Area Development Guidelines", contained in Appendix III to Report No. PD 02-02 will provide guidance for future private and public development initiatives within the area. The "Notion Road Area Development Guidelines" are proposed to be adopted as part of the Compendium to the Pickering Official Plan. The Guidelines are a distillation of those portions of the Urban Design Guidelines contained in the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study that relate only to the Pickering lands within the larger Notion Road Study Area. Informational Revisions to the Official Plan Informational revisions to the Pickering Official Plan are required to identify the adoption of the Development Guidelines for the Notion Road Area. Information Revision 10 to the Plan includes an updated Neighbourhood Map for the Village East Neighbourhood and informational text. Staff recommends Council adopt the Informational Revision 10 to the Pickering Official Plan as set out in Appendix IV to Report No. PD 02-02. 1987 Sibvell & Berma Applications In 1987, Silwell Developments Limited & Berma Estates Limited (now Metrontario Group) submitted applications to amend the Pickering and Durham Regional Official Plans (OPA 87-002/P) and the Pickering Zoning By-law (A 5/87) to redesignate the lands from Light Industrial to Medium Density Residential, to permit a 76 unit townhouse development on vacant lands on the west side of Notion Road north of Pickering Parkway (see location map - Attachment #2). REPORT NUMBER PD 02-02 Date: January 4, 2t)t)l Subject: Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study (ePA 01-003/P; A 19:01' City-initiated) (ePA 87-002/P; A 5,/87: Silxvell ac Benna [now Metrontario Group]) Page 6 Upon circulation o£ thc applications, tine Toronto and Region Conselwation Authority commented that the subject lands were located on a flood plain and residential use would only be suitable if stringent conditions could be satisfied. Conqments were also received from the Region of Durham. the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Town of Ajax and Dufl~rin Concrete tone of the heavv industries located in Ajax). These comments indicated that residential usc xx ould not be compatible at this location due to the adverse effects on residents from the noise, dust and pollution from existing heavv industrial uses located on thc east side of Notion Road. As a result of the comments, the applications were not presented to Picketing Council ibr decision. In 1991. the Region of Durham adopted a nexx Official Plan v, ithout specific resolution of the application to amend the Durham Official Plan for the subject lands. As no appeal was received from Silwell Berma of tile designation of the subject lands in thc new Durham Ofllcial Plan, the application to amend the Durham Regional Official Plan. for tile subject lands, was considered closed. One of tho findin~,s of the "Notion Road I_and Use and L rban Desian Study" was thc intention of the heavv industries to continue operating at the present locations. In addition, the Town of Aiax adopted a prestige employment designation in its official plan, in July 20()1, that recognizes thc rights of the heaxx industrial uses to continue operations on tile east side of Notion Road. Also. the recommendation that Pickering adopt a ~Sh'xed Em/;/2w,zcm~ ctesignation 1hr thc subiect lands would not pemnit residential uses on thc subject lands. Based on tiao conclusions of tiao Study, it is inappropriate to recommend residential use of the subject lands. Accordingly, it is i'ccommcndcd that Picketing Council refuse Picketing Official Plan Amendment Application S--~)~)2 P. reatsc Picketing Zonmg Amendment Application A 5 S* and so advise thc Clerk of Durham Region and the applicant. A copy of this draft report was sent via facsimile to representatives of the Metrontario Group in mid December. No comment has been received. APPENDICES: I By-law to adopt Amendment No. 7 to the Picketing Ol:ficial Plan ibr tile Notion Road Area (Amendment included as Exhibit "A" to Bv-lax~ ) II Draft Amendment to Zoning Bv-lax~ 3i)30 III Notion Road Area Development Guidelines IV Informational Revision 10 to tile Pickerin,~ OflScial Plan, Ibr tiao Notion Road Area ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notion Road Studv Area *lap 2. Location Map for Silxvell ac Benna Applications 3. Picketing Council Resolution =105 1. Item =1 4. Planning & Development Infbnnation Repo~ 2S-~;1 5. Minutes of the Statutory Public Inlbmnation Meetin~g held October 1S, 2001 0. Comment from Ministm' of Transportation i50 REPORT NUMBER PD 02-02 Date: Subject: Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study (OPA 01-003/P; A 19/01' City-initiated) (OPA 87-002/P; A 5/87: Silwell & Berma [now Metrontario Group]) JanuaO' 4, 2001 Page 7 Prepared By: Steve Gaunt, MCIP, RPP Planner II Catherine Rose Manager, Policy Approved / Endorsed by: NeiI CalToxli~q~iP: NPP Director, Plann"h~ ~and Development SXG/sm/jf Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickermg City Council . Tlm/ma/s ~l.~Qu~4~, Chic./Adminis~ve Offi~r APPENDIX I TO REPORT NUSIBER PD 02-02 151 BY-LAW TO ADOPT OFFICIAL PLAN ASIENDMENT 7 TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ~ERING BY-LAW NO Being a By-law to adopt Amendment 7 to the OffiCiAl Plan for the City of Pickering (OPA 0 -003/P : WHEREAS pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.p. 13, subsections 17(22) and 21(1), the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering may by by-law adopt amendments to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS pursuant to Section 17(10) of the Planning Act, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has by order authorized Regional Council to pass a by-law to exempt proposed area municipal official plan amendments from its approval; AND WHEREAS, the Region has advised that this Amendment is NOT exempt from Regional approval; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That Amendment 7 to the Official Plan for the City of Picketing is hereby adopted; That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward to the Regional Municipality of Durham the documentation required by Procedure: Area Municipal Official Plans and Amendments, to seek Regional approval of an Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan; 3. This By-law shall come into force and take effect on the da,,' of the final passing hereof. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 2002. clay of __ MAYOR .4~} WAYNE AR,~ CLERK BRUCE J. TAYLOR Exhibit "A" to Bv-la~' AMENDMENT 7 TO THE CITY OF PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN 154 AMENDMENT 7 TO THE CITY OF PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN PURPOSE: LOCATION: BASIS: The purpose of the amendment is replace the Urban Study Area designation along Notion Road with a Mixed Employment designation on Schedule I - Land Use Structure, delete the related Urban Study Area: Notion Road Industrial Area text policy 3.17 of the Plan, and establish new Village East Neighbourhood policies to guide development and redevelopment, to implement the results of the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study. The amendment affects land located in Part of Lot 17, Concession 1, City of Pickering, adjacent to Notion Road, which includes lands on the west side of Notion Road, between Pickering Parkway and Kingston Road, excluding the south-west comer of Kingston Road and Notion Road. The area is approximately 5 hectares in size. This amendment determined to be the Notion Road both lands in the to the Pickering Official Plan has been appropriate following the completion of Land Use and Urban Design Study for City of Pickering, and abutting lands in the Town of Ajax in the summer of 2001. The central issue is the land use compatibility between the existing heavy industry located on the Ajax lands, and the surrounding ne~ver residential development in Pickering. The vision for the study is to facilitate the evolution of the NotionRoad Area, over time, to a prestige employment area which is compatible with nearby residential development through new developments, redevelopment, and pride of current ownerships, in partnership with City and Town infrastructure investment. The Land Use objective for Pickering is to establish a land use that will allow new development that will be compatible with existing residential uses to the west while co-existing with existing heavy industrial uses to the east. Accordingly, a Mixed Employment designation is appropriate. The Land Use Objective for the abutting lands in Ajax is to establish a land use that will allow new employment development that is compatible with nearby residential uses that will co-exist with heavy industrial uses until they cease operations at this location, while respecting the existing industrial operators. With this objective, Ajax Town.Council amended the Ajax Official Plan to permit Prestige Employment uses on its study area lands with existing heavy industries permitted to remain and expand in a limited manner subject to criteria. 155 ACTUAL AMENDMENT: The Pickering Official Plan be amended by: Revising Schedule I - Land Use Structure by replacing the "l_'rban Stud)' Areas" designation with a "MLved Employment Areas" designation, as shown on Schedule to this amendment. Deleting policy 3.17 - ~'rban Stud)' Area: Notion Road Industrial Area, ~'hich policy currently reads as follo~vs: "3.17 Town Council shall recognize as an Urban Study Area on Schedule I, lands located south of Kingston Road, along Notion Road, opposite an industrial area in Ajax, and, (a) shall consider eliminating the Study Area designation following completion of a land use and design study for the lands demonstrating that the proposed use, (i) is consistent with the goals, objectives and general purpose and intent of this Plan; and (ii) is compatible xxqth the surrounding area given the area's location between residential lands in Pickering, and industrial lands in Ajax; and (iii) considering the results of the above study, shall establish, by amendment to this Plan, appropriate land use designations and policies." 3. Adding ne~ policies to section 11.11 I~'llage East 5eighbourhood Policies. as folloxvs: "11.11 Ciw Council shall, (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) recognize the transitional location of the lands on the west side of Notion Road betxveen low and medium density residential land uses to the xvest and existing heaxw industry to the east in the Town of Ajax, and further recognize the efforts of the Town of Ajax to upgrade the industrial areas to the east. Accordingly, City Council shall endeavour to, (i) improve the compatibility and design interface between existing residential, and existing and new employment uses established in Pickering adjacent to Notion Road; (ii) provide more direct accessibility, for pedestrians from the residential areas west of Notion Road to the Duffins Creek valley to the east; and, (iii) generally upgrade the quality ofthe area by, ~ supporting improved public infrastructure such as upgraded urban standard paving, sidewalks, street planting, boulevard treatments, gateway treatments, transit facilities and burying electrical wiring; and, supporting an improved stormwater treatment pond in Ajax; -3- 156 (0 despite Table 8 of Chapter Three*, not permit the establishment of any new automotive and vehicle sales and repair uses within the lands designated Mixed Employment Area adjacent to Notion Road, after the date this amendment comes into force; in order to ensure that development within the Mixed Employment Area on the west side of Notion Road is compatible with residential lands in Picketing and industrial lands in Ajax, require that the following design criteria be met in the development or redevelopment of properties: (i) consider protection for pedestrian pathways to the satisfaction of the City, to connect Marshcourt Drive to Notion Road at Beechlawn Drive and Bainbridge Drive, as a condition of development for abutting properties on the west side of Notion Road; (ii) provision of a continuous landscaped strip along the west property lines to contain fencing, plantings and/or berms in order to provide adequate visual screening for the existing residential dwellings; (iii) provision of loading and service areas at the side of buildings, not in the rear yards, unless suitable acoustical buffering and/or screening is provided for the existing residential dwellings; (iv) prohibition of outside operations or storage; (v) provision of a landscaped treatment along Notion Road to screen parking areas, loading areas and service areas from Notion Road in order to establish an attractive Notion Road streetscape; and, (vi)provision of screening for rooftop mechanical equipment so that it is not visible from residential dxvellings to the xvest or from Notion Road." I M PLEMENTATION: The provisions set forth in the Picketing Official Plan, as amended, regarding the implementation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment. The Clerk shall renumber section 3 of the Official Plan following the deletion of section 3.17. INTERPRETATION: The provisions set forth in the Pickering Official Plan, as amended, regarding the interpretation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment. * A copy of Table 8 of Chapter Three is provided for reference at the end of this Amendment. It does not constitute part of the Amendment. Schodule ~A~ CH REDESIGNATE FROM "OTHER DESIGNATIONS-URBAN STUDY AREA" TO "EMPLOYMENT AREAS-MIXED EMPLOYMENT" .BAYLY SCHEDULE ! TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN EDITION 2 SHEET 1 OF 3 OPEN SPACE SYSTEM NATURAL AREAS ACTIVE RECREATIONAL AREAS M ARINA AREAS MIXED USE AREAS LOCAL NODES COMMUNITY NODES MIXED CORRIDORS DOWNTOWN CORE REGIONAL NODES REGIONAL NODE 1 m REGIONAL NODE 2 L&ND USE STRUCFURE EMPLOYMENT AREAS FREEWAYS AND MAJOR UTILITIES GENERAL EMPLOYMENT ~ POTENTIAL MULTI--USE AREAS PRESTIGE EMPLOYMENT ~ CONTROLLED ACCESS AREAS MIXED EMPLOYMENT OTHER DESIGNATIONS URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREAS '~ URBAN STUDY AREAS LOW DENSITW AREAS SEATON URBAN STUDY AREA AGRICULTURAL AREAS r~ DEFERRALS APPEALS EXTRACT FROM THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PL,atN TABLE 8 Employment Permissible Uses Areas (Restrictions and limitations on the uses permissible, ar/sing from other policies of Subcatego~' this Plan, will be detailed in zoning by-laws.) General Manufacturing, assembly, processin~ of goods, ser¥ice industries, rescarch Employment and development facilities, warehousing, storage of goods and materials, waste transfer aud rcc.x cling, waste processing, freight transfer, transportauon facilities, automotive and vehicle sales and repair; Offices as a minor component of an industrial operation or serving the arca, limited personal scr¥icc uses serving thc area, restaurants sen-rog thc area, retail sales as a mmt)r c~)mponcnt of an industrial operation; Communiu, cultural and recreational uses, and other uses with similar performance characteristics that arc more appropriately located in the cnlployincnt area. Prestige Light manufacturing, assembly and processing of goods, light sen'ice Employment industries, research and development facilities, warehousing, equipment and vehicle suppliers, automotive and vehicle sales and repair; Offices, cort)oratc office business parks, limited personal sen'icc uses serving the area, restaurants scrxing thc area, retail sales as a minor component of an industrial operation, hotels, financial restitutions sen'lng thc area; Community, cultural and recreational uscs, and other uses xxdth similar performance characteristics that arc thoro appropriately located in the employment area. Mixed All uses permissible in prcstt(gc clnployment areas; Employment Limited retailing of goods and services serving the area. 158 APPENDIX II TO REPORT NUMBER PD 02-02 DRAFT AMENDMENT TO ZONING BY-LAW 3036 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. ; Being, a By-law to amend Restricted .krca (Zoning) Bv-lax~ 3~)30. as amended, to implement the Ofl2cial Plan of thc Cfly 'eL Picketing District Planning Area. Region of Durham in Part of Lot 1' Concession 1. City of Picketing. fOPA 01-003"P: A 19 {)1 ) WHEREAS the Council of thc ('ot33orat~on of the ('itu' of Picketing. having completed the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study. deems it desirable to peru-dr a range of mixed emplo>TnCnt uses on the subject lands, being Part of Lot 1- Concession 1. City of Picketing: AND \VHEREAS an amendment to Bv-lax~ 3()36. as amended, is therefore deemed necessary: NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKER1NG HEREBY ENACTS .AS FOLi_O\VS: 159 SCItEDULE I Schedule I attached hereto with declared to be part of this Bv-lax~. i]otatlolls alld i-eI'~i'eI]ccs sl]o\x,'I] ttlei-coI] is }~.crebv AREA RESTRICTED Thc provisionsofthis Bv-ia\~ shall appl} tothosc landsin Part of Lot l- C'c)ncession 1. City of Pickering, designated "N1C 15" on $ciqcdule I attacheci hereto. GENERAL PROVISIONS No building, land or part thereof shall hereafter be used. occupied, erected, mo,:ed, or structurally' altered except in conI~m~itv xx ith tile provisions oi' this Bv-Iaxx. 4. DEFINITIONS In this ~1) (2) (3) (4) By-lay,'. "Adult Entertainment Parlour" shall mean any premises or part thereof in xvhich is provided, in pursuance of a trade, callin,~,, business or occupation, services appealing to or designed to appeal to erotic or sexual appetites or inclinations; "Bakery" shall mean a building or pan of a building in x~hictn fbod products are baked, prepared and offered Ibr retail sale. or in x~hictn lbod products baked and prepared clsev, here arc offered for retail sate: "Business Office" shall mean an',' building or part of a building in which one or more persons are employed in the management, direction or conductin~ of an aeencv, business, brokera,,e labour or fraternal organization and shall include a telegraph office, newspaper plant and a radio or television broadcasting station and its studios or theatres, but shall not include a retail store: "Club" shall mean a building or part of a building in xxhich a not-for-profit or non-comn~ercial organization carats OUt social, cultural, welfare, athletic or recreational programs for the bencI~t of the colllI22UI1itv: 160 -2- "Commercial Club" shall mean an athletic or recreational club operated for gain or profit and having public or private membership, but shall not include an adult entertainment parlour as defined herein; (6) "Commercial-Recreational Establishment" shall mean a commercial establishment in which indoor recreational facilities are provided, and which mav include an athletic or recreational club, but shall not include any uses permissible within a place of amusement or entertainment as defined herein; (7) "Commercial School" shall mean a school which is operated for gain or profit and may include the studio of a dancing teacher or music teacher, an art school, a golf school or any other school operated for gain or profit; (8) "Convenience Store" shall mean a retail store in which food, drugs, periodicals or similar items of day-to-day household necessities are kept for retail sale primarily to residents of, or persons employed in, the immediate neig-hbourhood; (9) "Dry Cleaning Establishment" shall mean a building or part of a building where articles, goods or fabric are subjected to dr>' cleaning and related processes, are received or distributed, or where a dry cleaning plant is operated, or both. and xvhich may include the laundering, pressing or incidental tailoring or repair of articles, goods or fabric; (10) "Financial Institution" shall mean a building or part of a building in which money is deposited, kept, lent or exchanged; (11) "Food Preparation Plant" shall mean a building or part of a building in which processed food products are cooked, baked, mixed, packaged or other~vise prepared for distribution to retail or institutional outlets; (12) "Gross Leasable Floor Area" shall mean the aggregate of all storeys above or below established grade, designed for owner or tenant occupancy or exclusive use only, but excluding storage areas below established grade; (13) "Light Machinery and Equipment Supplier" shall mean a building or a part of a building in which office furniture and machines, carpet and drapery cleaning equipment, painting, gardening and plumbing equipment, small hand power tools and similar products are stored, offered or kept for wholesale or retail sale to industrial or commercial establishments; (14) "Light Manufacturing Plant" shall mean a manufacturing plant used for: the production of apparel and finished textile products other than the production of synthetic fibers; printing or duplicating; the manufacture of finished paper other than the processing of wood pulp; the production of cosmetics, drugs and other pharmaceutical supplies; or, the manufacture of finished lumber products, light metal products, electronic products, plasticware, porcelain, earthenware, glassware or similar articles, including but not necessarily restricted to, furniture, housewares, toys, musical instruments, jewellery, watches, precision instruments, radios and electronic components; (15) (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; 16) 17t IS) 19) ('2O) (21) {22) (23) (24) (25) "Manufacturino. Plant" shall mean a building or part of a building in which is carried on any activity or operation pertaining to the making of any article, and which shall include altering, assembling, repairing, ornamenting, finishing, cleaning, polishing, washing, packing, adapting /bt sale, breaking up or demolishing the said article; "Merchandise Service Shop" shall mean an establishment xx hero articles or goods including, but not necessarily limited to. business mactnnes, appliances, Furniture or similar items arc repaired or serviced, and includes the regular place of business of a nnaster electrician or master plunlber, but shall not include a manufacturing plant or any establishment used For thc service or repair of vehicles or a retail store: "Office-Associated Commercial Establishment" sb, all mean an establishment providing retail goods or equipment required Ibr the daily operation of a business office or professional office, such as a stationeo' store, a computer store, or an office furniture store: '~Personal Service Shop" shall mean an establishment in which a personal service is performed and which may include a barber shop, a beauty salon, a shoc repair shop, a tailor or dressmaking shop or a photograpidc studio, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined in section 224iO}tb) oi' tile Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended from time-to-time, or' anx successor thereto; "Place of Amusement or Entertainment" shall mean a building or part of a building in which ~cilitics arc proxided Ibr amuselnent or cnte~ainment pu¢oses, and whicta may include a billiard or pool room, a dance hall. a music hall or a theatre, but shall not include a room or an area used tbr any video lottery terminal use as govenqed bx tine Gan2in~ Scrxices .~ct, an adult enteNainment parlour as defined herein or a bodx rLlb parlour as defined in thc Municipal R.S.O. 1990. Chapter M.45, as amended IYonq tinao to tinqo, or anx successor thereto; "Place of Assembly" shall mean a building or part of a building in which Facilities are provided for civic, educational, political, recreational, religious or social meeting purposes and may include facilities /bt entertainment purposes such as musical and theatrical performances, but shall not include a place of amusement or entertainment as defined herein: "Place of Relimous :Xssemblv" siaall mean lands or premises where people assemble for worship, counseling, educational, contemplative or other purposes o£ a religious nature, which may include social, recreational, and charitable activities, and offices for tine administration thereof: "Printing Establishment" shall mean an establishment used for blueprinting, engraving, electro-typing, photocopying, plotting I'ron~ disk, printing, stereotyping or typesetting; "Professional Office" shall mcan a building or part of a building in which medical, legal or other professional service is peribnned or consultation gi,,en, and which may include a clinic, the offices of an arcIntect, a chartered accountant, an engineer, a lawyer or a physician, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined by the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 199{}. c.M. 45, as amended from time-to-time, or any successor thereto: "Restaurant - Type A" shall mean a building or part of a building where food is prepared and offered or kept lbr retail sale to the public For immediate consumption on the premises or off tile premises, or both on and off tile premises: (26) (27) (28) (29) (30) (31) (32) (33) (34) "Rental Establishment" shall mean a building or part of a building in which goods, wares, merchandise, substances, articles or things are offered or kept for offer for rent directly to the public, but does not include the rental of motor vehicles, and does not include a video store; "Sales Outlet" shall mean a building or part of a building accessory to a bakery, a food preparation plant, a light manufacturing plant, a manufacturing plant, a merchandise service shop, a printing establishment, or a warehouse, wherein products manufactured, produced, processed, stored, serviced or repaired on thc premises are kept or displayed for rent or for xvholesale or retail sale, or wherein orders are taken for future delivery of such products; "Scientific, Medical or Research Laboratory" shall mean a building or part of a building wherein scientific, research or medical experiments or investigations are systematically conducted, or where drugs, chemicals, glassware or other substances or articles pertinent to such experiments or investigations may be manufactured or othem4se prepared for use on the premises; "Vehicle Repair Shop" shall mean an establishment containing facilities for the repair and maintenance of vehicles on the premises, in which vehicle accessories are sold and vehicle maintenance and repair operations are performed, but shall not include a body shop or any establishment engaged in the retail sale of motor vehicle fuels; "Vehicle Sales or Rental Establishment" shall mean an establishment used for the sale, serv'ice, rent or lease of vehicles and which may include as an accessory use thereto a vehicle repair shop, but shall not include any establishment engaged in the retail sale of motor vehicle fuels; "Video Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which video cassette recorders, tapes, and accessories thereto are stored, serviced, displayed, and offered for rent or retail sale to the public for use off the premises only; "Warehouse" shall mean a building or part of a building which is used primarily for the housing, storage, adapting for sale, packaging, or wholesale distribution of goods, wares, merchandise, food-stuffs, sub, slallces, articles or things, and includes the premises of a warehouseman bat'shall not include a fuel storage tank except as an accessory use; -~,~ "Waste Transfer and Management Facility" shall mean a building or part of a building which is used primarily for the storage, handling or processing of household, institutional, commercial or industrial waste; (a) "Yard" shall mean an area of land which is appurtenant to and located on the same lot as a building or 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 ~vall 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 ~vidth 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; 163 (h) (i) (j) "Rear Yard Depth" shall mean tile shortest tnorizontal dimension of a rear yard of a lot betxveen the rear lot line of tine lot. or where there is no rear lot line. the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest mare building or structure on the lot: "Side Yard" shall mean a yard of' a lot extending from the front yard to tine rear yard. and front thc side lot line to the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on tile lot: "Side Yard \Vidttn" shall mean tile shortest tnorizontal dimension of a side yard of a lot betx',een fine side lot line and tile nearest wall of tine nearest main building or structure on tho lot: "Flankane Side Yard" shall mean a side xard immediateh' adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on tile opposite side of which is a street: "Flankane Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a fiankage side yard oi' a lot betv,'een tile lot line adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on tile opposite side of` which is a street, and tile nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on fine lot: and "Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side xard ortner titan a flankage side yard. PROVISIONS (1) Uses Permitted ("N1C - 15" Zone) No person slnall within tile lands designated "MC I5" on Schedule I attactned hereto, use ally lot or erect, alter, or usc anx building or slrklclurc tbr any purpose except tine lblloxving: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (fl (g) (h) (i) (k) (m) <n) <o) ip) <q) (r) (s) <t) /u) <v) (w) (x) (y) baker>'; business off-tee: club; commercial club: commercial-recreational establishment: commercial sclnoot: convenience store: dry cleaning establishment: financial institution: food preparation plant: light machinery and equipment supplier: light manufacturing plant; merchandise service shop; office-associated commercial establishment: personal service shop; place of amusement or entertainment: place of assembly; place of religious assembl;: printing establishment: professional office: restaurant Type A: rental establistmnent: sales outlet; scientific, medical or research laboratorx: warehouse. 164 -6- (2) Zone Requirements ("MC - 15" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "MC - 15" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter or use any building except in accordance with the following provisions: (a) OUTDOOR STORAGE: All permanent uses, other than parking, shall take place entirely within enclosed buildings or structures with no outside storage or display; (b) FRONT YARD DEPTH (minimum): 6.0 metres (c) INTERIOR SiDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 4.5 metres (d) FLANKAGE SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum) 3.0 metres (e) REAR YARD DEPTH (minimum): ·: 12.0 metres (f) BUILDING HEIGHT (nmximum/' : <: " 12.0 metres (g) PARKING: (i) There shall be provided a~d maintained on thc lands designated "MC-15", parking at a ratio of: 5.5 spaces per 100 square metres gross leasable area for thc first 500 square metres; plus, 3.5 spaces per 100 square metres gross leasable area Ibr all floor space in excess of 500 square metres; (ii) Clauses 5.21.2 (a), (b), (c), (e) and (13, inclusive, of By-law 3036, as amended, shall not apply to the lands designated "MC .- 15" on Schedule I attached hereto; (iii) Despite clauses 5.21.2g) and 5.21.2k) of By-law 3036~ as amended, all entrances and exits to parking areas and all parking areas shall be surfaced with brick, asphalt, or concrete, or any combination thereof. (h) LOADING: (i) shall only be located in the side yard; (ii) Despite (i) above, loading max be located in the rear yard provided it is screened from public view and from abutting residential land uses through architectural screening, landscape buffering, bem~ing or a combination of these ~rcatments. -- 165 (il 0) REAR YARD LANDSCAPED OPEN AREA: A minimum x metre landscaped open ai-ea shall be provided along the rear lot line to screen parking, loading and buildings through architectural screening, landscape buffering, bemm~ or a combination of these treatments, ikom the x'iex~ of abutting residential uses. SPEC[AL REGULATIONS' (i) till) (v) (vi) Despite any other provision in this By-lay,. lawful uses existing oi2 the lands designated "MC-15" on Schedule I attached to this law on the date of passing of this Bv-lax~. shall be deemed to comply v, ith the proxisions of Bx-laxx 3()30. as amended. Anx alterations, additions, or nov, dexelopment on tiao lands shall comply v, ith all tile prox isions set out itl this Bv-lax~: Despite anx other proxision in this B'~-lav,. a waste transfer and management facility shall not be permitted on lands designated "MC-15" on Schedule I attached hereto: A sales outlet, accessory to a pemlittcd bakery, tbod preparation plant, light manufacturing plant, manuI'acturmg plant, merchandise service shop. printing establishment or warehouse, shall only be permitted proxidcd tiaa gross leasable area of the sales otttlet does not exceed 25". of tiao gross leasable floor area of the related industrial operation: Despite Clause (iii) abo'~e, a sales outlet may exceed £5~'. up to a maximum oi' 4()'Co of thc xross leasable floor area of thc related industrial operation, proxided the aggregate gross leasable floor area of all sales outlets in a buildin<~ does not exceed ,>" -°,o oi' thc total ~ross leasable floor area in that buildim,' The maximum gross leasable floor area ibr any convenience store, office-associated commercial establishment, financial institution, personal service shop. and restaurant 'F}pe A shall be 325 square metres: The maximum aggregate gross leasable floor area shall be' A for all convenience stores on the lot: 325 square metres B all office-associated commercial establishnlents on tile lot: 325 square metres C Ibr all financial institutions on tine lot: 325 square metres D for all personal service shops on the lot' 325 square metres E for all restaurants T)Ve A on the lot' 325 square metres 166 -8- BY-LAW 3036 (1) By-law 4257/72 is hereby repealed; (2) By-laws 2118/85 and 2245/86, only as they affect the subject lands designated "MC-15" on Schedule I attached hereto, are hereby repealed; and. (3) By-law 3036, as an]ended, 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 Bv-law 3030, as amended. EFFECTIVE DATE This By-law shall take effect from the day of passing hereof subject to the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board, if required. BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this day of ,2002. Wa5~e Arthurs, Mayor Bruce Taylor, Clerk / MC-I~ BLOCK 215, 40MM499 SCHEDULE T TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2001 MAYOR CLERK APPENDIX III TO REPORT NUMBER PD 02-02 NOTION ROAD AREA DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES Village East Neighbourhood Section 12 Notion Road Area DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES NOTION ROAD AREA DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES / o¢,:-~ 'iI / 170 Notion Road Area Development Guidelines -Table of Contents Section I-2.1.0 I-2.2.0 I-2.3.0 I-2.4.0 I-2.$.0 I-2.6.0 I-2.7.0 I-2.8.0 Page General Description 1 Background 1 Relationship with Pickering Official Plan Vision Statement 2 Guiding Principles 2 The Guidelines 3 I-2.6.1 Roads and Frontages 3 Figure 1 Proposed Streetscape Improvements for Notion Road 4 I-2.6.2 Gateways 5 I-2.6.3 Open Space Edges 6 I-2.6.4 Paths 6 Odour Control 6 Implementation Strategies 6 APPENDIX I Notion Road Area Land Use And Urban Design Study Figure A: Study Area Map Figure B: Demonstration Plan The Notion Road Area Development Guidelines were adopted by Pickering Council oq XT,~, 171 Notion Road Area Development Guidelines I-2.1.0 General Description The ' - +' ~ !* ~o,~o , Road Area is Ia.coted on the wes, ~c~= c:~ ]~r-i~Rc:oc extends west to *'~e rear Io7 lines of the resicentia! developme c ,',es' :'c'-- $ c<eric~ PafKwoy NOrth, to, bUT excluding, the proper::: mT the south-west ~c"~er c~ ~, r":gsTor-, RCaC and Notion Road. The lands comprise OD:Ddt 5 hectares, of ,:.r- sr' CO,2 * Tv, S tr~irOE ~re currently vacant. T,qere is one large . ccont pmrcei and tv~c sq~o;e' ~ ~unT p~,~,z .... ~,S at the north eno of the Area cra quite smmii, and are oevelspes .:..~-~]gr-,* ~no,ostrial and outomotive-reioted uses. Lands to the west are developed with low and medium density '-q '~r~' ~ ts the north are developed as arterial commercial uses. Lands TO, the ess5 ;' The Town ~,~ Ajax, ore developed with heavy industrial uses tho~ are or, t c~po~eo tc remoir-' for the foreseeable future, with new ~,=s, ge deveJopmec and rese',~ ..... "-,~ ~,, ~rtlm~. Further east is Duffins ~,~k To tb,~ SCott' O'S::3~";[eS '-C ~de ' ..... ' 'large for'n-of' commercial ' ~'~ ' ..... ' _ccc Notion Rosa include o HigP,~c, z2' c.,erpcss cc .... ect;r,cj ,.."- 2c:' 'es Eec,ch xccc and to Bo'/~? Sx-eet. I-2.2.0 Background The Notion Road Area Deve cc --e:-- Z~ce ,-es hove been adapted fi'om work done by Brook Mcltroy Inc., City of ?ic~erinc~ ~.sr~- r-g & Development staff, and tine Town of Ajax Planning staff, as part o; :~-,e i~n: ~' c:: ='cr:er-ic,~q / Town, of Ajax Notion Road Area Land Use and Urban Desigr',.~ q ....; ~,~,. ~c ~.~-=~ ~ ~ ~ .... ~,'-: ~ ...... , ~ ~-~,,u ~ k._.u'~ ~ ~' ~.~ ~.r ,,~ ~ on the 'lolnt' land use and design study is provides ir-, z, ose .... ; I-2.3.0 Relationship withPickeringOfficiaIPlan ~ ~ ' ' - ..... :~- ~ d Arec os o Detailed Map 19- NeigiaDourhood 9: Villac~ East icaer~'fies e ;<:~,,u' Review Area for- which Council has ocop~eo De.e~cc,.menT S-,~,ide~Jnes. Section 11.2 of the PickeringOfficial Plan requires mat where Sc'dncil fas adopted Development Guidelines for c Detailed Review Area, de,elco, merit sno',l comply with those Guidelines. The Guidelines build on the u, xcsr- cesign obiect',e: c; S'-~r~ter' 9 -- "Community Design" and Chapter 13- 'Data es Design Co,~sce, c-c,~' c; ~n,e PicXerng Official Plan. in addition To me Guidelines cc. ntained in tr-s cz~_'-' er-c refe~er',,ce sno,JId be made to these other City-wide design ,objectives c' c ccrsi~xerotions in ~ec. oring and reviewing development proposals. Notion Road Area Development Guidelines Page 2 ]~-2.4.0 Vision Statement Through new development, redevelopment, private investment in properties and partnerships with public agencies including the City of Pickering (and the Town of Ajax to the east), it is proposed that the Notion Road Area will evoIve over time to become a prestige/mixed employment area, that values high quality uses on existing sites, and is more compatible with the existing residential uses in the area. It is the City's objective to encourage new development that is compatible with existing heavy industrial uses to the east, and provides for a positive fit with the existing residential development to the west through high performance standards for site operation and appearance within the Notion Road Area. The City's objective was prepared recognizing that the Town of Ajax has the same vision statement for its lands on the east side of Notion Road, and recognizing that the established objectives for the Ajax lands are: to protect the employment land base; make the area more attractive so as to promote additional investment; and to provide for new higher profile employment uses that can co-exist with heavy industry. I-2.5.0 Guiding Principles The following principles have been introduced as mechanisms to guide the course of physical improvements in the Notion Road Area: Vehicular access points and parking should be designed to accommodate the needs of industry and business and should contribute to the evolving mixed employment character of the area, while not adversely affecting existing residential uses; Public safety should be addressed through improved lighting, fencing, access restrictions, screening and enclosure of employment functions; · The streetscape of Notion Road should be unified through landscaping and building placement; Opportunities should be provided for pedestrians to access the Duffins Creek valley to the east; Generous landscape strips and features should be provided along Notion Road and along the western edge of the Notion Road Area as a way to address compatibility issues; Provisions should be made for "gateways" at the north and south ends of Notion Road, to mark municipal enfry points and to establish a sense of identity and profile to the Notion Road Area; · Materials and equipment storage and servic!ng functions fc xJsting uses should only occur within fully enclosed buildings. ObTdoor storage is not permitted. Notion Road Area Development Ouic-~'iqa~ Page ~[-2.6.0 The Guidelines Deveiooment guidelines are intended Tc 'ets ce.e~eers and the public ,understand the intent of the municipality, while ens,,'J,-?, T'-C: ,n~= .cmo review development applications clearly understand the desigr oeiectives me',, are trying to achieve. Development guidelines also provide direction for sub;lc sector imbrovements that will reaui~e Dudget allocations in order that 1-~_.6.1 Roads and Frontaaes Roads should ~rovi~e for ~ safe aN3 oF; c'er, t c. ire,dlaTion [~u ....... ~,,-= *m',OT O~o,~', ,~'-~'~q~ quality cf building materials. image of Notion Road as an empioymer~t sc:'Kwax' B,uiidings should be set s. cck a minimum o; c.- '*-e-'es ;~cm the street i;ne of %oran Road. This ¢¢i ai!o,,, for appropriate c~,,~",,".'- 3 crees sa.iacent tc +,*=i ' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ '~'~+ the future visual Cr-~,OrSctGr 0~ the oreo is re 3-,9, cc-ss'e'er. This will o;sc allow buildings to approach =~ b-,eot wniie mm .... ' ......" u .... o'v'eroli ior-dsccpeo character; For existing lots with Jess tea~- 5{~ metre? f,-onts~:e ct:r-- access easements should be used to maximize landscaped oreo. X. ccess cc,,rTS '3 smaller properties should beconsoliaateowhereverposs'ce. _mr-,oscape~ traffic islands should be used to identify main cri',,e,¢,'o',z and succ,'ce argo corking areas adjacentto the street: A continuous landscaped ccr~' action sr'-~ c: :se :3'c. c~eC ceTvveer~ T,ne building dna the street, for o~ eos~ 25~ ~; the s-e ;"c".'3tje. c~ec:, such andscoped building. Public safety should be improved by encouraging pedestrian activity in areas designed to accommodate pedestrians. Appropriate actions would include providing welt-lit and maintainec sidewalks, clear and identifiable pedestrian paths, and clearly marked p~o~c spaces. "Fence-isosoing" and unrestricted access to areas of employmer-' acf,'i', should De cisc.c, uraged through building placement, and provisions for-asc"cc~ UTe crtdscccec: suffers along the western edge of the Notion Road A'eo: Main entrances to buildings sr-,c~,d oe em:c'-csizec '~-rc~gr-' canopies, ownings and other architectural detoiis. Entrances s,~c,~,c be c"omnent and should be coordinated with on-site pedesTr'aq wal~, .s, s' Notion Road Area Development Guidelines Page 4 174 Double rows of trees should be planted along Notion Road, to create a locally distinct streetscape image, while having the effect of encouraging pedestrian traffic and masking existing industry (see Figure 1)' ! 0 m 0 5 m NOTION ROAD Typical StreetscaDe Plan and Section Figure 1' Proposed Streetscape Improvements for Notion Road Notion Road Area Deveiopmen~' GuJaelines Page S 1 75 A minimum boulevard widthu,-; 5.~. ,_,.,~.. ...... .... c, cu c ce s"o~,,.~_~i'-='- at the street front of buildings alone N¢-;~ - ..... ......... = fo:", ,qd=raround facilities, while ~mprc. nc the face of c~c c ~ ............... canna: be · Tree species should s,e _sad consister+iy w'tniq ,or-cscs:ce s'r ~,s and should be Io'¢, maintenance aha pollution *ate snT spec es' Blank, or single m, oTerloi facoaes that extend The er ~ire Jer-',gtr-.of the Suilding should not De permitweo. ~,~s~e',xo iorge facades~,~,"~ be d;vsed throuoh~ o combination of winoo,¢,'s cr~,j~ ...... ~, materials and colours: significant percentage c .... ,.e s:reeT e,e,c' c'~' Lcrcje ur',broken pork'r-,g are,ssshou,,d rs, e c,c'cec. _sr-cscapingsnouid be used ;c, bering smaller por~ir-:c crees, and st'au c ce crooortionoie to the size of the c, or K~n9 oreo; · n ali cases, rooftop n:~=~ ..... ..... ~ ecu]oma'-* '< '-' ~=e sc,eened from view from the Service areas (Ioad:,-,~ ...... - ;:=~ ....... ~ ~ cesrz'eer-,ec f'cn', - "~ and from the r-ear ",'~':J< ac~ I-2.8.2 Gotewo~ Gateways, or ceor end identifies e xsc nts of er-*r ~ snc, uid se provided at the north and south ends of Notion Road ~o q~,c:.~ ernTr'x' ir-,~o ~r~,e ~r'eo and to signal the municipal boundary bet~,,een Ajax and Picker'ir-3. ~n cj + '-;9 r 3 i 33T9,',3,.5 sh,osld ~e provided with an upGradedstondardofbuildin9tres:me'~- ~r-csc*¢~'~' , ~ , ~ ~,, ~ ~-'-~"~ oqd materiels. Gateway buildings should be oescr-,ed~ os pr?r~r:er, ...... ,,:~-.~' foci. V'erticoJ elements such os towers OF S~C,q* '~e CC; [DECKS 2!qSJiO C;'e used tO Qq©FK their location; · Signage should be used at gaTe¢~,a? cca-'c'-: ~ ~oer~:;:,, and visually unify both ends of Notion Road; Corner buildings should be located~'-~=-¢~=-~-~ 3 n-e'r-es and 8 metres of the street points. Pedestrian entrances src~ c ce .coates ~ a~ .... to the street corner; · It is anticipated that gOTe,',O, een~e'-'z s'c~ c ce coated on both sides of Notion Road and shouio ir, o ~;ce ~si=:rooe3 ~Ir 3~s3;3e eements; Notion Road Area Development Guidelines Page 6 Although there is greater opportunity for a gateway element on the Ajax side of Notion Road at the north end, redevelopment on the Pickering side may permit gateway elements to be achieved. The northern gateway treatments should reflect the architectural and historic character of Pickering Village. I-2.6.3 Open Space Edges Side yard landscape strips between neighbouring properties should be a minimum of 6.0 metres (3.0 metres in width on each property), for vegetation, fencing and snow storage; A minimum 3.0 metre landscaped open area shall be provided along the rear lot line to screen parking, loading and buildings through architectural screening, landscape buffering, berming or a combination of these treatments, from the view of abutting residential uses. I-2.6.4 Paths During the review of site plans for lands centrally located within the Notion Road Area, careful consideration should be given to incorporating public walkways, in a safe and appropriate manner, from Marshcourt Drive through the property to Notion Road. This will also allow connections to the trails along Duffins Creek to the east in Ajax. I-2.7.0 Odour Control The establishment of uses, such as restaurants and bakeries, which may incorporate commercial cooking equipment and thus, may produce odours, shall be required to install high efficiency odour control mechanisms, approved by the City of Pickering, at the construction stage. Requirements for such odour control mechanisms shall be addressed at the time of building permit review. I-2.8.0 Implementation Strategies Council shall consider, during it annual budget process, the allocation of funds for the following projects to assist with improving the image of the Area, and the environmental quality of stormwater run-off: · reconstruction of the northern portion of Notion Road to fully curbed urban standards with sidewalks (a portion of the cost is to be collected through development charges); · special 'gateway' and sidewalk pavement treatment on the south side of the intersection of Kingston and Notion Roads, and the north side of the intersection of Pickering Parkway and Notion Road; · street trees, pavement splash-strip and similar improvements as recommended for Notion Road in the cross-section identified in Figure 1; and Notion Road Area Development G,~,i,seiJres Page 7 ~- 7 7 · burial of above-ground wiring r pm~tnersnip with others' (Pickering owns Notion Road while the Town of Ajax is responsiDle for its maintenance ten,a,~ve~ aL,=-~-,~ for standard urbanization of under an agreement. Picketing has .... ~,_, The west side of the north per- of Notion Rooo -o occ,~r '~- ~r~e year 2003.) The City of Pickering shall consider so"*ce"-~: cs~- *'-,e CASTS cf or-:n-,proveo srorn-~v, cte~ Dona :n Ajax, south and ecs: cf ~ne e'-3 of ~cp,~rm ~o, oc', o~ o $:e~senwoge DOSJS emuo municipoiity. The City of Pickerin.g supnscrts Tr~e eSTOOi!shn~e.qT o: a c,cnnr'~unity/'ndustry liaison committee to seek SOlUTiOnS TO ,?~r'c~e the Notch Re, om ~,rea for ~)us]nesses and residents. Local residents agency officials, as requ~rem. The mits,~ , of Picketing shol!,ea~eSCTne Town of ~,'o>,,-~ c~-.-eqc: i*s noise m)/-,~,' ,~, '=';,~ Dern-,iT' ~,iox To, investigate ccn~,s);c n;s ~ror~-~ nearby Pie<o' r zj '~=~ c~='-';~ of inappropriate noise fr,cn-', Aiox sources. 178 APPENDIX I to the Notion Road Area Development Guidelines Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study The Notion Road Study Area, shown on Figure A, included lands located within both the City of Picketing and the Town of Ajax. It was bounded by Kingston Road to the north, Duffins Creek to the East, Highway 401 to the south and the rear lot line of properties on the west side of Notion Road to the west, excluding the south-west corner of Kingston Road and Notion Road. The Notion Road Study Area and its surroundings evolved from an historic settlement at Pickering Village, with the progressive post-war development of industrial and related uses within the Study Area. More recently, residential uses were introduced to both the east and the west of the Study Area. The introduction of these newer uses, coupled with a proposal for a new waste transfer station on the Aiax side of Notion Road brought public attention to conflicts between heavy industry and residential development in the area, and raised concerns about what the future held for the Study Area. Consequently, the joint City of Pickering/Town of Ajax Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study was conducted between 1999 and 2001, which resulted in official plan and zoning amendments, strategies to improve public infrastructure and other associated strategies to improve the compatibility between the surrounding residential uses and the industrial uses within the Study Area. A central purpose of the policy changes was to encourage development within the Study Area to evolve over time to a high quality mixture of prestige/mixed employment uses. An additional result of lhe study was the adoption by the City of Pickering of the Notion Road Area Development Guidelines for the Pickering lands within the Study Area and the adoption by the Town of Ajax of Urban Design Guidelines for Ajax lands within the Study Area. I 2.4.0 Demonstration Plan One of the products of the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study was a demonstration plan that incorporated the urban design principles arising from the Study. The demonstration plan is provided as Figure B. 1 7:) Figure A: Notion Rcc,s S:uct ,kre.s ~ I ,~,/OTION ROAD LAND USE ~ ~, AND URBAN DESIG,N 1SO Figure B: Demonstration Plan b TOWN of AJAX CITY of PICKERING APPENDIX IV TO REPORT NUMBER PD 02-02 INFOR~IATIONAL REVISION 10 TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN 182 INFORMATIONAL REVISION 10 TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN Informational revisions to the Official Plan can be adopted by Council at any' time. The revisions required to reflect the completion of the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study are as folloxvs. Revise the introductory text to the Village East Neighbourhood in order to identify that Council has adopted the "Notion Road Development Guidelines", such that the introductory text reads as set out below: 2. Revise Map 19 - Neighbourhood 9: Village East, to add shading to indicate that the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study has been completed (see next page). NEIGHBOURHOOD 9: VILLAGE EAST Description · Is bounded by the hydro transmission corridor, thc West I)uftin ( ircck, the Ajax-Pickering boundau', and H~ghway 401 · Has established residential areas fronting Guild Road, Royal R<>ad and Southview Drive; recent subdivision acuvitv at thc western anct eastern ends of the neighbourhood occurred since 1970's · Consists of a mix of detached, semi-detached, townhousc and apartment dwelhngs; also includes fimr neighbourlnood parks plus part of the 'Diana, Princess of \Vales Park', a cemetery and a pohce staUon · Has neighbourhood and communiw shopping around the intersecuon of Brock and Kingston Roads, and the Metro t';ast Trade (;cnn:c, located on the east side of Brock Road · Has enviromnentalh, sensitive areas associated with the \Vest 1)uffins Creek CHANGE ................ · Has/J;ree Detailed Review _\rca,< within its boundatw: (i) lands along the Kingston Road frontage: n l:mds containing and surrounding thc Metro East Trade Centre and thc Home and Leisure Centre; /an& a/o~.g ltae we.~'I .,'ide qi'.k'~,,','~,~: Ciw Council has adopted "I-~mgston Road Corridor Development Guidehnes", which guideline~ :q, ply to thc Kingston Road Corridor through this Neighbourhood CHANGE SET UP OF EXISTING TEXT RE GUIDELINES: ................... Council has adopted development guidelines ea:'l :o~er e/'l];e t-h~p,. 401 / Bro:k Road ADD REFERENCE TO NEW GUIDELINES: ................... T& '~'o/io~ Road y/de qf~N'otzbt~ Road MAP 19 NEIGHBOURHOOD 9: 'vILLAGE EAST P L ~LLL!NO ¢, LEGEND SYMBOLS DETAILED REVIEW AREA '~ LANDS FOR WHICH COUNCIL HA,% RC {REFER ~'O COMPENOIUM DOCUMENT! iCEM CEMETERY POLICE STATION CITY OF PICKERINO PLANNfNG & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DECEMBER, 2OO1 ',:-E LA',2 _7~ 2E%:GNANONSI PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN EDITION 2: Char3te"Eie,e,- - ~rL:c'- ~;=~- ............ T:'o 184 Oi~ of Piokering Planning & Dovelopmont Dopa~ment MA~ NOTION BOAD ~ND USE AND URBAN DESIGN STUDY [ DATE AUG 15, 2001 TO 185 BANBURY COURT City of Picketing Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION BLOCK 215, 40M-1499 7 OWNER SILWELL DEVELOPMENTS LTD. DATE dAN 2, 2002 DRAWN Bv RC i % APPLICATION No. A 5/87 [ SCALE 1:7500 'CHECKED BY SG L ~/ FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY PN-9 PA- 186 ~TTACHME~IT #_ ..~ TO ADMINISTRATION DEPART NT CLE CS DIVISION 1VLEMORANDUM September 20, 2001 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Neil Carroll, Director, Planning & Development Bruce Taylor, Clerk Referrals from Council Meeting of September 17, 2001 RECEIVED SEP 2 1 2ool CITy OF Please be advised that the Council of the City of Picker/ng passed Resolution #105/01, Item #1, at Council Meeting of September 17, 2001, as follows: That Council receive the Addendum to Report PD 20-01 and replace the recommendations in Report PD 20~01, dated May 4, 2001, by adoption of the following recommendations; That Council receive, as background information, the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study, prepared by the Planning & Development Departments of the City of Picketing and the Town of Ajax, with consulting assistance from the firms of Brook Mcllroy and iTrans Consulting Inc., dated May, 2001, and attached as Appendix I to Report Number PD 20-01; as amended June, 2001 by the updated replacement pages contained in Attachment #1 to this Addendum Report; o That Council initiate an amendment to the Picketing Official Plan to implement the results of the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study, and request staff to hold a statutory pubhc meeting on October 18, 2001 to replace the "Study Area" designation on the west side of Notion Road in Pickering with a "Mixed Employment" designation, and add new policies to the Village East Neighbourhood, generally as set out on Appendix II to Report Number PD 20-01; That Council initiate an amendment to Picketing Zoning By-law 3036 to implement the results of the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study, and request staffto hold a statutory public meeting on October 18, 2001, to replace the various "MI" zonings with an appropriate "MC-mixed employment" zoning, generally as set out on Appendix Ill to Report Number PD 20-01; That Council adopt in principle, the Urban Design Guidelines for the Notion Road 'Area, generally as set out on Appendix IV to Report Number PD 20-01, and request that staff rev/se the guidelines as necessary to be consistent with the adopted official plan amendment, reformat the Guidelines to fit the Compendium Document to the Official Plan, and bring the final Development Guidelines to Council for adoption with the final official plan amendment and zoning by-law by Spring 2002; That Council adopt in principle, the h}~tbrmational Revisions to the Pickerin_o O£ficiai Plan, generally as set out in Appendix V to Report Number PD 20-01. and request ti-mt sta~tT refine the In£onnational Revisions iS necessary to be consis:ent with the adopted official plan amendment, and bring the ~tinal Inl~brmational Revisions to Council with the final official plm~ mnendment ~2d zonin~ by-law by Spring. 2002; 7. That Council adopt other implementation measures to improve the Notion Road Area, as set out in Appendix VI to Report Number PD 20-01, hncluding the following: al) consideration during the azmual budgeting process for contributions towards the future urbanization of the north end of Notion Road; possible acquisition of blocks 1'or walkway purposes bet~veen Marshcourt D5ve and Notion Road; special gateway pavement treatments at intersections; pianting street trees; burial of hydro wires; an~t a stonnwater pond adjacent to Du£fins b) supporting the establishment o£ a communitF..business improvement Iiaison group, for the Notion Road Area; ~d c; requesting the Town o£ Ai~,c to amend is noise by-law to permit action on complaints from Picketing residents about noise originating in Ajax; and That Council request the Clerk to for~vard a cop.,.' of' Report Number PD 20-01 and the Addendum to Report Number PD 20-01 and the ~-elated Council decision to the Clerk of the Town of A_~ax. BT:dk Copy: T.J. Quinn, Chief Administrative Ofticer 188 INFORS~ATION REPORT NO. 28-01 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2001 IN ACCORDANCE WITH TIlE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Picketing Official Plan Amendment OPA 01-003/P Zoning By-law Amendment Application A .19/01 City initiated: Notion Road Study Area Part of Lot 17, Concession 1 (West side of Notion Road, between Picketing Parkway and Kingston Road, excluding the south-west comer of Kingston Road and Notion Road) City of Picketing 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION the subject lands are 5 hectares in area and consist of a 50 to 60 metre wide strip located on the west side of Notion Road, between Pickering Parkway and Kingston Road, excluding the south-west corner of Kingston Road and Notion Road (see location map, Attactunent #1 ); the northern third (1.7 hectares) of the subject lands, comprising 9 individual properties, supports attto repair, sales and body shops and other light manufacturing and service industries in facilities with no permitted outdoor storage; the southern two-thirds (3.3 hectares) comprising three properties, is presently vacant; the north and south property are under the same ownership; uses surrotmding the subject lands are: o to the north is a building equipment rental business on the south-west corner of Kingston and Notion Roads; o to the south of Picketing Parkway are vacant lands abutting the Pickering Home and Leisure Centre; © to the west are townhouse condominiums at the north end, detached dwellings in the central area and a small parcel of vacant land immediately north of Pickering Parkway; further west is the Wal-Mart store, the Metro East Trade Centre and the Home and Leisure Centre on the south side of Pickering Parkway; and, o to the east, across Notion Road in thc Town of Ajax are located more than 20 heavy industrial uses with extensive outside storage and manufacturing activities including two cement plants and an asphalt plant; Duffins Creek runs to the east of the industrial properties; 2.0 BACKGROUND the subject lands comprise the Pickering lands within the larger joint City of Picketing/Town Of Ajax Notion Road study area, for Which the "Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study" was conducted; further detail about past and present development of the study area lands, surrounding areas and the transportation system is provided in the "Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study"; (a copy can be obtained from the Pickering Planning & Development Department); the study process commenced in 1999, involved broad based consultation and resulted in Ajax Town Council adoption of the study results for the Ajax study area lands in July 2001; Information Report No. 28-01 Page 189 3.0 4.0 4.1 4.2 Picketing City Council considered the tindings of' the "Notion Road Land Use aud Urban Desigm Study". Planrlhag a: Development Report Number PD 20-01 and Addendum to Report Ntmlbcr: PD 2(1-C)1 at its meeting held September 17, 2001 and adopted Resolution #105'I)1. Item ::1, which (along with other associated decisions} authorized a statutory public inlbrnmtion meeting to initiate amendments to the Picketing C)/'ficial Plan and Zoning By-law 3036 to implement tile findin~ss <of tile study; tile background and study consultation process is described in Appendix III: a full discussion of the siLldv process, planning considerations, land use options considered, urban design proposals and proposed policy is provided in the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Desion Study, Planning & Development Report Number: PD 20-01 and Addendum to Report Number: PD 20-01 (copies of these items ca~ be obtained from the Pkuming & Development Departmentl; CITY'S PROPOSAl. the City of Picketing proposes to amend the Picketing Official Plan and Zoning By-law 3030 in order to imptcment the results of the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study: specifically the Gitv proposes to redesignate the sub ect lands fi'om Urbau Study Arerz to ~lh'.ved /5~Uo/qv,ze~[ as set out on Schedule l, the Land Use Structure schedule of thc Picketing Official Plan: thc text policy tbr thc Notion Road Urban Study Area ~Scction 3.17) is proposed to be deleted, in addition, tho City proposes to add a number of new Village East Neighbourbood policies (Section 11.11 of the Plan~ to guide development of this Mixed Emplo)qnent Area; tho City also proposes to rezone the subject ]ands item various light industrial zoning categories to pe~qnit a range of prestige and higher order employment uses, and establish appropriate yard and other zone provisions, to implement the proposed Mixed Emplosqnent designation. a copy of thc proposed official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment is attached ~see Appendices I and lI); OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING Durham Regional Official Plan the subject lands appear to be designated Em?/q;,,tet~! Area in the Durham Regional Official Plan; lands designated Employment Area may be used lbr manufacturing, assembly and processing of goods, setwicc industries, research and development ihcilities, warehousing, business parks, limited personal sec'ice uses, hotels, storage of goods and materials, retail warehouses, fi-eight transfbr and transportation facilities; the Plan encourages prestige cmplo>qncnt uses xvifl~ high employment generating capaci~ and ~eater architectural, landscaping and s~gn controls to be located along Itighways and T3Tc :X and B Arterial roads: Kingston Road is designated as a ]57c /3 ~:z'icz't~z[ r(;c:d and a Regional D'ansit 5);iue on Map B2- the Transportation System ,~t' thc I)urham Regional O~cial Plan, while both Notion Road and Pickcrii~g Parkway are designated as 7j;7;e C arterial roadx; no amendment lo the Durham Regional ()fficial Plan is required to permit the proposed amendments to thc Picketing Official Plan and Zoning By-law 3036; Pickering Official Plan tile subject lands are designated Lh'bm~ Suidx' .drer:.s' in the Picketing Official Plan and are subject to the Urban Study Areas.' .~¢[io~ Ro~d ],dux~rial Area policies; the subject lands arc located within thc Village East Neighbourhood; lands within an Urbau Stud;' .drerJ.$' designation may be used tbr conse~ation, environmental protection, restoration, education, passive recreation, similar uses and existing lawful uses; Information Report No. 28-01 Page 3 - the Urban Study Areas: Notion Road Industrial Area policy provides that Council shall consider eliminating the Study Area designation following a land use and design study demonstrating that the proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives and general purpose and intent of the Official Plan; is compatible with the surrounding area, given the area's location between residential lands in Picketing and industrial lands in Ajax; and, shall establish appropriate land use designations and policies, by amendment to the Official Plan; - completion of the "Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study" satisfies the foregoing need for a study; the Picketing Official Plan recognizes Employment Areas as those areas having (or intended to have) significant concentrations of manufacturing, assembly, warehousing and/or related employment opportunities; Council shall require the highest standards for site operation and appearance in Mixed Employment Areas, recognizing their, highly visible and accessible locations along main arterial roads; the next highest order of Employment lands, Prestige Employment, may be located in proximity to residential areas; uses permissible in each of the Employment Area subcategories are set out in Table 8 to the Official Plan, which is provided as Attachment # 2 to this Report; Schedule II to the Picketing Official Plan, the Transportation System schedule, designates Kingston Road as a Type B Arterial Road and designates Notion Road and Pickering Park~vay as T),lve C Arterial Roads. Schedule III to the Picketing Official Plan, the Resource Management Schedule, designates the subject lands as Shorelines and Stream Corridors and as Flood Plain Special Policy Areas; these designations recognize areas that may be subject to flooding; the Flood Plain Special Policy Area designation pemfits development and redevelopment within the flood susceptible lands, providing appropriate flood protection measures are instituted; Map 19 of the Picketing Official Plan identifies the subject lands as lying within the Village East Neighbourhood; as described in Section 3.0 of this Report, the City initiated proposal includes an amendment to the Picketing Official Plan (see detailed amendment, Appendix 1 to this Report); 4.3 Compendium Document to the Pickering Official Plan on September 17, 2001, Picketing City Council adopted the "Urban Design Guidelines for the Notion Road Area", in principle, for the subject lands; these guidelines address matters affecting site layout and design such as preferred building locations, screening of roof top equipment, vehicular access and parking, public safety, streetscapes, landscaping, and gateway elements. the "Urban Design Guidelines for the Notion Road Area" will be added to the Compendium to the Picketing Official Plan once the Official Plan Amendment proposed in this Report comes into tbrce; the Kingston Road Corridor Development Guidelines apply to the lands to the immediate north of the subject lands, the south-west comer of Kingston and Notion Roads; the Guidelines .would require any redevelopment of this comer, whether through rezoning or site plan approval, to provide a symbolic eastern gateway to Picketing, through urban form and streetscape elements, to reduce the dominance of the automobile and strengthen pedestrian amenity by such means as improved urban form and streetscape elements (including removal of roadside ditches) and other design features to create a sense of community pride; 4.4 Zoning By-law 3036 the northern one-third of the subject lands are zoned "MI" and "MIS", while the southern two-thirds of the subject lands are zoned "MI-4", all storage and light manufacturing zones, by By-law 3036 as amended by By-laws 4257/72, 2118/85 and 2245/86; the "MI" zone permits business and professional offices, service or repair shops, warehouses or distributing depots, garages, light manufacturing or assembly of products and other specific uses; Information Report No. 28-01 '--~;..ox'.7?jT #_.~TO Page 4 ! 91 one property is zoned "NilS", which pernuts a caretaker's residence in addition to the "M 1" uses; the "M1-4" zone permits warehousing, light manufactunng and other specific uses; O11 lands zoned "Nil" and "MIS", buildings must bt: scl back a minimunl of 12 metres from thc front lot line, and a ini~.il'nUill of 7.5 metres tiom tile rear lot lille or 30 nlclrcs fi'om the rear lot linc when tile abutting usc is residential; on lands zoned "M1-4", buildings must bc set back a nnnimum of 7.5 metres from the front lot linc, and a minimum of 12 metres Ii'om the rear lot line; an amendment to Zoning By-law 3036 is required to iinplement the rccommendations of thc Notion Road l~and Lse and Urban Design Study (see detailed amendment, Appendix II to this 5.1} 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.3.1 5.3.1.1 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION Resident Comments no comments have been received fi'om ;esidents or industrial property owners or operators in response to the notice about the Statutory Public information Meeting; Comments - no agency comments have been received to date i~n response to file notice about thc Statutory Public Inlbnnation Nleeting: Staff Commenls Proposed Amendment to tile Picketing Official Plan the City is proposing these amendments for tile lands withila tile Notion Road study area in order to fulfill the following objectives: o replace the Urban Study Area designation in the Picketing Official Plan with a land use designation that will be compatible with abutting residential nses in Picketing and both heavv industrial uses that cu~ently exist and prestige industrial uses that arc expected to evolve with new development as a result of recent policy amendments of the Town of Ajax for the Ajax study area lands; o establish specific pennitted uses and standards tbr new development and redevelopment within the area by amendment to Zoning By-law 3036 that will lbster compatibility betxvccn employment uses on the subject lands and low and medium density residential uses on abutting lands; o hcilitate evolution of the Notion Road area, over time, to a high quality and attractive prestige employment area; Deletion of Policy 3.17 -- (.5'br~ Study Area: Notiot, Ror~d ]t~rlt~s;~'i~l Area tile "Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study", the proposed amendments to the official plan and zoning by-law, tile proposed urban design guidelines and related implementing recommendations satisfy the requirements contained in Policy 3.17 for removal and replacement of the Study .,M'ea designation; the proposed Mixed Employment designation and policies are consistent with the goals, objectives and general purpose anti intent of the Official Plan, and will result in the establishment of uses that are compatible with the surrounding area; an annendment to thc Official Plan is be/ag processed to estalolish apt~ropriate land use desigmations and policies; Information Report No. 28-01 Page 5 192 ,k T'? ACHMEr'JT #_/-./ TO REPORT # PD t"t,,.?--c;~ 5.3.1.2 5.3.1.3 5.3.2 5.3.2.1 Proposed Mixed Emplo?nettt Designation the Mixed Emplo. wnent designation responds to the constraints and opportunities facing these lands; Mixed Employment uses are compatible with both heavy industrial uses currently occupying the Ajax lands east of Notion Road and the prestige uses intended for the Ajax lands in the future; by contrast, a residential use of these lands would be a sensitive use that would be adversely affected by proximity to the current heavy industry in Ajax, and the flood risk; Mixed Employment uses do not include the same broad range of heavy manufacturing, storage, waste transfer, recycling and processing and fi'eight transfer and transportation facilities of the General Emplo. vme~t uses, and a mix of the higher quality prestige employment uses and limited retailing of goods and services serving the area permitted by the proposed Mixe~t Emplo.~,ment designation can be expected to be more compatible with abutting residential uses than prestige or general employment uses; Proposed Village East Neig/~bot~rhood Policies the proposed Irillage East Neigl~bottrhood Policies provide further dctail with respect to the purpose and means of addressing compatibility between residential and employment uses, accessibility for pedestrians and the methods to upgrade the quality of the area; a list of upgrades is provided to specify the items that Council considers of significance; the exclusion of new automotive and vehicle sales and repair uses, and the inclusion of specific design criteria in the Official Plan provides policy direction for the review of further rezoning and site plan approvals; one of the proposed design criteria is to consider protection for pedestrian pathways, to the satisfaction of the City, to connect Marshcourt Drive to Notion Road, as a condition of development for abutting properties on the west side of Notion Road; the intent of this desi~ criterion is to increase access for residents of the Village East Neighbourhood; concerns respecting the safety of pedestrians in proximity to heavy industry will be one issue to be addressed by an industry/community liaison group; the remaining design criteria proposed for the Village East Neighbottrhood Policies seek to provide policy support for design guidelines proposed within the Compendium to the Official Plan; PropOsed Amendments to Zoning By-law 3036 Permitted Uses - the list of permitted uses proposed for the subject lands implements the more general provisions of the proposed Mixed Emplo)~ment Official Plan designation; the proposed list of uses incorporates the industrial, office, personal service,-restaurant, retail, financial, community, cultural, recreational and similar uses, in addition to the limited retailing of goods and services serving the area permitted by the Mixed Emplo3~nent designation; - the list proposed for Zoning By-law 3036 also includes industrial uses existing on the date this amendment comes into force; this provision is included in recognition of current fights of existing automotive repair, or sales and service establishments and other industrial uses to continue as legal uses with expansion or redevelopment rights on those properties where these uses are currently practiced; - the list of permitted uses is to exclude new automotive repair, or sales and service establistunents, and waste transfer or management facilities as uses not considered compatible with abutting residential uses in light of the potential for noise, pollution, and heavy truck traffic; outdoor storage is not proposed in this area in recognition of both the existing provisions of the current "MI" and "M1-4" zoning and of the objective to Infonnation Report No. 28~01 Page 6 foster compatibility with residential uses and achieve a high quality employment area; 5.3.2.2 Other Provisions 6.0 6.1 6.2 a inaximum building height of' 12 metres is proposed to match maximum building heights permitted tbr the abutting residential dwellings; miifiinuin yard rcquiremel~tS of 7.5 metres ibr thc ITont yard, 12 metres ibr thc rear yard and 4.5 metres ibr side var'ds are proposed in order to permit a reasonable size lbr industrial and commercial buildinos within this shallow (50 to 60 metre wide) strip of land: o t~ical front yard requirements tbr the "~I1" zone are 12 metres and 7.5 metres lbr the "M1-4"zonc, and 7.5 metres is proposed; o t~ical rear yard requirements of 3{) metres ibr properties zoned "MI" would eft~ctix'clv prevent any industrial or commercial building fi-om being constructed on ii,ese lands; the typical rear yard requirements For the"Mi-4" zone of 1~' metres is proposed to be maintained; o lbo t>~ical requirement of 4.5 metre side yards of the "Nil" zone is maintained by these recommended standards: parking, loading and sea-vice uses are to be permitted in the side yard and loading and service areas arc not to be located in the rear yard unless buffered to provide an adequate mitigation of noise fi'on] existing residential dwellings; the proposed requirement ibr a 3-metre landscaped strip tbr planting, fencing and/or benns along the rear property line will ensure an appropriate level of visual screening Ibr existing residential dxvcllings; finally, it 5-metre landscaped strip in the i?ont yard will provide adequate screening of parking, loading and service areas fi'om Notion Road' at the time that an amending zoning bv-iaxv is fbrwarded lbr Council adoption, the tbregoing objectives can be implemented, provided suitable flexibility is also available to make any necessary technical changes. PROCEDUILAL INFORSIATION Official Plan Amendment Approval Authority the Region of Durham may exempt certain local official plan amendments from Regional approval ii' sucit applications are determined to be locally si~ificant, and do not exhibit matters of Regional and. or Provincial interest; at this time, the Region has not vet determined whether this official plan amendment application is exempt fi'om Regional Approval; General written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; oral comments may be made at the Public Inlbnnation Meeting; all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department For a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; if you wish to resen'e the option to appeal Council's decision, you must provide conm~ems to the City betbrc Council adopts an5r by-taw For tiffs proposal; if you wish to be notified of Council's adoption of any official plan amendment, or passing of any zoning by-law amendment, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk: if you wish to be notified of thc decision of the Region of Durham with respect to the proposed amendment to the official plan, you must make a written request to the Commissioner of Planning, Region off Durham Planning D ep artm ent. Information Report No. 28-01 19/1 7.0 OTHER INFORMATION 7.1 Appendix I copy of the Proposed Picketing Official Plan Amendment; 7.2 Appendix II copy of the proposed amendment to Zoning By-law 3036; 7.3 ..Appendix III the background and consultation process of the Notion Road Land Use and Urban Design Study 7.4 Appendix IV list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the proposal at the time of writing this report; Steve Gaunt, MCiP, Pd)P Plammr 2 SG/CLR/jf Copy: Director, Planning & Development Cathehne L. Rose, Manager, Policy t._itq "tY ~ PICKERING REPORT ¢, PD ¢'2.-,,,. Excerpts from the Statutory Public Information Meeting Minutes Pursuant to the Planning Act Thursday, October 18, 2001 7:00 P.~l. Chair: Councillor Johnson The Xlana,gcr, Policy Division. pro\ idcd an overview o~' thc rcciu~rc~ncn~5 of tt~c Plannin~ .Ac~ and the ()ntario Nlunicipal Board rcspcct~n~ ttqi5 meeting and nT'~tttci?, LlIq(~iCI' consideration there :it. (I1} PlCKERING OFFICIAl. PI~.XN ANIENI)3I ENT ()P.\ 01-tH}3/P ZONING BY-LAV~' :\.~IENI)_~IENT APPI.IC.\TION A 19/01 CITY INITIATED: N()'I'I¢)N ROAD STI'DS' :\REA PART OF LOT 17. (ONCESSION 1 (WEST SIDE OF NOIION ROAD, BETXYEEN PICKERING PARK'~¥AY AND KINGSTON ReAl). EXCLtDING THE SOt'TH-\,\'ESI CORNER OF KINGSTON ROAD AN1) NOTION ROAD) Report .lack Milos. 1964 Notion Road. cluc>tioncd }aox\ this '~q~pi]cat]on xxill impact the cxistin,M buildings and uses. Cathy Rose responded th'at 'anx cxistin~ lax,,t'ul t_t:<os xxould continue to be permitted. New construction or si~nilhcant ztdditions xx ould bc ~,ubjcct to .,,itc plan apt')T'OX al. clone dowll by Millxx orR. Cathy Rose advised that thc road is owned by thc ('it\ of t'ickcmnc but maintenance is shared with the Toxxn ct' Ajax. Paving nltiv be conducted >ubjcct to budget approval in 2001. Money bas tentatively been included in dexelopmcnt charges. C'athx also toni]tuned that the appearance of thc area will begin to change as applications arc r'cccix cd but t}]at no aptMications have been received. Mlnl~llry of Tran~portntlon Tra~lsport$ Phone: Fax: E-ma/l: (416) 235-4572 (416) 235-4267 hugh. fyffe~)mto, gov. on.c a AT~, ACH,VIENT # ~ TO Ontari Corridor Management Office 7th Floor, Atrmm Tower 1201 Wilson Avenue Downsview, Ontmso M3M l J8 October 02, 2001 City of Pickenng Administration Depamnent Clerk's Division Picketing Civic CompIex One The Esplanade Picketing, Ontario Official Plan Amendment OPA 01-004/P anti Zoning By-law Amendment A 19/01 City Initiated: Notion Road Study Area Part of Lot 17, Concession 1 City of Pickering We have reviewed tim above Applications and have no objection in principle, subject to thc following comments. This Ministry is concerned about thc future traffic impacts ar/sing from the i~nplmnentation of the above Applications, on tzhe intersection at Picketing Parkweay/Brock Road mad at the E-N/S Ramp Terminal at Brock Road. CC. The mi~fistry would encourage a traffic impact study to rightly assess the possible and probable traffic impacts at these two locations. ' Hugh Fyffe Corridor Management Technician