Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 17, 2008Cif o? Council Meeting Agenda Monday, November 17, 2008 Council Chambers 7:30 pm INVOCATION Mayor Ryan will call the meeting to order and lead Council in the saying of the Invocation. II) DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST III) ADOPTION OF MINUTES PAGE Council. Meeting Minutes, October 20, 2008 1-28 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, 29-37 November 3, 2008 Executive Committee Minutes, November 10, 2008 38-49 IV) PRESENTATIONS V) DELEGATIONS 50-53 VI) CORRESPONDENCE 54-136 VII) COMMITTEE REPORTS 137-146 a) Report PD 2008-12 of the Planning & Development Committee b) Report EC 2008-08 of the Executive Committee VIII) REPORTS - NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS IX) MOTIONS AND NOTICE OF MOTIONS X) BY-LAWS XI) OTHER BUSINESS XII) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW XIII) ADJOURNMENT 147-208. 209-211 212-216 Cif o? Council Meeting Agenda Monday, November 17, 2008 Council Chambers 7:30 pm FOR INFORMATION ONLY • Minutes from Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, September 23 & Oct. 28, 2008 • Minutes from Committee of Adjustment, October 1, 2008 • Minutes from Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee, October 23, 2008 • Minutes from Taxicab Advisory Committee, October 27, 2008 Cirq 00 41 ,...? 1-1 PICKEFING PRESENT: Mayor David Ryan COUNCILLORS: D. Dickerson R.Johnson B. Littley B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles ALSO PRESENT: Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers T. J. Quinn - Chief Administrative Officer N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development T. Melymuk - Director, Office of Sustainability G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer A. Allison - City Solicitor C. Mearns - Chief Executive Officer, Pickering Public Library R. Holborn - Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering S. Reynolds - Division Head, Culture & Recreation D. Wilcox - City Clerk C. Rose - Manager, Policy L. Taylor - Manager, Development Review G. McGregor - Principal Planner, Policy D. Shields - Deputy Clerk (1) INVOCATION Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order and led Council in the saying of the Invocation. (11) DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST 1. Councillor McLean made a declaration of interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act with respect to CORR. 88-08 being correspondence from Steve Warsh, S.R. & R. Developments and Report PD 36-08 of the Director, Planning & Development as he has sold property within the development. Councillor McLean did not take part in the discussion or vote on the matter. 1 01 City 0¢ PICKERING 02 Council Chambers (III) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Resolution # 190/08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor McLean In Camera Council Minutes, September 15, 2008 Council Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2008 In Camera Council Minutes, September 29, 2008 Special Council Meeting Minutes, September 29, 2008 Special Planning & Development Committee Minutes, September 29, 2008 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, October 6, 2008 Executive Committee Minutes, October 15, 2008 CARRIED (IV) PRESENTATIONS 1. Ontario EcoSchool Certification Judy Gould, Waste and Energy Officer Durham District School Board Dunbarton High School Rosebank Road Public School Altona Forest Public School Glengrove Public School Maple Ridge Public School Mayor Ryan, Councillor Littley and Judy Gould, Waste and Energy Officer, Durham District School Board congratulated Dunbarton High School, Rosebank Road Public School, Altona forest Public School, Glengrove Public School and Maple Ridge Public School on obtaining the Ontario EcoSchool Certification status. In order for the schools to obtain EcoSchool status they must have programs in place that teach students to reduce waste, save energy, teach ecological literacy and promote school ground greening. 2. Communities In Bloom Recognition of 5-Bloom Winners Mayor Ryan and Council congratulated the Communities in Bloom Advisory Committee and City of Pickering staff on another successful Communities in Bloom 2 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM City o0 A PICKERING Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers program year. Mayor Ryan noted that the City of Pickering once again achieved a 5 Bloom rating, the highest possible ranking and also noted that special mention was made to the City of Pickering's youth programs. (V) DELEGATIONS 1. Paul. Savel, Chair Pickering Public Library Board Update on Board Initiatives Paul Savel, Chair, Pickering Public Library Board appeared before Council to update the Community on the Board's initiatives and also explained how the Library contributes to the development of a sustainable Community. He noted that the Library continually works towards programs and processes that help the environment, the economy and the social sector by recycling, reusing, trying to reduce gas emissions by introducing electronic features so residents can access the library from their homes and courier routes that reduce excessive driving throughout the City. Mr. Savel noted that the Library continues to address the sustainable concept and all future buildings and programs will keep sustainability in mind as the Library moves forward. 2. Glenn Rainbird, O.C, Chair Michael Angemeer, President and CEO Veridian Corporation Re: Annual Shareholder Update Glenn Rainbird, Chair, Veridian Corporation and Michael Angemeer, President and CEO, Veridian Corporation, appeared before Council to provide Council and Pickering residents with an update on the Corporation and the energy business. They noted that the 2007 fiscal year had a very solid performance and that the Capital expenditures provided for growth and support in the Community. 3. John G. Smith, Campaign Chair United Way of Ajax-Pickering-Uxbridge John Smith, Campaign Chair, United Way of Ajax-Pickering-Uxbridge, appeared before Council and the Community to update them on what the United Way does and how United Way funding is spent and how it supports the Community. Mr. Smith requested the City of Pickering's support and partnership be renewed once again by requesting the City provide the United Way with a Grant in 2009. Mr. Smith also noted that consideration of an increase in the Grant to provide for an increase in the cost of living would be appreciated. 3 . 03 City o¢1 PICX-FRING 04 4. Pat McNeil, SVP Nuclear Generation Development Group Ontario Power Generation Re: Update on Environmental Assessment for the Potential New Build at Darlington Council Chambers Mr. McNeil, Senior Vice President, Nuclear Generation Development, OPG, appeared before Council to provide an update on the New Nuclear Build at Darlington and the Pickering B refurbishment. Mr. McNeil noted that OPG continues to be open and transparent throughout the process by informing residents and stakeholders throughout the process. He noted the upcoming meeting in Ajax for Pickering residents and that they would be seeking input on the Pickering B site. 5. Laura Drake, Chair, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Pat Dunnill, Chair, Pickering Museum Village Foundation Re: Update on Brougham Central Hotel Restoration Proiect Laura Drake, Chair, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee and Pat Dunnill, Chair, Pickering Museum village Foundation, appeared before Council to update them on the Museum initiatives and an update on the Brougham Central Hotel Restoration project. They also expressed their desire for the City to embark on a Cultural Heritage Plan. 6. Paul & Lori Murray Re: Request for City Grant Flavours by the Bay Paul Murray, appeared before Council and presented a proposal for a grant request submission for the 2009 Budget to assist the 2009 Flavours by the Bay event. 8. Joe Caiata Re: Report CS 47-08 Appeal to Variance to Fence By-law 1781 Spruce Hill Road [Refer to New and Unfinished Business Pages 147-1511 Joe Caiata, 1781 Spruce Hill Road, appeared before Council to request a variance to the Fence By-law. Mr.. Caiata noted that he built the fence understanding it was within the by-law regulations and stated that height of the fence in certain areas was for privacy reasons. He noted that due to the elevation changes in his neighbours yard some areas of the property looked right into his backyard. 4 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Crrq 00 PlCKERING, Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 0 9. Don Campbell Re: Report CS 47-08 Appeal to Variance to Fence By-law 1781 Spruce Hill Road [Refer to New and Unfinished Business Pages 147-1511 Don Campbell, 1789 Spruce Hill Road, appeared before Council in opposition to the variance of the fence by-law. Mr. Campbell noted that due to the height of the fence in areas around his property he felt like he was imprisoned. He noted that there is no air movement or light in some areas and felt that this would damage his grass and trees. He stated that even though he spoke to his neighbor regarding the building of the fence he was surprised at the height of the fence. Mr. Campbell stated he was in opposition to the fence and noted he would either like a chain link fence or a fence no higher then 6 feet. 10. Dennis Large Dalar Properties Re: Report PD 39-08 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/07 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road (Part of Lot 32 & Part of Block C, Plan M 1040) City of Pickering Dennis Large, appeared before Council in opposition to the refusal of his zoning application and noted that they have looked throughout Pickering and cannot find a suitable location. Mr. Large stated that if the zoning was approved he would also like to see an office component within the by-law. 11. Gordon Willson Re: Report PD 35-08 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program -Terms of Reference -Collaborative Study Management Gordon Willson appeared before Council and noted he did not support Seaton. He stated that he did not feel that the expectations for Seaton could be met and felt that the Terms of Reference need to be strengthened. He stated that we need to put more emphasis on saving and respecting our heritage and feels no real thought has been placed on heritage. 5 Caq o¢1 PICICEFING 06 Council Chambers 12. Peter Rodrigues Re: Report PD 35-08 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program -Terms of Reference -Collaborative Study Management Peter Rodrigues appeared before Council in opposition to the development in Seaton and the proposed development of the area. He questioned whether the population for Seaton was based on land acreage and noted that if high density for this area was approved then the population could be quite a bit more. He questioned what was so sustainable about double the population which would mean double the garbage, double the crime, double the energy use and also noted what it would do to the environment. Mr. Rodrigues stated that urban sprawl needed to be curbed. Mr. Rodrigues also questioned why the landowners were allowed to participate in the Management Committee. He stated that the public do not feel engaged in this process and are not being listen to. (VI) CORRESPONDENCE CORR. 81-08 BRUCE PASSMORE, DIRECTOR, OUTREACH HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (CANADA) 372 St. Catherine St. West, Suite 319 Montreal, QC H3B 1A2 Resolution # 191/08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor McLean That CORR. 81-08 from Bruce Passmore, Director, Outreach, Humane Society International (Canada) requesting the City of Pickering consider adopting a resolution (draft attached) with respect to the opposition of battery cage egg production based on the inherent cruelty of confining egg-laying hens in battery cages be received for information. DEFEATED ON A RECORDED VOTE YES NO Councillor Johnson Councillor Dickerson 6 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Caq o? Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 07 Councillor McLean Resolution # 192/08 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell Councillor Littley Councillor O'Connell Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan That CORR. 81-08 from Bruce Passmore, Director, Outreach, Humane Society International (Canada) requesting the City of Pickering consider adopting a resolution (draft attached) with respect to the opposition of battery cage egg production based on the inherent cruelty of confining egg-laying hens in battery cages be endorsed as follows: To encourage Pickering residents to; a) as restaurants and caterers in both private and City operations, to highlight the support for and availability of certified organic, free-range eggs on their menus; b) as consumers, to request the option of purchasing certified organic, free-range eggs at retail food outlets and restaurants and, where available, choose the certified organic, free-range option; c) as wholesalers, to highlight the preference for and availability of certified organic, free-range eggs in their food supply inventories; d) as retailers, to highlight the preference for and availability of certified organic, free-range eggs in their food stores; 2. That the operators and caterers of City-run facilities be encouraged to use only certified organic, free-range or free-run whole (shell) eggs; 3. That a letter be written to the Provincial Government, Federal Government and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency stating that the Pickering Council opposes battery cage egg production based on the inherent cruelty of confining egg-laying hens in battery cages; and, 4. That a letter be written to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario requesting all members to adopt a similar initiative. 7 Cttq o¢ A Council Meeting Minutes PICKERING Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM 08 Council Chambers CARRIED ON A RECORDED VOTE LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor Johnson Councillor Littley Councillor McLean Councillor O'Connell Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan Resolution # 193/08 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That the words in recommendation (2) of the draft motion be changed from "be requested" to "be encouraged". CARRIED 2. CORR. 82-08 DOUGLAS G. MARTIN MAYOR, TOWN OF FORT ERIE 1 Municipal Centre Drive Fort Erie, ON L2A 2S6 Resolution # 194/08 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson That CORR. 82-08 from Douglas G. Martin, Mayor, Town of Fort Erie, requesting support from the City of Pickering with respect to supporting a Private Member's Bill calling for the public election of all hospital boards in the Province of Ontario as part of the municipal elections commencing in 2010 be received for information. CARRIED 8 Cat o0 All PICKERINQ Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 3. CORR. 83-08 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER CITY OF PICKERING Resolution # 195/08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor McLean That CORR. 83-08 from Thomas J. Quinn, Chief Administrative Officer, City of Pickering requesting Council direction with respect to having staff meet with the Landowners Group to discuss the Terms of Reference made by the Planning & Development Committee be received for information. CARRIED 4. CORR. 84-08 SANDRA KRANC, CITY CLERK CITY OF OSHAWA 50 Centre Street South Oshawa, ON L1 H 3Z7 Resolution # 196/08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That CORR. 84-08 from Sandra Kranc, City Clerk, City of Oshawa with respect to support for parenting events and National Bully Awareness Week be received for information. (A copy of the City of Pickering's Zero Tolerance Policy will be forwarded to the City of Oshawa) CARRIED 5. CORR. 85-08 SAFE KIDS CANADA FCM MARKETPLACE Resolution # 197/08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell 9 09 ?fct o? PICXEMG 10 Council Chambers That CORR. 85-08 received from Safe Kids Canada through FCM Municipal Marketplace to advise of the upcoming "Canada's Favourite Crossing Guard Contest" to encourage municipalities to work with their schools to enter local crossing guards be received for information. CARRIED 6. CORR. 86-08 P.M. MADILL, REGIONAL CLERK REGION OF DURHAM 605 Rossland Road East, Whitby. ON L1 N 6A3 Resolution # 198/08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That CORR. 86-08 from P.M. Madill, Regional Clerk, Region of Durham, advising that at a meeting held on September 17t , 2008, Regional Council adopted a resolution with respect to the transfer of transit facilities from area municipalities be received for information. CARRIED 7. CORR. 87-08 ROBERT A. DRAGICEVIC, MCIP, RPP SENIOR PLANNER WALKER, NOTT, DRAGICEVIC ASSOCIATES LIMTIED 172 St. George Street, Toronto. On M5R 2M7 Resolution # 199/08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That CORR. 87-08 from Robert A. Dragicevic, Senior Principal, Walker, Nott, Dragicevic Associates Limited providing comments with respect to the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Environmental Servicing Plan be received for information. CARRIED Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM 10 PICKERING 8. CORR. 88-08 STEVE WARSH S.R. & R DEVELOPMENTS 35 The Links Road, Suite #201 Toronto, ON M2P 1T7 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers Resolution # 200/08 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley 1. That CORR. 88-08 from Steve Warsh, S.R. & R Developments requesting Report PD 36-08 respecting parkland conveyance be referred to the November 17t Council meeting be received for information; and 2. That Report PD 36-08 of the Director, Planning & Development (Item #4 of PD 2008-11) be referred to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council. CARRIED 9. CORR. 89-08 RESIDENTS LETTERS FAIRPORT ROAD TRAFFIC CALMING Resolution # 201/08 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean That CORR. 89-08 from the following Pickering residents expressing their opposition to the proposed plan for traffic calming on Fairport Road: Doreen Smith, Harriet Willoughby, Ms. M. Kelly, Paul Bailey, Cynthia Campbell, Judith Matthers, Cindy Turnbull and Paul Flannery be referred to the Director, Operations & Emergency Services to report. CARRIED 10. CORR.90-08 RECYCLING COUNCIL OF ONTARIO Resolution # 202/08. 11 C-tty 00 PICKERING 12 Council Chambers Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That CORR. 90-08 received to request that the City of Pickering proclaim October 19-25, 2008 as Waste Reduction Week be proclaimed. CARRIED 11. CORR. 91-08 MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS & HOUSING Association of Municipal Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario Association of Municipalities of Ontario Resolution # 203/08 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That CORR. 91-08 received from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing for the Introduction of Local Government Week be endorsed and that the week of October 19-25, 2008 be proclaimed as Local Government Week. CARRIED 12. CORR. 92-08 JOHN PRESTA DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REGION OF DURHAM 605 Rossland Road East Whitby, ON L1 N 6A3 CORR. 92A-08 SEAN LOVE, SENIOR COUNSEL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK YORK REGION 17250 Yonge Street Newmarket, ON L3Y 6Z1 Resolution # 204/08 12 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Crrq 00 A Council Meeting Minutes PICKEIUNG Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 1 3 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That CORR. 92-08 from John Presta, Director, Environmental Services, Region of Durham and additional correspondence received on October 20th, 2008 from Sean Love, Senior Counsel, Environmental Law, York Region with respect to Director, Planning & Development Report PD 39-08, Dalar Properties. The Region of Durham and Region of York respectfully requests that the City defer a decision on Zoning Amendment Application A 11/07 in order to review with the applicant and the City alternative locations for the current activities at 1050 Squires Beach Road be received for information; and 2. That Report PD 39-08 of the Director, Planning & Development (Item #5 of PD 2008-11) be deferred to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council. CARRIED (VII) COMMITTEE REPORTS a) REPORT PD 2008-11 OF THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE 2. Director, Planning and Development Report PD 33-08 Maxcon Developments Ltd./Cassel, Sidney/Cassel Consultants Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1827 Nugget Construction Co. Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1831 Maxcon Developments Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1861 Garthwood Homes Limited/Thomas Feeley Construction Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1866 Woodsmere Properties Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1875 Marshall Homes (Woodview) Limited/Rival Enterprises Inc. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1877 13 Ciro o¢? 14 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers Shrone View Holdings Inc. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1887 Woodsmere Properties Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1896 Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report PD 33-08 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision 40M-1827, 40M-1831, 40M-1861, 40M-1866, 40M-1875, 40M-1877, 40M-1887 and 40M-1896 be received; 2. That the highways being Chickadee Court and Sparrow Circle within Plan 40M-1827 be assumed for public use; 3. That the highways being Sandhurst Crescent, Meldron Drive and Deerhurst Court within Plan 40M-1831 be assumed for public use; 4. That the highway being Nordane Drive within Plan 40M-1861 be assumed for public use; 5. That the highways being Lekani Court and Mountain Ash Drive within Plan 40M-1866 be assumed for public use; 6. That the highways being Woodsmere Court, Wildflower Drive and Deerhaven Lane within Plan 40M-1875 be assumed for public use; 7. That the highway being Rouge Forest Crescent within Plan 40M-1877 be assumed for public use; 8. That the highway being Clearside Court within Plan 40M-1887 be assumed for public use; 9. That the highways being Summerpark Crescent, Garland Crescent and Wildflower Drive within Plan 40M-1896 be assumed for public use; 10. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to Plans 40M-1827, 40M-1831, 40M-1861, 40M-1866, 40M-1875, 40M-1877, 40M-1887 and 40M-1896, which are constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by the City, or on lands lying immediately adjacent thereto, including lands that are subject to easements transferred to the City, be accepted and 14 Ciry o0 All PICKEMNG Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers assumed for maintenance, save and except from Blocks 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 27, Plan 40M-1827; Lot 35, the remainder of Lots 36 and 80, Blocks 99, 100, 101 and 102, Plan 40M-1831; Blocks 13, 14, 15 and 17, Plan 40M-1861; Block 57, Plan 40M-1866; Block 144, Plan 40M-1875; Blocks 33, 34, 35 and 38, Plan 40M-1877; Block 21, Plan 40M-1887 and Blocks 209 and 211, Plan 40M-1896; 11. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to Plans 40M-1827, 40M-1831, 40M-1861, 40M-1866, 40M-1875, 40M-1877, 40M-1887 and 40M-1896, save and except from Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1827; Lot 35 and the remainder of Lots 36 and 80, Plan 40M-1831 and Blocks 13, 14 and 15, Plan 40M-1861, be released and removed from title; 12. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Block 103, Plan 40M-1831 as public highway; and 13. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Blocks 54 and 55, Plan 40M-1866 as public highways. 3. Director, Planning & Development Report PD 34-08 Rockwood Drive Road Extension Road Closing and Abandonment of Easements Reconveyance of Land/Interest to Adjacent Owners COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report PD 34-08 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Council enact a by-law to: a) stop-up and close those portions of Rockwood Drive being Blocks 16, 17, 18 and 19, Plan 40M-2164 and Blocks 19 and 20, Plan 40M-2068 as public highway; b) declare those portions of Rockwood Drive being Blocks 16, 17, 18 and 19, Plan 40M-2164 and Blocks 19 and 20, Plan 40M-2068 surplus to the needs of the Corporation for the purpose of sale to the abutting owners, in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act and the Acquisition and Disposal of Land Policy and subject to any required easements; c) abandon the easements, in favour of the City, for road access/maintenance purposes, over those parts of Lots 1, 2, 14 and 15, Plan 40M-2164, 15 15 City 00 PICKEMG 16 Council Chambers designated as Parts 1; 2, 3 and 4, Plan 40R-22162 and reconvey the easement interest to the abutting owners; and d) authorize the execution of all relevant documentation necessary to abandon the existing access/maintenance easements, stop-up and close portions of Rockwood Drive as public highway and effect the conveyances of same to the abutting owners for nominal consideration, subject to any required easements. 4. Director, Planning & Development Report PD 36-08 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. -Parkland Conveyance COUNCIL DECISION That Council confirm the requirement that S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland in relation to the redevelopment of the lands in the former Bay Ridges Plaza shown on Attachment #1 to Report PD 36-08. 6. Director, Planning & Development Report PD 40-08 1291821 Ontario Limited 1070 Toy Avenue (South Part of Lot 18, Concession 1 Parts 1 - 5, 40R-19641 and Parts 1 - 3, 40R-22986) City of Pickering COUNCIL DECISION That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 31/05 submitted by 1291821 Ontario Limited to amend the zoning of the subject property to permit outdoor storage, truck parking, loading facilities and railway trackage in any yard in association with the existing permitted liquid waste management facility on lands situated on the South Part of Lot 18, Concession 1 (Parts 1 - 5, 40R-19641 and Parts 1 - 3, 40R-22296) be approved; and 2. Further, that the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 31/05 as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 40-08 be forwarded to City Council for enactment. Resolution # 205/08 16 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM City 00 A PICNEWNG Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 17 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Littley That the Report of the Planning and Development Committee PD 2008-11, dated October 6, 2008, be adopted save and except Items 1 and 5. CARRIED Item 4, being Report PD 36-08 of the Director, Planning & Development was referred to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council earlier in the meeting. Refer to Resolution #200/08. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 41-08 Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Environmental Servicing Plan and Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) Category'B' Class EA Cost Sharing Agreement Funding Request for Stormwater Management Facility and Related Infrastructure Resolution # 206/08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Littley That Council receive Report PD 41-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Environmental Servicing Plan and ORC Category 'B' Class EA dated June 2008 for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood; 2. That Council endorse the recommendations of the Environmental Servicing Plan and ORC Category 'B' Class EA dated June 2008, as set out in Attachment #1 to Report PD 41-08 subject to changing the designation on lands located on the west side of Tillings Road from Low Density Area to Medium Density Area, as set out in Attachment #5a to Report PD 41-08; 3. That Council authorize staff to: (i) initiate an amendment to the City's Official Plan and revisions to the Duffin Heights Development Guidelines to implement the land use, transportation and environmental recommendations of the Environmental Servicing Plan including the recommendations set out in Sections 3.3 and 3.4 of this Report; and 17 f-tcf 0? PICKERING 18 Council Chambers (ii) advertise and host both Planning Act required meetings (Public Open House and Statutory Public Meeting) for the above Official Plan Amendment; 4. That Council endorse in principle entering into a cost sharing agreement with the Duffin Heights Landowner Group respecting the provision of infrastructure in the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood and that staff report back to Council with a report seeking formal authority to execute the cost sharing agreement and authority to front-fund the costs of the infrastructure as shown in Attachments #8 and #9 to Report PD 41-08 when the agreement is in its final form; 5. That the City require a report to be submitted with all development applications demonstrating how the site development and building design/construction is consistent with the City's Sustainable Development Guidelines; and 6. Further, that a copy of Report PD 41-08 be forwarded to the Region of Durham, Town of Ajax, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Durham School Boards and the Duffin Heights Landowners Group for information. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) Resolution # 207/08 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That the main motion be amended by adding the following as Item #6 and renumbering Item #6 to Item #7: 6. That a Special Planning & Development Committee meeting be held to discuss and clarify matters respecting development of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood such as building heights and mixed use form in the Mixed Corridors designation, phasing, parking and sustainable elements as input to the preparation of the draft amendment to the City's Official Plan and draft revisions to the Development Guidelines. CARRIED 5. Director, Planning & Development Report PD 39-08 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/07 18 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM qty o¢1 . 41 PICKERING Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 19 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road (Part of Lot 32 & Part of Block C, Plan M 1040) City of Pickering Resolution # 208/08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Littley That Report PD 39-08 of the Director, Planning & Development be referred back to staff for further information and discussion with the Region of Durham and the Region of York and brought back to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council. CARRIED REPORT EC 2008-08 OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 28-08 Information Technology (IT) Server Room -Ventilation and Air Conditioning, Civic Complex COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report OES 28-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services, regarding the Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) requirements for the Information Technology (IT) Server Room in the Civic Complex be received; and 2. That staff be directed to proceed with a formal tender process for the provision of ventilation and air conditioning in the Information Technology Server Room. 2. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 31-08 Municipal Bridge Maximum Gross Vehicle Weight Restrictions -By-law to Establish a Load Limit for Bridge #5001 on. Whitevale Road -Amendment to By-law 6753/07 COUNCIL DECISION That Report OES 31-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the establishment of safe load limits on municipal bridges be received; and 19 City o? PICKERING 20 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 2. That the attached Draft By-Law limiting the gross vehicle weight of any vehicle or any class thereof, passing over certain bridges, under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering be enacted. 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 32-08 City's Traffic & Parking By-law No. 6604/05 -Housekeeping and Updating Amendments COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report OES 32-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding proposed amendments to the City's Traffic & Parking By-law No. 6604/05 be received; and 2. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted to amend By-law No. 6604/05. 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 34-08 Supply & Delivery of One-Ton Sign Truck -Q-63-2008 COUNCIL DECISION 1.. That Report OES 34-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the supply and delivery of One (1) One-Ton Sign Truck be received; 2. That Quotation No. Q-63-2008, as submitted by Donway Ford Sales for the supply and delivery of One (1) One-Ton Sign Truck, in the amount of $83,233.54 (PST and GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross purchase cost of $83,233.54 and net purchase cost of $79,550.64 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the purchase with funds received from a Transportation Infrastructure Grant as approved in the 2008 Capital Budget; and 5. Further, that the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to give effect thereto. 5. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 35-08 Durham Region Grade 5 Action Pass Program 20 Cart o¢? PICKERING Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report OES 35-08 regarding the Durham Region Grade 5 Action Pass Program be received; 2. That Council approve the Durham Region Grade 5 Action Pass Program for Grade 5 students to have free access to City of Pickering public swim and public skate programs; and 3. That the appropriate officials at the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. 6. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 40-08 Internal Controls Review - Clerks Division. Animal Services Section COUNCIL DECISION That Report CS 40-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding the results of the Internal Controls Review - Clerks Division, Animal Services Section be received for information. 7. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 44-08 Tender/Contract Approval -Councils' Summer Recess COUNCIL DECISION That Report CS 44-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding tendering and contract approvals during Councils' Summer Recess be received; and, 2. That Council pass a resolution ratifying the approval of the Tenders and Contracts by the Chief Administrative Officer contained in this Report during Council's summer recess being Tender No. T-7-2008 Surface Treatment, Tender No. T-8-2008 Pickering Lawn Bowling Greens Phase II, Tender No. T-9-2008 Path Extension to Bus Loop at Sunbird Trail Park and Tender T-11-2008 Supply & Installation of Humidification System Pickering Civic Complex. 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 46-08 Proposed Increase to Taxicab Fares COUNCIL DECISION 21 21 City 00 PICKFRING 22 Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 1. That Report CS 46-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; and, 2. That the draft by-law, included as Attachment #1 to Report CS 46-08, to amend By-law #6702/06 to provide for an increase to taxicab fares effective November 1, 2008 be enacted. 9. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 48-08 2009 Standing Committee and Council Meeting Schedule COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report CS 48-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the 2009 Standing Committee and Council Meeting Schedule included as Attachment 1 to this report be approved; and 3. That the City Clerk be given authority to give effect thereto. Resolution # 209-08 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the Report of the Executive Committee EC 2008-07, dated October 15, 2008, be adopted. CARRIED (VIII) REPORTS - NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Director, Planning & Development Report PD 35-08 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program -Terms of Reference -Collaborative Study Management Resolution # 210-08 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 22 Council Meeting Minutes Citq 00 PICX-FRINGIr Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 3 1. That Report PD 35-08, of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program, be received; 2. That the draft Terms of Reference for the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program which requires appropriate opportunity for public engagement and consultation, be endorsed, as set out in Appendix I, as amended as follows; Section 1.8 (Consultant Selection) - First paragraph to read: The consulting team shall include in their proposal a section on Conflict of Interest. This section shall contain information respecting disclosure of possible conflict of interest, including any business, financial or other interest respecting the lands, owners/developers of the Seaton lands, or prospective owners/developers of the Seaton lands. Appendix A, Section 1(d) identification of detailed community facility requirements including but not limited to municipal facilities, and such other facilities as elementary and secondary schools and places of worship; and Appendix A, Section 3 (a) beginning with the first residential neighbourhood and employment lands along the 407 corridor, facilitating the early introduction of transit services, alternative transportation facilities and retail and service uses to accommodate residents' needs. Appendix A, Section 5 (e) Requiring the commencement of the development of the employment lands along the Highway 407 corridor prior to the commencement of the residential neighbourhoods. 3. That the collaborative management approach to the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program between the City of Pickering and the Seaton Landowner Group (North Pickering Development Management Inc.) be endorsed; 4. That, to formalize the collaborative management approach, the Mayor and the Clerk be authorized to enter into a Management Committee agreement with the Landowner Group that is consistent with the terms and conditions set out in Section 2.2 of this Report; 5. That the issuance of a Request for Proposals by the Seaton Landowner Group for the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program be advertised appropriately, authorized to the consulting firms listed below and any additional consulting firms wishing to submit a Request for Proposal, following the execution of the Management Committee agreement between the City and the Landowner Group: 23 Caq O? 3 PICKEMG 2 4 Council Chambers • Bousfields Inc. • Malone Given Parsons Ltd. • Macaulay Shiomi Howson Ltd. • planningAlliance • Planning Partnership • Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc. • Walker Nott Dragicevic Associates Limited • Weston Consulting Group Inc., and • Young Wright/1131 Group 6. That the following City staff be appointed to the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Management Committee: the Director, Office of Sustainability; the Director, Planning & Development; and the Manager, Policy; 7. That Council make the final decision on any matters regarding the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program and that City staff formally report to Council regularly for information, direction and endorsement as appropriate on the work of the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program as it progresses; and 8. Further, that a copy of this Report and Council's resolution be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Ministry of Infrastructure and Energy, the Ontario Realty Corporation, the Region of Durham, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, the Trustee for the North Pickering Development Management Inc., and the Sernas Group (on behalf Oof the Landowner Group), CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) Resolution # 211/08 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report PD 35-08 be referred back to staff to meet with landowners and be brought forward to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council MOTION DEFEATED 24 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Cztq o? PICKE1UNG Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 2 5- 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 47-08 Appeal for Variance to Fence By-law, 1781 Spruce Hill Road Resolution # 212/08 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor McLean That Report CS 47-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; and, 2. That the variance to Fence By-law 425/76 for property know as 1781 Spruce Hill road be denied. CARRIED 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 38-08 Quotation No. Q-62-2008 -City Services & Leisure Guides and Supplements Resolution # 213/08 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Report OES 38-08 regarding the City Services & Leisure Guides and Supplements be received; 2. That Quotation No. Q-62-2008 submitted by York Region Printing for the printing of the City Services & Leisure Guides and Supplements in the amount of $91,145.90 (GST extra) be accepted; and, 3. Further, that the appropriate officials at the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. CARRIED 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 36-08 Playground and Park Reconstruction -Quotation Q -71-2008 Resolution # 214/08 25 City 00 PIC-NUUNG `! Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report OES 36-08 of the (Acting) Director, Operations & Emergency Services be received; 2. That Quotation No. Q-71-2008 submitted by Royalcrest Paving & Contracting Limited in the amount of $87,890.25 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $116,233 and a net project cost of $110,698 including the quotation amount and other associated costs be approved; 4. That Council of the City of Pickering authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) The sum of $110,000 from the Parkland Reserve Fund as identified in the 2007 Capital Budget; b) The balance of $698 from the 2008 Current Budget; and 5. Further, that the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect thereto. CARRIED (IX) BY-LAWS 6898/08 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing parking restrictions on private property (By-law attached) 6899/08 Being a by-law to dedicate Blocks 54 and 55, Plan 40M-1866 as public highways. [Refer to Planning page 37] 6900/08 Being a by-law to dedicate Block 103, Plan 40M-1831 as public highway. [Refer to Planning page 36] 6901/08 Being a by-law to stop up and close certain portions of Rockwood Drive as public highway, abandon easements in favour of the City and reconvey certain lands and interests in land to the abutting owners. [Refer to Planning page 42] 26 C-tty 00 i`i PICKEFING Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers 6902/08 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 2234/86, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering District Planning Area, Region of Durham, on South Part of Lot 18, Concession 1 Parts 1-5, 40R-19641 and Parts 1-3, 40R-22986, in the City of Pickering (A31/05). [Refer to Planning pages 99-101] 6903/08 Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 6753/07. [Refer to Executive Page 11] 6904/08 Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 6604/05 [Refer to Executive pages 17-19] 6905/08 Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 6702/06 to confirm an increase to taxicab fares. [Refer to Executive page 102] 6907/08 Being a by-law to amend Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6718/07, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham in Part Lot 27, Range 3, Broken Front Concession, Parts 1, 2 & Part of 3, 40R-8710, and "West Shore Boulevard (aka Fairport Road) between Kings Highway No. 2 and Kings Highway No. 401 being road allowance between Lots 26 and 27, Concession Broken Front", in the City of Pickering (Al 5/08) (By-law attached) THIRD READING: Councillor Johnson, seconded by Councillor Littley moved that By-law Numbers 6898/08 to 6907/08, be adopted save and except By-law 6906/08, and the said by-laws be now read a third time and passed and that the Mayor and Clerk sign the same and the seal of the Corporation be affixed thereto. CARRIED By-law 6906/08 was withdrawn and referred to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council, being the by-law attached to Report PD 39-08 of the Director, Planning & Development which was referred to the November 17, 2008, meeting of Council. (X) OTHER BUSINESS Councillor Dickerson gave notice that he would be bringing forth a Notice of Motion pertaining to Regional representation by population. (XI) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW 27 27 C'cty 00 41 28 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, October 20, 2008 7:30 PM Council Chambers By-law Number # 6908/08 Councillor Johnson, seconded by Councillor Dickerson, moved for leave to introduce a By-law of the City of Pickering to confirm those proceedings of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering at its Regular Meeting of October 20, 2008. CARRIED (XII) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 12:40 am. 28 DATED this 20th day of October, 2008 MAYOR DAVID RYAN DEBI A. WILCOX CITY CLERK City oo Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley PRESENT: Mayor Ryan COUNCILLORS: D. Dickerson R.Johnson B. Littley B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles ALSO PRESENT: N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development L. Taylor - Manager, Development Review C. Rose - Manager, Policy R. Pym - Principal Planner, Development Review S. Gaunt - Principal Planner, Policy D. Shields -Deputy Clerk (1) DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST 1. Councillor McLean made a declaration of interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act with respect to the Information Report No. 22-08, regarding Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2008-02, as he has sold property within the development. Councillor McLean did not take part in the discussion or vote on the matter. (II) PART W- INFORMATION REPORTS City Initiated Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan File: OPA 08-002/P Requirements for Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Consultations City of Pickering (Pickering Official Plan Review) A public information meeting was held under the Planning Act, for the purpose of informing the public with respect to the above noted application. Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. She also noted 29 C-ty 00 PICKE 30 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littlev that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City before by-laws are passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Steve Gaunt, Principal Planner, Policy, gave an overview of the City initiated amendment to the Pickering Official Plan. No members from the public spoke in opposition or support to OPA 08-002/P. 2. Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2008-02 S.R. & R Bay Ridges Ltd. Part of Block Y Plan 16 City of Pickering A public information meeting was held under the Planning Act, for the purpose of informing the public with respect to the above noted application. Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. She also noted that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City before by-laws are passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Ross Pym, Principal Planner, Development Review, gave an overview of the Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2008-02. William Friedman, the representative for S.R. & R Bay Ridges Ltd. appeared before the Committee in support of the application and to answer questions if required. Ken Devine, 506-1210 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee and noted his concerns in regard to the developments mixed uses and what additional parking problem this would create in the area. Mr. Devine also stated his concern with a grading problem and how they have had flooding in the area and asked whether the new development would create additional flooding problems if the site wasn't graded properly. 2 City 00 PICKERING Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littlev (III) PART `B' - PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORTS 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 37-08 Rinal Enterprises Inc. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1906 Cougs Investments Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1913 Ballymore Building (Pickering) Corp. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1915 Dare-Dale Developments Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1916 Rondev Homes Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1920 Rondev Homes Ltd./ACPA Corporation Ltd./Bianchi; Vincenzo, Lisa, Gabriale and Liliana/Digirolamo, Filomena and Anna Plan of Subdivision 40M-1923 Woodsmere Properties Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1943 Marshall Homes (Altona) Limited/D'Oliveira, Anthony and Allison Helbling, Gertrude Plan of Subdivision 40M-1958 Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report PD 37-08 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M- 1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958 be received; 3 31 Cary 00 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes PICKE Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 32 Chair: Councillor Littley 2. That the highway being Monica Cook Place within Plan 40M-1915 be assumed for public use; 3. That the highway being Holbrook Court within Plan 40M-1916 be assumed for public use; 4. That the highway being Granby Court within Plans 40M-1920 and 40M- 1923 be assumed for public use; 5. That the highways being Stroud's Lane and Treetop Way within Plan 40M- 1943 be assumed for public use; 6. That the highways being Fawndale Road, Stover Crescent, Littleford Street and Stonehampton Court within Plan 40M-1958 be assumed for public use; 7. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M- 1943 and 40M-1958, which are constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by the City, or on lands lying immediately adjacent thereto, including lands that are subject to easements transferred to the City, be accepted and assumed for maintenance, save and except from Blocks 10 and 11, Plan 40M-1906; Blocks 28 and 29, Plan 40M-1915; Blocks 23, 24 and 25, Plan 40M-1920; Blocks 42, 43, 44 and 45, Plan 40M- 1923; Block 16, Plan 40M-1943 and Blocks 35, 36, 37 and 38, Plan 40M- 1958; 8. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958, save and except from Blocks 30, 32, 33 and 34, Plan 40M-1923 and Block 16, Plan 40M-1943, be released and removed from title; 9. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Block 26, Plan 40M-1920 as public highway; and 10. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1943 as public highways. CARRIED 4 City o0 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 43-08 Zoning By-law Amendment -A 11/08 Grant Morris Associates Ltd. 1789, 1795, 1801 & 1805 Pine Grove Avenue 1790, 1792, 1794, 1804, 1806, 1808 & 1810 Woodview Avenue (Part of Road Allowance Between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1 Parts 2, 3, 5 - 9, 11 -13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26 - 30, 32, 33. & 35, 40R-25121) City of Pickering Grant Morris, applicant, appeared before the Committee in support of the application and to answer any questions if required. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean That Zoning By-law Amendment Application Al 1/08 submitted by Grant Morris Associates Ltd. to amend the existing zoning on the rear of the subject properties to permit reduced side yard widths, reduced building height and an increased lot coverage on lands situated on Part of Road Allowance Between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1, Parts 2, 3, 5 - 9, 11 - 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26 - 30, 32, 33 & 35, 40R-25121 be approved. 2. That City Council endorse the creation of more than 3 lots to proceed by Land Division for the properties at 1795 Pine Grove Avenue and 1804, 1806 & 1808 Woodview Avenue; and 3. Further, that the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application Al 1/08 as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 43- 08 be forwarded to City Council for enactment. CARRIED 3. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 42-08 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham - Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. et al, dated September 23, 2008 - Phase 5 5 33 Cry oo Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes PICKER Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 3 4 Chair: Councillor Littlev Lucy Stocco of Tribute Homes appeared before the Committee in support of Report PD 42-08 of the Director, Planning & Development. Brian Buckles of the Green Door Alliance and Durham Conservation Association appeared before the Committee and stated his concerns with the size of the urban area expansion and how it had escalated over the past 4 - 5 years. He also noted that due to uncertain times economically and environmentally it was recommended that if a decision were ever made to expand urban boundaries, that the expansion only makes land available for the next 15 years not 20 year. He stated that there should be no expansion until municipalities are ready to intensify. The Provincial Policy Statement places great stress on approaches, which efficiently use land and resources, minimize negative impacts to air quality and climate change, and promote energy efficiency, efficiently use infrastructure and public service facilities and only use prime agricultural land when there are no reasonable alternative locations. He noted there were still a lot of unanswered questions and the City should be evaluating whether replacing prime farmland with housing added any additional value to the Cities bottom line and the impact this would have on the environment. Serge Rielau, 3425 Greenwood Road, appeared before the Committee and noted his support for a higher density. He stated that the residential component needed to go up instead of out. Peter Rodrique appeared before the Committee representing Bernadette Zubrisky. Mr. Rodrique read and submitted her letter to the Planning & Development Committee. Ms. Zubrisky's main concerns are with the loss of good agricultural land and what the expansion will do to the environment. She noted that what is missing from Pickering's focus on sustainability is the ability to accept that there is a carrying capacity for the number of humans and amount of development an area of land can withstand before becoming negatively compromised. Ms. Zubrisky also noted that it was not very sustainable for the City to continue planning for a proposed airport when a decision to build it had not yet been made, so why spend the time and money planning around it. Mike Fearon, 3620 Westney Road, appeared before the Committee and noted his concerns with planning for the future. He stated that what we think is good planning now, future generations might feel that they would have sooner had us protect the environment and agricultural land to grow food on. He questioned, when will the growth stop, and noted we won't have any land left if we keep expanding at this rate of speed. Terry Nuspl, 140 Woodview Drive, also noted that she felt the expansion was being done too quickly, she stated that how do we know what the future 6 Citq o0 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes PlCKE Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley 35 generations need or want in 20, 30 or 50 years from now. She noted comments made about the City not being able to afford Seaton but, the City continues to plan for excessive growth. She stated that she would like to see cost analysis on how much all of this is going to cost and the impact it will have on the environment. Maurice Brenner, 711 Sunbird Trail, appeared before the Committee and questioned whether the City had taken into consideration the 3 pillars of sustainability; how does it address the social components, the environment and the economy. Mr. Brenner felt that these serious questions needed to be answered first. Detailed discussion ensued on this matter. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report PD 42-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, dated September 23, 2008, presenting the draft recommendations for Phase 5 of the Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study, be received; 2. That the comments contained in Report PD 42-08 on the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report for the Region of Durham Growth Plan Implementation Study be endorsed, and further that the Region of Durham and its consultants be requested to make the following changes: a) Expand the extent of land identified for future living area around Kinsale, extending both to the west and to the east to Lake Ridge Road, so as to create a threshold of growth for a complete neighbourhood; b) Revise the policy restricting major office development from employment areas, such that it permits major office development at selected freeway interchanges, thereby taking advantage of transit and increasing employment densities; c) Reconsider the timing of the lands in the centre of northeast Pickering identified for future employment in the post-2031 period, so as to maximize the logical and orderly extension of services and infrastructure; and 7 C-ri 00 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes PICKE Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 36 Chair: Councillor Littley d) Implement the timing changes recommended by Regional Planning Committee on October 14, 2008, to bring lands for future living area at the north limit of northeast Pickering from post-2031 to pre-2031, and to change the lands in northeast Pickering adjacent to Lake Ridge Road from pre-2031 to post-2031; and 3. Further, that a copy of Report PD 42-08 and Pickering Council's resolution on the matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham, Urban Strategies Inc. et al, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motions) Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That the main motion be amended by adding the following as Item 3 and renumbering Item 3 to 4; That the City of Pickering recommend to the Region of Durham that a public meeting in Pickering be held following release of the final report. CARRIED Councillor Littley turned the Chair over to Councillor Johnson. Moved by Councillor Littley Seconded by Councillor McLean That the main motion be amended by adding the following as Item 4 and renumbering Item 4 to 5; That fiscal impact analysis studies including social and community infrastructure requirements be completed prior to urban expansion. MOTION DEFEATED The main motion, as amended was then CARRIED. 8 City 00 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes PIO<ER Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley 37 (v) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:40 pm. 9 Crrq 00 38 PRESENT: Mayor Ryan COUNCILLORS: D. Dickerson R.Johnson B. Littley B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles ALSO PRESENT: Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development. G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer E. Buntsma - Director, Operations & Emergency Services R. Holborn - Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering D. Wilcox - City Clerk C. Rose - Manager, Policy - attended for part of the meeting K. Senior - Manager, Accounting Services - attended for part of the meeting M. Pelzowski - Coordinator, Traffic Operations - attended for part of the meeting (1) DELEGATIONS Gayle Clow Ian Cumming Re: Report OES 33-08 Citizens Group for Traffic Calming on Fairport Road -Traffic Calming Justification and Design Ian Cumming, 1899 Fairport Road, appeared before the Committee on behalf of the Citizens Group for Traffic Calming on Fairport Road. He stated that the Citizens Group was interested in safety of everyone who travels on Fairport Road, not just the residents. He emphasized that this issue is not about volume of cars, but is solely a safety issue. He outlined for the Committee four newspaper headlines in relation to accidents that had occurred on Fairport Road, with the fourth item being one that could happen if safety measures are not implemented. Mr. Cumming further advised that they had contacted residents on Mountcastle Crescent and had received C,tq O? PICKE Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 39 95% support of those contacted. He further advised that the group had worked with the child safety group put together by Johnson & Johnson. In summary, he stated that the Citizens Group for Traffic Calming on Fairport Road was not a special interest group, but in fact a special safety group. (11) MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 1. Director, Operations & Emergency Services Report OES 33-08 Citizens Group for Traffic Calming on Fairport Road -Traffic Calming Justification and Design Correspondence in opposition to the plan was received from the following residents and provided as a hand out; Maria-Pilar Lopez, 645 Amberwood Crescent, Peggy & Stephen Cowley , 1010 Redbird Crescent and Ken & Elizabeth Gray, 1554 Heathside Crescent. General discussion ensued on this matter. Staff were requested to ensure that residents who had submitted correspondence on this matter were advised when the matter would be dealt with further. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That Report OES 33-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be received and referred back to staff in order to meet with the Fairport Road Committee for the purpose of reaching consensus on facts; and 2. That staff report back at the December 15th , 2008 meeting of Council. CARRIED 2. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 37-08 Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project -Tender No. T-17-2008 Questions arose with respect to the financing of this project and the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer provided clarification in this regard. RECOMMENDATION 2 C-cty O? PICKER 40 Moved by Councillor Littley Seconded by Councillor Dickerson Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 1. That Report OES 37-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding T-17-2008 for the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project be received; 2. That Council ratify the approval by the Chief Administrative Officer during Council's summer recess of proposal no. RFP-4-2008 for the supply of energy ventilation and pool dehumidification systems for the Dunbarton Pool; 3. That Tender T-17-2008 submitted by BWK Construction Company Ltd., at a cost of $1,782,900 (PST and GST included) be accepted; 4. That the total gross project cost of $1,995,000 (GST included) and a net project cost of $1,900,000 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 5. That Council approve the re-allocation of the Federal Gas Tax funds associated with the 2008 capital project for the Frenchman's Bay - Master Plan Phase One (5410.0805.6182) and that these funds be re-submitted in the 2009 Capital Budget; 6. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the sum of $1,000,000, as provided for in the 2008 approved Capital Budget, to be funded from Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; b) the sum of up to $500,000, as provided for in the 2008 approved Capital Budget, to be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional Municipality of Durham, over a period not exceeding fifteen (15) years, at a rate to be determined; c) the additional project costs estimated to be $400,000 be funded from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund ($200,000) and from the funding the City will receive from the "Investing in Ontario Act, 2008" ($200,000) including any additional unanticipated costs; 3 Crtq co PICKER Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 41 d) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $49,800 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2009, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any financing cost to be paid out of the Current Budget; e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has updated the City's 2008 Annual Repayment Limit and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit for debt and financial obligations, as established by the Province for municipalities in Ontario and would not cause the City to exceed the updated limit, and therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required prior to City Council's authorization; f) undertake the financing of this project or portions thereof that cannot be accommodated through the foregoing through internal loans, Infrastructure Ontario - OSIFA Loan Program, or a financial institution offering long term financing under similar terms and conditions; g) the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; 7. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 8. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. CARRIED 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 39-08 Facility Snow Removal -Quotation No. Q-69-2008 General discussion ensued on this matter. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Littley 1. That Report OES 39-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Facility Snow Removal be received; 4 Cif o PICKFRE"qG 42 Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 2. That Quotation No. Q-69-2008 submitted by C&R Paving Inc. for Snow Clearing and Salting Service - Facility Parking Lots Schedule A in the amount of $89,000 plus GST for Year 1 and $95,500 plus GST for Year 2 and Schedule C (hourly rates) Year 1 and Year 2 be accepted; and 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. CARRIED 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 40-08 Building Canada Fund - Communities Component Intake One -Pickerinq Museum Village Restoration and Upgrade Project General discussion ensued on this matter. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report OES 40-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Building Canada Fund - Communities Component (BCF-CC) Intake One be received; 2. That the Corporation of the City of Pickering participate in the BCF-CC Intake One through the submission of an application by the application deadline of November 21, 2008; 3. That the City of Pickering's application to BCF-CC Intake One shall consist of various building restoration programs and upgrades to the infrastructure at the Pickering Museum Village, at a total estimated (gross) cost of $885,000 and a net estimated City cost of $295,000; 4. That the Council of the City of Pickering endorse the Pickering Museum Village Restoration and Upgrade Project as the City's Intake One BCF-CC application; 5. That the BCF-CC Intake One project be identified as a Capital priority in the 2009 Capital Budget, subject to receiving approval of funding by BCF-CC; and 5 Citq 00 PICKE Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 4 3 6. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. CARRIED 5. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 41-08 City's Traffic & Parking By-law No. 6604/05 - Updating Amendment General discussion ensued on this matter. Based on the discussion, staff were requested to review parking issues and report back to Council on moving forward with new strategies. Staff were further requested to provide clarification on the effect of this by-law on permit parking and tow trucks/commercial vehicles parking on the road during this period. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor Littley 1. That Report OES 41-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding proposed amendments to the City's Traffic & Parking By-law No. 6604/05 be received; and 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Section 15 to By-law No. 6604/05 to provide for the prohibition of on street parking between the hours of 2:00 am and 6:00 am from December 1St to March 31St annually. CARRIED AS AMENDED [See Following Motion] Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That item 2 of the main motion be amended by deleting '6:00 am' and inserting '5:00 am'. CARRIED The main motion, as amended, was then CARRIED. 6 Ctq 00 eres ? PICKE 44 Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 6 Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 45-08 2008 Internal Loan and External Debentures RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report CS 45-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be approved; 2. That Council approve an internal loan in the amount of $200,000 for a maximum term of ten (10) years, to be borrowed from the Development Charges Reserve Funds, for the External Subdivision Works-Roads: Brock Road, Third Concession Road to Taunton Road and furthermore, that the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized and directed to take whatever actions necessary; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. CARRIED 7 Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 49-08 Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean That Report CS 49-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for information be received for information. CARRIED 8 Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 50-08 Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes RECOMMENDATION 7 City 0? PICKF M tft Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report CS 50-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the write-off of taxes in the amount of $40,283.47 as provided under Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act, 2001 be approved; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. CARRIED 9. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 51-08 2008 Year End Audit General discussion ensued on this matter. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That the Audit Plan as submitted by Deloitte & Touche LLP, included as Attachment 1 to this report be received for information;. and, 2. That the Chief Administrative Officer and the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to sign the Auditor's Engagement Letter on behalf of the City. CARRIED 10. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 07-08 Review of Appointments to Boards and Committees - Council Direction December 14. 2006 General discussion ensued on this matter. Questions arose with respect to the request of the Library Board for an additional member and the rationale utilized by the Board in making the request. Staff were further advised that the Duffins & Carruthers Creek Watershed Task Force had finished their mandate and could be 8 45 Citq 00 ]PICKER 46 Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson closed; Rouge Park Alliance should reflect one Council appointment or alternate and the Waterfront Coordinating. Committee, representatives from OPG and TRCA were not formal members of the Committee, but were by invitation to the Committee. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Littley Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That Report CAO 07-08 of the Chief Administrative Officer be received; 2. That Policy ADM 040 for Boards & Advisory Committees, included as Attachment # 1 to this report be approved; 3. That the Boards & Advisory Committees, included as Attachment # 2 to this report be formally closed based on project completion, dissolution and/or inactivity; 4. That the Boards & Advisory Committees, included as Attachment # 3 to this report be formally reconfirmed; 5. That the Public Library Board composition be increased by one member for a total of 10 members effective December 1, 2008; 6. That the Advisory Committee on Race Relations composition be increased by two community appointments for a total of five members and the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee be increased by three community appointments for a total of eleven members; 7. That the term for the Property Standards/Fenceviewers be extended to December 31, 2008 pending the outcome of a fence by-law review; 8. That a Special Meeting of Council (including an In Camera session) be held on Monday, November 24, 2008 at 7:00 pm for the purpose of review and appointment to Boards and Advisory Committees; and 9. That the City Clerk be directed to take the appropriate action. CARRIED AS AMENDED [See Following Motion] 9 Ctr# v0 FlCXER Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30.pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 4 7 Moved by Councillor Littley Seconded by Councillor Pickles That item 8 of the main motion be amended by deleting `November 24, 2008' and replacing it with 'December 8, 2008'. CARRIED The main motion, as amended, was then CARRIED. [Attachment #2 and #3 will be updated to reflect the changes noted by the Committee]. 11. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 45-08 Draft Regional Transportation Plan (September 2008) Draft Investment Strategy (September 2008) Metrolinx EBR Registry Number: 010-4717 Discussion ensued on this matter. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor'Littley That Report PD 45-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Draft Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Draft Investment Strategy (IS), both dated September 2008 and released by Metrolinx, be received; 2. That Metrolinx be requested to revise the Draft Regional Transportation Plan: The Big Move: Transforming Transportation in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area, dated September 2008, as follows: a) implement the vision for Seaton as a "transit first" community by adding the following to the 15-Year Plan (2024): (i) resolution of the Steeles-Taunton traffic bottleneck as a priority; (ii) identify a new east-west rapid transit connection on the Steeles-Taunton Corridor to Brock Road on Figure 4; (iii) prioritize passenger rail service on the C.P. Bellville Rail Line to Brock Road as one of the "Top 15 Priorities"; 10 C,tq 00 Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 48 Chair: Councillor Johnson (iv) widen and improve Highway 7 west of Brock Road to four lanes through Seaton to support development and transit service; (v) extend the Brock Road rapid transit line (Other Rapid Transit (BRT/LRT/AGT) line) through Seaton to Highway 407 on Figure 4; b) support and invest in developing Transportation Master Plans (TMPs) addressing all modes of transportation and identifying policies and a course of action for implementing the RTP, as well as other critical transportation infrastructure within Pickering's Urban Growth Centre by establishing an Eastern GTA Anchor Mobility Hub, including: (i). the City's planned pedestrian bridge over Highway 401; (ii) a full Highway 401 interchange at Liverpool Road; and (iii) a shared vehicle parking structure serving commuters and downtown visitors; c) support the easterly extension of Highway 407, its links and transitway by: (i) identifying the easterly extension of Highway 407 to Highway 35/115 by 2013 and transitway within the first 15 years in Figure 4 of the RTP; (ii) identifying the easterly extension of Highway 407 and its links and transitway as completed on Figure 5 (the 25-Year Plan) of the RTP; (iii) revising the text referring to the Highway 407 east extension on page 75 of the Draft RTP to reflect the Province's commitment to complete the highway and its links by 2013; d) correct Figures 4 and 5 by: (i) revising mapping of `built-up' area for Pickering to reflect the approved Provincial built boundary; 3. That Metrolinx be requested to revise the Draft Investment Strategy: A Plan for Implementation Action, September 2008, by: a) developing an operating cost model for new infrastructure proposed under the RTP; b) considering the broader relative benefits of investments in key road infrastructure versus investments in improved transit operations; c) developing a financing plan for the operating, rehabilitation and capital infrastructure needs of the RTP, in consultation with municipalities; and 4. Further, that a copy of Report PD 45-08 be forwarded to Metrolinx, the EBR, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, the Ministry of Transportation, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Regional Municipality of Durham, and Durham Area Municipalities. CARRIED 11 -PICKER Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 10, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 4 9 (III) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:34 pm. 12 DELEGATIONS November 17, 2008 Inspector Ross, Unit Commander Ajax/Pickering Community Police Office - 19 Division Jeff Moore, Sergeant, Community Resource Unit - 19 Division Re: Durham Region Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy (DRAVIS) 2. Brian Spencer Re: Report PD 36-08 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. -Parkland Conveyance 3. Ed Fulton Re: Report PD 36-08 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. -Parkland Conveyance 4. John Blanford Re: Report PD 36-08 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. -Parkland Conveyance 5. Jacqueline Smart Re: Report PD 36-08 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. -Parkland Conveyance 6. Steven Warsh Re: Report PD 36-08 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. -Parkland Conveyance 7. Gabriel Szobel Associate Counsel, Development Law Region of York Legal Department Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 50 51 8. Donna Edwards Region 12 Coordinator Special Olympics Ontario Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 9. Krista Dales Speaking on behalf of the Coaches of the Pickering Athletic Centre Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 10. Sarah Dales Emily Towers Speaking on behalf of the Athletes of the Pickering Athletic Centre Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 11. Helen Tymbos-Sanidas Nancy Toupin Justine Veillette Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 12. Andrew Taylor Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 13. David Gill Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 14. Tom Smedley Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 52 15. Colleen Ho Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 16. Kristina Trach Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 17. Dennis Large Re: Report PD 39-08 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road 18. Michael Robertson Land Over Landings Re: Corr. No.101-08, Report PD 42-08 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham 19. Bryan Buttigieg Re: Report PD 42-08 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham 20. Peter Rodrigues Re: Report PD 42-08 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham 21. David Donnelly Re: Report PD 42-08 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham 22. Brian Buckles Green Door Alliance and the Durham Conservation Association Re: Report PD 42-08 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham 53 23. Bernadette Zubrisk Re: Report PD 42-08 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham 24. Hazel Daubeny Re: Infrastructure of Pickering and the Effects on the Medical System CORRESPONDENCE November 17, 2008 Pages 1. CORR. 93-08 Motion for Direction TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 57-94 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview, ON M3N 1 S4 Letter received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority seeking Council adoption with respect to a resolution which was passed at a meeting held on March 28, 2008, regarding the Rouge River Watershed Plan. [Book available in the office of the City Clerk]. 2. CORR. 94-08 COUNCILLOR O'CONNELL CITY OF PICKERING Motion for Direction 95-100 Memo received from Councillor O'Connell with respect to Regional Works Committee Report 2008-WR-35, Clear Bags Pilot Study Objectives and Procedures. Councillor O'Connell has requested this matter be presented for discussion purposes. 3. CORR. 95-08 LORRAINE CHIASSON REGULATORY COORDINATOR ENBRIDGE 500 Consumers Road North York, ON M2J 1 P8 Receive for Information 101-110 Letter received from Lorraine Chiasson, Regulatory Coordinator, Enbridge, providing a copy of the notice of application with respect to the Enbridge Gas Distribution 2009 Rate Adjustment. 4. CORR. 96-08 PATTI BARRIE MUNICIPAL CLERK MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1 C 3A6 Receive for Information 111-113 Letter received from Patti Barrie, Municipal Clerk, Municipality of Clarington, advising that at a meeting held on October 27th, 2008, Council adopted a resolution with respect to the protection of agricultural land within the white belt, as part of the Durham Growth Plan. 54 55 5. CORR. 97-08 Receive for Information KATHY STRANKS 114-119 MANAGER, CHAIR AND CAO'S OFFICE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview. ON M3N 1S4 Letter received from Kathy Stranks, Manager, Chair and CAO's Office, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority advising that at a meeting held on October 24, 2008, a resolution was passed with respect to Growing Durham. 6. CORR. 98-08 THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL CHAN MINISTER, MINISTRY OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION 6th Floor, 400 University Avenue Toronto, ON M7A 2R9 Receive for Information 120 Letter received from Michael Chan, Minister, Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration with respect to an invitation to participate in Ontario's volunteer recognition programs for 2009. 7. CORR. 99-08 Receive for Information P.M. MADILL, REGIONAL CLERK 121-126 REGION OF DURHAM 605 Rossland Road East Whitby. ON L1 N 6A3 Letter received from P.M. Madill, Regional Clerk, Region of Durham, advising that at a meeting held on October 29, 2008, the Planning, Works, Finance and Administration Committees of Regional Council adopted recommendations with respect to the Metrolinx Draft Regional Transportation Plan and Investment Strategy for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. 8. CORR. 100-08 Receive for Information LORNE D. ALMACK, P.ENG., CMC 127 R.R. #5 CLAREMONT, ON Letter received from Lorne Almack regarding the expansion of urban boundaries in the Oshawa, Whitby and Pickering areas. 9. CORR. 101-08 Receive for Information MICHAEL ROBERTSON 128 LAND OVER LANDINGS. 1150 Hwy 7, RR1 LOCUST HILL. ON LOH 1J0 Letter received from Michael Robertson,.Land Over Landings, with regards to the destruction of class 1 farmland in the North Pickering watershed. 10. CORR. 102-08 Receive for Information DURHAM REGIONAL POLICE SERVICES BOARD 129-130 605 Rossland Road East, Box 911 Whitby. ON L1 N 068 Letter received from the Durham Regional Police Services Board providing an Information Sheet for Mayors of the Durham Region. 11. CORR. 103-08 KRISTIN ROBINSON BOWMANVILLE. ON Receive for Information 131 Correspondence received from Kristin Robinson, Bowmanville, with respect to Growing Durham and the urban expansion into northeast Pickering lands. 12. CORR. 104-08 Motion to Waive P.E. MATTSON the Grants Policy 838 Miriam Road 132-133 Pickering, ON L1W 1X6 Correspondence received from Pat Mattson, requesting a grant in the amount of .$1,887.00 to cover the costs of hall rental, Socan, taxes, liability insurance, license and ticket printing for a benefit for long term resident Earl Costello. 13. CORR. 105-08 Motion to Proclaim LINDSEY BRENNER 134-135 SUPERVISOR, ANIMAL SERVICES CITY OF PICKERING Correspondence received from Lindsey Brenner, Supervisor, Animal Services, City of Pickering, to request that the City of Pickering proclaim the month of December, 2008 as lams Home 4 the Holidays month. 14. CORR. 106-08 Motion to Proclaim MARISA CARPINO 136 SUPERVISOR, CULTURE & RECREATION CITY OF PICKERING Correspondence received from Marisa Carpino, Supervisor, Culture & Recreation, City of Pickering, to request the City of Pickering proclaim various cultural celebrations on behalf of the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations and Equity in the month of December. 56 3 57 ROUGE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN: TOWARDS A HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE FUTURE At Authority Meeting #2/08, of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), held on March 28, 2008, Resolution #A42/08, in regard to Rouge River Watershed Plan: Towards a Healthy and Sustainable Future was unanimously approved as follows: THAT the Rouge River Watershed Plan: Towards a Healthy and Sustainable Future be approved; THAT staff be directed to work with partners to implement the plan; THAT staff be directed to use the Rouge River State of the Watershed Report, Rouge River Watershed Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report, Action Plan for Sustainable Practices and Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide as reference documents to inform and guide ongoing work and long term work planning and budget preparation; THAT copies of the Rouge River Watershed Plan be circulated to municipalities within the Rouge River watershed and their Councils be asked to adopt the plan and commit to work with Toronto and Region Cons tion Authority (TRCA) to implement the recommendations appropriate to their municipality, THAT copies of the Rouge River Watershed Plan be circulated to the Rouge Park Alliance and they be asked to adopt the plan and recognize it under section 3.2.6 of the Greenbelt Plan; THAT copies of the Rouge River Watershed Plan be circulated to the provincial and federal governments as well as other relevant organizations and interest groups, including former members of the Rouge Watershed Task Force, and they be asked to provide ongoing support for the implementation of the principles, goals and relevant recommendations of the plan; THAT copies of the Rouge River State of the Watershed Report, Rouge River Watershed Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report, Action Plan for Sustainable Practices and Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide be circulated to watershed municipalities and made available to other partner organizations and they be encouraged to use these reference documents to inform and guide their ongoing work, THAT copies of the Rouge River Watershed Plan be circulated to local libraries and copies of the plan and all supporting documents be posted on the TRCA web site; THAT staff be directed to work with watershed municipalities develop five year workplans and budgets for top priority prof( Watershed Plan Implementation Guide and incorporate them budget process; tip- l - lC I at f,6(' -bI' other partners to ??'??1e?rttr?'RoUgand a?pital_. _ c ^RR.) FILE G'?t ", ? APPR. ACTION T c -3r 8cr-ak_ ?vc,1, (6, (? /t. 58 THAT the revised Conformity Assessment for the Rouge River Watershed Plan in Attachment 4 and the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment be deemed to fulfil the watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP; 2002) and be approved for use in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine and that the regional and local municipalities, province and Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC) be so advised; THAT staff meet with representatives of the Aboriginal community to discuss the Rouge River Watershed Plan and ways they wish to be involved in its implementation; THAT staff be directed to host an annual multi-stakeholder forum, beginning in 2009, to report on progress in implementation of the Rouge River Watershed Plan, and report back to the Authority on the results of the forum; AND FURTHER THAT staff convene up to 3 additional meetings per year with municipal staff and other stakeholder representatives from the Rouge watershed, and in conjunction with other watershed groups where appropriate, to have input to the annual forum design and follow-up. TO: Chair and Members of the Authority Item 7.1 Meeting #2/08, March 28, 2008 FROM: Deborah Martin-Downs, Director, Ecology RE: ROUGE RIVER WATERSHED PLAN: TOWARDS A HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE FUTURE KEYISSUE Approval of Rouge River Watershed Plan and immediate steps to facilitate its implementation. RECOMMENDATION THAT the Rouge River Watershed Plan: Towards a Healthy and Sustainable Future be approved; THAT staff be directed to work with partners to implement the plan; THAT staff be directed to use the Rouge River State of the Watershed Report, Rouge River Watershed Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report, Action Plan for Sustainable Practices and Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide as reference documents to inform and guide ongoing work and long term work planning and budget preparation; THAT copies of the Rouge River Watershed Plan be circulated to municipalities within the Rouge River watershed and their Councils be asked to adopt the plan and commit to work with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to implement the recommendations appropriate to their municipality; THAT copies of the Rouge River Watershed Plan be circulated to the Rouge Park Alliance and they be asked to adopt the plan and recognize it under section 3.2.6 of the Greenbelt Plan; THAT copies of the Rouge River Watershed Plan be circulated to the provincial and federal governments as well as other relevant organizations and interest groups, including former members of the Rouge Watershed Task Force, and they be asked to provide ongoing support for the implementation of the principles, goals and relevant recommendations of the plan; THAT copies of the Rouge River State of the Watershed Report, Rouge River Watershed Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report, Action Plan for Sustainable Practices and Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide be circulated to watershed municipalities and made available to other partner organizations and they be encouraged to use these reference documents to inform and guide their ongoing work; THAT copies of the Rouge River Watershed Plan be circulated to local libraries and copies of the plan and all supporting documents be posted on the TRCA web site; 22 F 9 60 THAT staff be directed to work with watershed municipalities and other partners to develop five year workplans and budgets for top priority projects identified in the Rouge Watershed Plan Implementation Guide and incorporate them into the annual capital budget process; THAT the revised Conformity Assessment for the Rouge River Watershed Plan in Attachment 4 and the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment be deemed to fulfil the watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP; 2002) and be approved for use in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine and that the regional and local municipalities, province and Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC) be so advised; THAT staff meet with representatives of the Aboriginal community to discuss the Rouge River Watershed Plan and ways they wish to be involved in its implementation; THAT staff be directed to host an annual multi-stakeholder forum, beginning in 2009, to report on progress in implementation of the Rouge River Watershed Plan, and report back to the Authority on the results of the forum; AND FURTHER THAT staff convene up to 3 additional meetings per year with municipal staff and other stakeholder representatives from the Rouge watershed, and in conjunction with other watershed groups where appropriate, to have input to the annual forum design and follow-up. BACKGROUND Purpose and Role of Watershed Plan In 2003, TRCA entered into a five year work program with the Regional Municipality of York and the City of Toronto to prepare a watershed plan for the Rouge River. This initiative was to assist York Region municipalities in fulfilling the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. (ORMCP) requirement to have watershed plans completed by April, 2007. The study was also designed to update the original 1990 Comprehensive Basin Management Strategy for the Rouge River Watershed, provide a watershed context for Rouge Park plans, augment the City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan by providing direction in the '905' region and apply TRCA's vision for The Living City at a watershed scale. 23 61 The goal of the watershed planning study was to make long term strategic recommendations for the protection and enhancement of watershed health, based on an integrated understanding of watershed systems and technical analysis of issues, opportunities and management strategies and their predicted effects on the watershed. The watershed planning approach is well-recognized in legislation and local plans and policies, although it is only the ORMCP which requires municipalities to undertake watershed plans and incorporate their objectives and requirements into municipal official plans and ensure that major development on the Oak Ridges Moraine conforms with the watershed plan (see Table 1: Selected Policy Documents Promoting Watershed Planning). Also of note is section 3.2.6 of the Greenbelt Plan, which recognizes the significance of the Rouge watershed and recommends that for lands within the watershed outside of the Protected Countryside, any municipal or conservation authority plans which build on and/or support the Rouge North Management Plan or Rouge Park Plan should be considered as the guiding land planning and resource management documents. The watershed plan is intended to inform and guide municipalities, provincial and federal governments, Rouge Park Alliance and TRCA as they update their policies and programs for environmental protection, conservation, and restoration within the contexts of land and water use, and the planning of future urban growth. The plan also provides direction to local non-governmental organizations and private landowners with regard to best management practices and opportunities for environmental stewardship. Table 1: Selected Policy Documents Promoting Watershed Planning Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2002) Watershed plans 24. (1) Every upper-tier municipality and single-tier municipality shall, on or before April 22, 2003, begin preparing a watershed plan, in accordance with subsection (3), for every watershed whose streams originate within the municipality's area of jurisdiction. (2) The objectives and requirements of each watershed plan shall be incorporated into the municipality's official plan. Growth Plan for Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006) 3.2.5 Water and Wastewater Systems 7. Municipalities, in conjunction with conservation authorities, are encouraged to prepare watershed plans and use such plans to guide development decisions and water and wastewater servicing decisions. 24 i111 62 Greenbelt Plan (2005) 3.2.3 Water Resource System Policies The following Water Resource System policies apply throughout the Protected Countryside... 2. Watersheds are the most meaningful scale for hydrological planning, and municipalities together with conservation authorities should ensure that watershed plans are completed and used to guide planning and development decisions within the Protected Countryside. 3.2.6 The Rouge River Watershed and Park "The Rouge River Watershed is of particular significance ...for those lands within the watershed north of Steeles Avenue, outside of the Protected Countryside, the Rouge North Management Plan and the Rouge North Implementation Manual, together with any municipal or conservation authority plans or initiatives which build on and/or support the Rouge Park North Management Plan, should be considered as the guiding land planning and resource management documents. For those lands within the Rouge Park south of Steeles Avenue, outside of the Protected Countryside, the Rouge Park Plan together with any municipal or conservation authority plans or initiatives which build on and/or support the Rouge Park Plan should be considered as the guiding land use planning and resource management documents." Municipal Official Plans City of Toronto, 2002 The Official Plan makes reference to watershed plans in the context of managing stormwater. Official Plan policy states that the City will work with neighbouring municipalities and the Province to develop a framework for dealing with growth across the GTA which will, among other things result in better water quality through water conservation and wastewater and stormwater management based on watershed principles. In addition, the Official Plan indicates that private city-building activities and changes to the built environment, including public works, will "reduce the adverse effects of stormwater and snow melt based on hierarchy of watershed-based wet weather flow practices...". York Region, 2004 2.3 Water It is the policy of Council: 1. To cooperate with area municipalities, the conservation authorities and other agencies in the preparation of watershed planning initiatives to: a) identify headwaters areas and better understand their function, linkages and sensitivities; b) establish and achieve water quality objectives for the watershed; c) address the long-term cumulative impact of development on the watershed; d) create an inventory of existing geology, hydrology, hydrogeology, groundwater recharge areas, limnology, aquatic and terrestrial habitats and other environmental data; e) recommend appropriate stormwater management techniques, including, but not limited to best management practices, the use of natural vegetative drainage corridors and the use of permeable surfaces; and f) identify the form and constraints under which development may be permitted and provide guidelines for development, design and construction. 25 63 Restoration Plans Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (1994) Recommends a watershed-based approach to de-listing impaired beneficial uses of the Toronto waterfront and watersheds, and notes Action 41: Include Watershed Perspectives in Planning Process. Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan (WWFMMP; 2003) The City of Toronto Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan identified a specific need to undertake restoration to mitigate impacts of development in the 905 area and to complement actions being taken in the downstream portion of the watershed. A key guiding principle of the WWFMMP is wet weather flow will be managed on a watershed basis with a natural systems approach being applied to stormwater management as a priority. Watershed Planning Process At Authority Meeting #7/03, held on September 26, 2003, Resolution #A196/03 was approved, giving approval to an overall workplan for the watershed planning study. The workplan outlined a three-phased approach, including: 1) initial scoping and characterization of current conditions; 2) analysis of current and potential future stresses on the watershed and evaluation of various management strategies; and 3) preparation of the watershed management plan and implementation framework. Opportunities for public and stakeholder consultation throughout the process were recognized as an essential component of the work program. A significant component of this program involved the formation of a multi-stakeholder Rouge Watershed Task Force in.April, 2004 to guide the preparation of the watershed plan. The task force met almost monthly between April, 2004 and November, 2006. The scope of technical study components addressed the core ORMCP requirements (e.g. water, natural heritage) and acknowledged that 'other' study components such as cultural heritage and nature-based recreation were to be included to address local watershed interests and issues. In 2005, the province released a series of draft technical guidelines addressing various aspects of the ORMCP, including one on watershed planning. The guidelines were finalized in 2007. The watershed planning guideline, while quite general, advocates the same planning process that TRCA and its partners have followed. New Approaches TRCA has been committed to be a leader in advancing the science of integrated watershed planning in order to produce state-of-the-art watershed planning products that will provide a sound basis for effective management decisions. Some of the innovative aspects of this work included: • modelling and analysis of the watershed's response to future land use and management scenarios, including various extents and forms of urban growth, stormwater retrofits, expanded natural cover and climate change; 26 :,i, 64 • an integrated, interdisciplinary analysis that has improved TRCA's understanding of the watershed system and its sensitivities (e.g. interaction of surface and groundwater; effects of terrestrial natural heritage on hydrology); • development and application of linked modelling tools to support the above-noted analysis; • development of a science-based methodology for prioritization of regeneration actions; • social marketing studies in support of more strategic implementation recommendations for lot level practices in business and residential sectors; • development of an implementation guide to accompany the watershed plan, including a policy component that will assist municipal planners in applying the plan's science and strategic recommendations; and • ongoing commitment to community engagement in the planning process. Rouge Watershed Task Force's Final Draft Watershed Plan As reported to the Authority in January, 2007, the Rouge Watershed Task Force delivered the Final Draft Watershed Plan at their final meeting on November 30, 2006 and requested that TRCA complete all technical supporting documents for the plan and undertake additional consultation and peer review on the final draft plan and its supporting documents (see Attachment 1 - Correspondence from Bryan Buttigieg to Chair of TRCA). Although initial consultation had been conducted on a first draft of the plan during November, 2006, it was acknowledged that opportunities for input had been limited, both in time and availability of the background documents. At Authority Meeting #11/06, held on January 26, 2007, Resolution #A295/06, was approved as follows: THAT the Chair, Mr. Bryan Buttigieg, and members of the Rouge Watershed Task Force be thanked for their outstanding effort in the development of the Rouge watershed plan, entitled "Rouge River Watershed Plan: Towards a Healthy and Sustainable Future "I THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to undertake public and stakeholder consultation on the final draft Rouge watershed plan and its supporting technical documents; THAT TRCA staff offer presentations on the final draft Rouge watershed plan to all Rouge watershed municipalities and solicit their comments; THAT TRCA staff develop an implementation guide, a five year implementation workplan and budget, and implementation committee structure for the Rouge watershed plan, in consultation with implementing partners; THAT TRCA staff finalize the Rouge watershed plan, in cooperation with the Rouge Watershed Task Force Chair, to ensure the comments are in keeping with the task force principles, tone and spirit of the final task force plan; THAT TRCA staff report back to the April, 2007 Watershed Management Advisory Board meeting with a final Rouge watershed plan, proposed implementation committee Terms of Reference, and preliminary implementation guide and implementation workplan; 27 65 AND FURTHER THAT the Chair and Members of the Rouge Watershed Task Force be invited to attend the meeting when the Rouge watershed plan is to be considered for adoption by the Authority. As discussed under'ORMCP Conformity' section, later in this report, TRCA staff reported back to at Authority Meeting #3/07, held on April 27, 2007, on progress with completion of the support documents and a recommendation for use of the final draft plan on an interim basis for fulfilment of the ORMCP requirements. 'Supporting Documents The following principle documents support the Rouge River Watershed Plan: Rouge River State of the Watershed Report (TRCA, 2007) - documents the current watershed conditions and issues in relation to the watershed goals and objectives, according to eight theme areas: groundwater quality and quantity, surface water quantity, surface water quality, stream form, aquatic systems, terrestrial systems, nature-based recreation, cultural heritage, air quality and sustainable land and resource use. A summary of ratings of current conditions is provided as a reference for future reports of watershed health. Rouge River Watershed Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report (TRCA, 2007) - summarizes the predicted watershed response to future land use and management scenarios. This work identified the relative effectiveness of various management strategies and provided a basis for recommendations in the watershed plan. Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide (TRCA, 2008) organizes the watershed plan's recommendations according to the relevant implementation tools and assembles additional information to inform initial action. The guide summarizes a proposed workplan of implementation projects, within the context of existing programs and likely implementing partners. Action Plan for Sustainable Practices - Implementation Strategies for the Residential and Business Sectors in the Greater Toronto Area (Freeman Associates, 2006) - a social marketing based study which recommended strategies for accelerating the uptake and adoption of sustainable practices, with a focus on lot level stormwater management and naturalization. These key strategies were included in the watershed plan. A full list of all supporting and complementary documents is presented at the back of the watershed plan and each of the individual supporting reports. Of note is the Rouge River Watershed Based Fisheries Management Plan, which has been developed in concert with the watershed plan, but is following an independent consultation and approval process. 28 66 Consultation on Final Draft Watershed Plan and Supporting Documents Consultation Mechanisms Upon completion of the supporting documents, TRCA staff conducted a final program of consultation for the plan. Copies of the final draft watershed plan were sent out in early November, 2007 to senior study contacts within key departments of each watershed municipality, offices of Rouge Park and provincial and federal governments, interested stakeholders and former members of the Rouge Watershed Task Force. Information was provided about the availability of supporting documents (downloadable from TRCA's website or available upon request in hard copy or CD) and upcoming consultation sessions. An offer was extended to have TRCA staff attend meetings or provide presentations to facilitate reviews. Comments and an indication of support in principle for the watershed plan were requested by January 15, 2008, although this deadline was extended to the end of January and beyond in several instances. A half-day 'government' consultation session was held on November 26, 2007, involving staff representatives from watershed municipalities and provincial and federal government departments. Approximately 35 people attended. There was strong support for the watershed plan and good dialogue about how to move forward to implementation. Three public open houses were held at locations around the watershed, including Toronto (November 26, 2007), Whitchurch-Stouffvi Ile (November 27, 2007) and Markham (November 28, 2007). A total of about 50 people attended. -These sessions were advertised via notices placed in all major community newspapers throughout the watershed, including one ad which was translated into a Chinese language for inclusion in the newspaper Ming Pao. A number of newspapers and a professional planning newsletter printed supportive follow-up articles about the Rouge River Watershed Plan. Presentations and meetings were convened in January, 2008 with the Town of Richmond Hill Council, the Building Industry and Land Development (BILD) Association and the North. Markham Landowners Group. Presentations and meetings had previously been given, upon request, to the Town of Markham Development Services Committee (January, 2007), City of Toronto staff (January, 2007) and Town of Whitchurch-Stouffvi Ile staff (April, 2007). Feedback Received In summary, most of the feedback received was very supportive, acknowledging the scientific basis for the plan, the innovative and comprehensive planning approach and the action-oriented implementation directions. Many municipalities, including the Regional Municipality of Durham, the Town of Markham, the Town of Richmond Hill, Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville and the City of Pickering, have already passed council resolutions supporting the plan in principle. The two most significant comments pertained to the need for clarification of the role of the watershed plan, in terms of the authority under which it is to be implemented (explanatory text has been added in response to this comment) and clarification about the third main strategic direction 'recognize regional open space' (additional explanation has been provided in the text). A few other comments identified the need for minor points of clarification and updated references to current initiatives of implementing partners. These edits have been incorporated into the final document brought forward for approval. T1 Aboriginal Community TRCA and Rouge Park Alliance had originally attempted to involve representation from the Aboriginal community as part of the task force membership, but were unable to identify someone who was able to participate. Staff believe that involvement of the Aboriginal community in the implementation of the watershed plan will be very important to its success, particularly considering the rich cultural heritage of the watershed. Staff recommend the need to meet with members of the Aboriginal community to discuss the plan and determine ways that this community may wish to be involved in future stages of the plan's implementation. Expert Peer Review It had been the original intent to conduct an expert peer review on the final draft plan and supporting documents (in addition to the peer review that was conducted on the draft 2004 State of the Watershed Report and Study Workplan), and in fact this was one of the steps requested by the Rouge Watershed Task Force. However, given the time required by staff to complete all background reports in conjunction with other concurrent watershed planning studies, TRCA and Rouge Park Alliance staff considered the relative benefits of additional peer review in relation to the further delays this would cause in finalizing and initiating implementation of the plan. Peer review has already been conducted on core components of the watershed planning work, specifically: • Modular Flow System - Fortran (MODFLOW) groundwater model was developed and reviewed by the multi-partner'YPDT (York-Peel-Durham-Toronto) groundwater group;' • a TRCA jurisdiction-wide water budget model, producing similar results in the Rouge as the model used in the Rouge watershed planning study, has been favourably peer reviewed by an independently-contracted expert as part of the CTC (Credit Valley-Toronto and Region-Central Lake Ontario) Source Protection program; • the TRCA's Regional Terrestrial Natural Heritage Strategy which formed the basis for the Rouge target terrestrial system has been peer reviewed; and • the Duff ins Creek Watershed Planning process, which the Rouge study followed, was favourably peer reviewed and has been cited by the province and others as a state-of-the-art model. Staff has involved external expertise in workshops as part of the plan development and the plan itself, and the supporting documents, have been circulated for public and agency review and comment. In addition, the fisheries management plan, which is being developed in concert with the watershed plan (and its associated aquatic system components), is being 'guided by a multi-agency steering committee and is undergoing independent public and agency consultation. Modelling of similar issues in neighbouring watersheds (i.e. Credit River, Humber River) is showing similar watershed responses. Therefore, staff feel the work is further supported by these findings. Finally, assumptions and areas of uncertainty in the modelling throughout the plan and supporting documents have been acknowledged, and staff is committed to facilitate further work in those areas. Based on these considerations, it is believed the work is defensible and staff would prefer to proceed to final approval to allow. implementation of the many'no regrets,' urgent recommendations which have many benefits. The plan is a living document, which can be updated in the future, as new science and approaches emerge. 30 67 II • 6 8 Rouge River Watershed Plan - Key Recommendations The Rouge River Watershed Plan concludes that the watershed is an extraordinary resource, but if future development proceeds with current approaches to community design and stormwater management, it will not be possible to maintain current conditions, let alone improve them (see Attachment 2 - Watershed Plan Executive Summary). The plan sets out a number of strategic recommendations to protect and enhance valued resources, regenerate damaged systems and build more sustainable communities. These strategies fall into three broad categories: • Establish the targeted terrestrial natural heritage system. • Build sustainable communities (by improving water management and promoting sustainable practices overall). • Recognize and enhance a regional open space system. The management strategy recommendations are as follows: Water 1) Protect recharge and discharge. 2) Increase natural cover. 3) Improve sustainability of development design. 4) Improve erosion and sediment control and site restoration. 5) Implement stormwater retrofits. 6) Maintain stormwater infrastructure. 7) Prevent pollution. 8) Manage flood risks. 9) Protect stream form. 10) Monitor, evaluate and adjust. Aquatic System 1) Protect habitat and maintain flow conditions. 2) Optimize fish passage for native fish species. 3) Install or maintain barriers to partition species or exclude invasive species. 4) Improve recreational fishing opportunities. Terrestrial System 1) Secure the targeted system. 2) Restore and enhance natural cover. 3) Manage the matrix. Urban Land Use 1) Implement sustainable urban form. 2) Implement sustainable infrastructure. 3) Implement sustainable transportation. 31 Agriculture 1) Provide GTA-wide services for local farm businesses. 2) Support local food and increase public awareness about sustainable agriculture. 3) Implement land use policies to support agriculture. 4) Support agricultural vitality on publicly owned agricultural lands. Resource Use 1) Increase water efficiency and conservation. 2) Reduce energy use and non-fossil fuel alternatives. 3) Reduce waste. Air Quality and Climate Change 1) Undertake a vegetation impacts study. 2) Reduce vehicle use and other emissions. 3) Enhance natural vegetation sinks. Nature Based Recreation 1) Recognize the regional system for nature-based recreation. 2) Implement an inter-regional trail network. 3) Develop a recreation strategy for the Northern Countryside. 4) Protect the urban wilderness experience of Rouge Park. 5) Develop a plan to balance public access and resource protection. 6) Interpret natural and cultural heritage. 7) Establish management and operational agreements for Rouge Park and other public lands in York Region. 8) Form community partnerships for implementation. Cultural Heritage 1) Investigate and conserve cultural heritage prior to changes in land use. 2) Establish a comprehensive communication plan with Aboriginal groups. 3) Fill gaps in archaeological knowledge. 4) Develop active and participatory programs to increase awareness. 5) Develop a living cultural heritage program. Implementation Guide - Top Priority Implementation Projects The Implementation Guide organizes the watershed plan's recommendations according to relevant implementation tools (e.g. policy, regeneration, land securement, stewardship and education, operations and maintenance, enforcement and monitoring) and identifies top priority projects for initial implementation (see Attachment 3 - Implementation Guide Executive Summary). Like the watershed plan, the Implementation Guide is intended to inform and guide. The proposed projects contained in the guide are meant to serve as a basis for discussion among implementing partners and as a source for the further development of individual partners' own long term work plan and budget preparations. Upon approval of the Rouge River Watershed Plan, TRCA will initiate discussion with key implementing partners to develop five year workplans and budgets for the top priority projects, and incorporate them in capital budgets. 32 69 i H.11 7 0 Revised ORMCP Conformity Assessment At Authority Meeting #3/07, held on April 27, 2007, Resolution #A102/07 was approved as follows: THAT the conformity assessment for the Rouge River Watershed Plan in Attachment 2 and the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment be deemed to fulfil the watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP; 2002) and be approved for use on an interim basis in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine in the Rouge River watershed until such time as a final Watershed Plan is brought back to the Authority for approval, Staff has revised the conformity assessment, based on the final watershed planning document references (see Attachment 4 - ORMCP Watershed Planning Requirements Conformity Assessment for Rouge River Watershed). Staff recommend that the revised conformity assessment and the final watershed planning documents referenced therein be approved for use in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine portion of the Rouge River watershed. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA staff will take the following steps to facilitate the transition from plan to action: • design the desk-top-published version of the Rouge River Watershed Plan document and distribute it to watershed partners; • meet with Aboriginal community leaders to discuss the watershed plan and ways they may wish to be involved in its implementation; • meet with municipal staff and other key implementing partners to incorporate top priority projects in future years workplans and budgets; • meet with municipal staff and other stakeholders to initiate the plan for hosting a 2009 multi-stakeholder forum to review progress at implementation of the watershed plan; and • continue to pursue projects in support of the Rouge Watershed Plan, as already funded in 2008 capital budgets, for example: • regeneration/reforestation projects; • Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit project; • Sustainable Neighbourhood Greenfield Development project; preparation of water management guidelines; Remedial Flood Risk Reduction Studies; and • Healthy Yards Program and associated social marketing studies. Many municipalities, other agencies and local groups, including Rouge Park Alliance, have already begun to use the watershed plan to inform their ongoing projects and new initiatives. 33 FINANCIAL DETAILS Total funding in the amount of $1.3 million over 5 years was provided for the Rouge River Watershed Plan by the Regional Municipality of York and City of Toronto as part of the municipal capital budgets for TRCA. An additional grant of $25,000 was provided by Environment Canada's Great Lakes Sustainability Fund in support of the regeneration plan component of the Implementation Guide. Report prepared by: Sonya Meek, extension 5253 Email: smeek@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Sonya Meek, extension 5253 Email: smeek@trca.on.ca Date: March 14, 2008 Attachments: 4 34 71 72 Attachment 1 AVOW Rouge Park roecwru a,?o arc+av ? LL` onserva ton for The Living City 50 Bloomington Road West 5 Shoreham Drive Aurora, Ontario Downsview, Ontario L4G 3G8 M3N 1S4 Ph 905-713-7426 Ph 416-661-6600 Fax 905-713-6028 Fax 416-661-6898 rougepark(@rougepark.com www.trca.on.ca www.rouaer)ark.com November 30, 2006 Mr. Dick O'Brien Chair Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview, ON M3N 1S4 Dear Mr. O'Brien: The Rouge River Watershed Plan is the product of the Rouge Watershed Task Force. At the last meeting of the Task Force, following 2.5 years of discussion and study, the report was adopted with the final resolution. Underlying the report is a wealth of scientific study including some groundbreaking modelling as well as innovative empirical social science research. These studies and the often lively discussions at the Task Force meetings have brought to the fore some key messages at once sobering and yet providing the opportunity for positive action. The underlying science demonstrates unequivocally that the Rouge River watershed is at a crossroads. At its heart is the largest urban wilderness park in North America. Yet pressures on five municipalities, two regional governments, the province and the federal government (which owns substantial tracts of land in the watershed) create enormous and often conflicting management demands. Concern for the environment is once again at the public forefront as this report is being finalised. There is no doubt that members of the public want to "do the right thing" when it comes to environmental matters. Yet the complexity of the problem can be overwhelming to an individual citizen. The phenomenal participation rate in blue and green box programs demonstrates how much change can be effected with appropriate leadership and direction. Research, the public will and economics all appear to be moving towards favouring a more truly sustainable way of living in a North American urban area. Opportunities exist today for individual buildings, infrastructure, transportation, energy and water management that were merely theoretical only a few years ago. Decisions to take advantage or squander these opportunities will directly affect the future of this watershed. The watershed plan provides general direction. It is the broadest of navigational tools. It points out the routes available and the desired destination. By itself, this document will not achieve any results. If there was one sentiment expressed consistently by members of this Task Force it was a desire that this report not be yet another report that would be filed away and gather dust. Leadership is needed to make specific decisions at all levels from governments, to planners, developers and individuals that are consistent with the goals of this plan. Not all decisions need necessarily cost money. Inaction, indecision and lack of leadership also have their costs- often to be paid for (with accrued interest) by future residents. 35 Within our own sphere, every citizen in this watershed is a leader and a decision maker. Every one of us has the power to make decisions that will affect the future of this watershed. It is my sincere hope that the right leadership will be demonstrated by all decision makers in the watershed so that the general principles and goals of this watershed plan will indeed be put into specific action. I believe that if this is done, when this plan is next reviewed, we can all be proud to have navigated through the future years of this watershed in a way that we and more importantly perhaps, our children and their children can be proud of. The text of the final task force resolution follows: THAT the Rouge Watershed Task Force forward its final Watershed Plan to the TRCA for its consideration, THAT TRCA be requested to complete all supporting documents as soon as possible and conduct further consultation, including an expert peer review, on the final draft Plan and supporting documents; THAT Rouge Watershed Task Force members be circulated a copy of the expert peer review report; THAT TRCA be requested in the finalization of this document to ensure that comments have been addressed in keeping with the Task Force principles, tone and spirit of the final Task Force Plan; THAT TRCA be requested to facilitate the development of an Implementation Guide and a five year Implementation Workplan and budget for the Rouge River Watershed Plan, in consultation with key implementing partners; THAT the TRCA be requested to establish an Implementation Committee as soon as possible following the finalization of the Watershed Plan in order to promote and track the implementation of the Watershed Plan; AND FURTHER THAT the Rouge Park Alliance, the Municipal partners, the Provincial and Federal governments as well as all residents, organizations and relevant interest groups be requested to provide their ongoing support for the implementation of the principles and goals of the Rouge River Watershed Plan. Yours Ver- 'Frtal4 Bryan J. Buttigie Chair. Rclug e RiverAN atcrshed Task Force. 36 73 74 Attachment 2 Rouge River Watershed Plan Towards a Healthy and Sustainable Future EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Rouge River watershed is an extraordinary resource in Southern Ontario, treasured and enjoyed by residents and visitors alike. It spans 336 km2 of land and water in the Regions of York and Durham, Cities of Toronto and Pickering, and Towns of Markham, Richmond Hill and Wh itch u rch-Stouffvil le. It includes all the lands that drain to the Rouge River and its tributaries, including the Little Rouge River, starting in the hills of the Oak Ridges Moraine and flowing south to Lake Ontario (see Figure 1-1). Why do we need this watershed plan? -If you live, work or play in the Rouge River watershed, you depend on its health in a number of ways. The Rouge watershed is a source of your drinking water - whether you rely on wells or water from Lake Ontario. Unpaved land absorbs water from rain and snowfall to replenish groundwater and streams and reduce the negative impacts of flooding and erosion. Healthy aquatic and terrestrial habitats support diverse communities of plants and animals. Agricultural lands provide local sources of food and green spaces provide recreation opportunities. A rich human heritage affords links to the past that enrich and inform our lives today. The natural beauty of the forests, meadows, farmlands, wetlands, rivers and creeks provides urban dwellers with solace, renewal and contact with nature. Increasing concerns about the health of our cities and countryside, the safety of our drinking water and the future of the Oak Ridges Moraine have lead to a number of initiatives towards sustainable living in Ontario, the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) and the Great Lakes Region. Actions taken in the Rouge watershed can provide a model for actions in other watersheds, as well as influence the environmental health of larger systems. What is the role of the watershed plan? Specifically, the watershed plan is intended to inform and guide municipalities, provincial and federal governments, TRCA, Rouge Park Alliance, non-government organizations and private landowners as they update their policies and practices for environmental stewardship. This watershed plan was prepared by a multi-stakeholder task force that includes representatives from all levels of government agencies, private businesses, not-for-profit organizations and the public and was coordinated by TRCA and Rouge Park Alliance (see Appendix C). The plan has a strong technical foundation, based on decades of monitoring of environmental conditions combined with a leading edge approach to modelling of potential future conditions. A series of management summits was held to convene experts who could help identify best practices and recommendations to achieve the objectives of the Rouge Watershed Task Force. 37 The guiding framework for this watershed plan comprises an overall goal, a set of principles, nine goals and 22 objectives with specific targets. Our overall goal is: To work towards a healthy and sustainable Rouge watershed by protecting, restoring and enhancing its ecological and cultural integrity within the context of a regional natural heritage system. Our goals, objectives and targets address: • Groundwater • Surface water • Stream form • Aquatic system • Terrestrial system • Air quality and climate change • Cultural heritage • Nature-based recreation • Sustainable land and resource use One of the foundations of this plan is the Rouge River State of the Watershed Report, which provides a wealth of recent information about natural and cultural resources and human activities in the watershed. Land use in the Rouge watershed today is approximately 40% rural, 35% urban, 24% natural cover and 1 % open water. The lower watershed is dominated by Rouge Park, with a small but well established area of urban development to the west. The middle and western parts are experiencing rapid urban expansion and have sparse natural cover except in Rouge Park. The upper and eastern portions of the watershed are primarily rural and agricultural with some small towns and villages. The Rouge watershed represents a rich inheritance for current and future communities. The Little Rouge River watershed is still relatively undeveloped with considerable natural cover and a water balance typical of a rural watershed. The aquatic systems in the upper Little Rouge and parts of the Main Rouge are healthy enough to support cold- and cool-water communities including species of concern such as redside dace and brook trout. Natural habitats support a high diversity of plants and animals, including many that are rare or at risk (such as the nationally threatened Jefferson salamander, provincially significant Cooper's hawk and regionally rare one flower cancer-root). Major blocks of publicly owned lands have been reserved for conservation and greenspace purposes, most notably the 41 square kilometre Rouge Park. The Rouge watershed also has a rich cultural heritage, including many archaeological and historic sites, landscapes, stories and artifacts from earlier inhabitants as well as the diverse cultures of present day communities. 38 7J 76 Unfortunately, there are signs of stress. Decades of urban development have resulted in harmful changes that exceed the carrying capacity of natural systems. These changes include increased surface runoff, more water pollution, greater annual flow volumes in rivers and streams, increased erosion and sedimentation, channel instability, loss of biodiversity, and greater incidence of smog. They are signs that the ability of the air, land and water to absorb the negative impacts of human activities is strained and cannot be sustained over the long term unless fundamental changes are made. Rehabilitation of infrastructure and restoration of natural habitats to address these issues is underway, but these measures are expensive and time consuming. To help us understand how the watershed might react to changes in land use, environmental management and climate in the future, we undertook a multi-faceted process of analysis and synthesis. This included modelling studies to compare eight potential scenarios, as documented in our Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report. The results of this work were combined with an examination of existing conditions and trends in the watershed, a review of watershed research in other areas, and the best professional judgement of a range of experts in many fields. What can we expect in future? We discovered that if future development proceeds with current approaches to community design and stormwater management, it will not be possible to maintain current watershed conditions, let alone improve them. If development practices are changed to use the best foreseeable community designs and management techniques, it may be possible to maintain and in some cases enhance current conditions. However many of the new designs and technologies for sustainable urban development are still evolving and being tested so we recommend that where permitted, development should proceed with caution. Evaluation should be undertaken, with extensive and meaningful public consultation, to assess how well watershed objectives and,targets are being met and recommend adjustments to development practices when necessary. Fortunately, the Rouge watershed offers many unique opportunities, including the assembly and renaturalization of lands as part of Rouge Park and the continuation of agriculture on public and private lands. Watershed municipalities are already working to address the negative impacts of existing developments and are among the leaders in promoting sustainable practices. These opportunities provide valuable tools to help address concerns with current watershed conditions, manage impacts from future land use changes and adapt to the uncertainties associated with global climate change. The pathway to a healthy watershed that emerged from this analysis is based on a comprehensive and inter-dependent set of strategies that will protect and enhance valued resources, regenerate damaged systems, and build more sustainable communities. These strategies encompass three broad themes: 1. Establish the targeted terrestrial natural heritage system: Figure 5-2 illustrates an expanded natural heritage system that provides multiple benefits, including biodiversity and habitats, water balance maintenance and restoration, opportunities for nature-based recreation, improved quality of life, and greater resilience to urban growth and climate change. It can be accomplished by protecting existing valued assets, securing additional lands, regenerating degraded areas and improving stewardship of public and private lands. 39 77 2. Build sustainable communities: We have identified more sustainable approaches to urban form, infrastructure, transportation and resource use that will contribute to overall improved quality of life. They should be applied to new communities, as well as to the intensification or redevelopment of existing ones. Some of the key features include reduced imperviousness, measures to maintain or restore water balance, design features to facilitate sustainable choices (e.g. energy conservation, reduced vehicle use, support for local agricultural products) and protection and adaptive re-use of cultural heritage features. Development, where permitted, should proceed at a pace and extent that allows sufficient time to adopt, test and evaluate the effectiveness of new technologies and to make adjustments if the results do not meet our objectives and targets for the watershed. 3. Recognize and develop a regional open space system: The Rouge watershed has the basis for a significant, inter-connected regional open space system including Rouge Park and regional trails, conservation areas and major municipal parks. We recommend that this system be further developed to reach its potential to provide nature-based recreation experiences for a growing population, support for healthy communities; interpretation of natural and cultural heritage, linkages with local neighbourhoods and connections to surrounding watersheds. An important prerequisite for action will be to increase awareness among watershed residents, businesses, developers and agencies of the importance of the watershed, its water cycles, natural systems and cultural heritage. We recommend a long-term outreach program to provide information, and understanding, explain how people can act on this knowledge, and inspire action. Our.social marketing study, Action Plan for Sustainable Practices, showed that there is a modest basis of understanding and support for sustainability, but the public needs more specific information, marketing campaigns and assistance to inspire action. It also highlighted a number of issues that reduce opportunities for businesses to adopt sustainable practices, therefore we plan to remove barriers and provide incentives for the business community. The coordinated efforts of government agencies and community leaders are also crucial to the success of this watershed plan. They have many complementary tools available, including plans and policies, permits and regulations, enforcement, infrastructure operations and maintenance, stewardship and regeneration programs, and education and awareness initiatives. More details about how these existing tools can be used to help implement the watershed plan are provided in the Implementation Guide. We are standing at a crossroads. In one direction lies a future modelled on the past, with continued losses of environmental quality, biodiversity and cultural heritage along with considerable costs to address the health, social and economic consequences of degraded environmental conditions. In the other direction is a future with healthy natural systems and a rich natural and cultural heritage, supporting a higher quality of life for our communities. This plan outlines the key steps to achieve the best possible future for ourselves and our grandchildren. We hope you will support it and become a partner in its implementation. 40 78 Attachment 3 Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide - Executive Summary Executive Summary Introduction The Rouge River Watershed Plan Towards a Healthy and Sustainable Future (TRCA, 2007) was prepared by a multi-stakeholder task force to provide effective guidance for the protection and enhancement of the Rouge River watershed. The task force included representatives from all levels of government agencies, private businesses, not-for-profit organizations and the public and was coordinated by TRCA and Rouge Park Alliance. The watershed plan is intended to inform and guide municipalities, provincial and federal governments and TRCA as they update their policies and programs for environmental protection, conservation, and restoration within the contexts of land and water use, and the planning of future urban growth. The plan provides direction to local non-governmental organizations and private landowners with regard to best management practices and opportunities for environmental stewardship. To accomplish the management strategies set out in the plan, there will need to be coordinated efforts by a variety of implementing partners. Purpose The purpose of this Implementation Guide is to facilitate implementation of the recommendations contained in the Rouge River Watershed Plan Towards a Healthy and Sustainable Future (TRCA, 2007). The Guide organizes the watershed plan recommendations according to relevant implementation tools and assembles additional information to inform initial action. The Guide further summarizes a 10 year work plan of implementation projects, within the context of existing programs and likely implementing partners. Like the watershed plan the Implementation Guide is intended to inform and guide the ongoing implementation and development of programs and policies. The proposed projects in the workplan are meant to serve as a basis for discussion. The proposed projects contained in this Guide are intended to serve as a basis for discussion among implementing partners and as a source for the further development of individual partners' own long term work plan and budget preparations. Strategic Watershed Management Direction The Rouge River Watershed Plan concludes that the watershed is at a critical crossroads in that it continues to support many unique natural and cultural heritage values, and yet a number of present and anticipated stresses will challenge the ability to sustain this remarkable condition. The watershed plan identifies three integral actions for the protection and enhancement of the watershed: 41 1. Expand Terrestrial Natural Cover Create and enhance natural cover in a targeted terrestrial natural heritage system (TNHS). This action is especially important in areas upstream of existing and future urban growth, from a water management and erosion control imperative, and for parts of the target system vulnerable to loss or impact from urban growth, from a habitat biodiversity standpoint. It will also contribute to serving the growing demand for nature-based recreation and provide greater resilience to climate change. Land use policy, regeneration and land securement projects are the primary implementation mechanisms to achieve this set of recommendations. 2. Build More Sustainable New Communities and Retrofit Older Ones to Improve Their Sustainability By improving water management and promoting more sustainable practices overall. a) Improve Water Management Manage for pre-development water balance (i.e., runoff volume control and maintenance of infiltration) by protecting natural heritage systems, naturalizing urban landscapes, using innovative lot and conveyance level stormwater management technologies, and rainharvesting. This set of actions is critical to water management and the associated health of the aquatic system. b) Promote Sustainable Practices Overall Facilitate the use of these innovative water management approaches by promoting improved urban form, green buildings and sustainable behaviour, and, at the same time address a broad range of other objectives for the sustainable community. Of particular interest is the need to accelerate the shift to the adoption of more sustainable practices - through education/ awareness, testing, and demonstrating new technologies. A co-ordinated combination of new policies, "retrofit" type regeneration projects, improved operations and maintenance programs, stewardship/education, and monitoring initiatives will be necessary. 3. Recognize and Develop a Regional Open Space System Further develop the regional open space system to support the growing population and healthy communities by improving accessibility to trails; interpretation and celebration of natural and cultural heritage. Distinctive urban wilderness experiences of Rouge Park and countryside experiences are offered in the Rouge watershed. Cultural heritage features and landscapes are increasingly playing a role in recreation (e.g., rural heritage settings, adaptive re-use of heritage buildings). Active and participatory education programs were identified as a strategic means of engaging the public and raising awareness of these issues and several regeneration capital works initiatives have been identified to address this set of recommendations. 42 79 80 Top Priority Implementation Projects This Implementation Guide identifies a 10 year work plan of implementation projects addressing all recommendations of the watershed plan, and organized according to primary implementation mechanisms: • Policy; • Regeneration; • Land securement; • Stewardship and education; • Operations and maintenance; • Enforcement; and • Monitoring. The following list of top priority implementation projects has been selected with consideration for their collective ability to address the three integral actions noted above, in an expeditious and mutually supportive way. They are not listed in any particular order. The reference numbers in brackets (i.e., 1-8) are the respective project numbers, as listed in the implementation work plan tables within the Guide, where additional information is provided. Policy and Policy Related Special Studies Municipalities should work with TRCA to investigate ways to incorporate the following new policy directions into their planning documents (see Table 1.1 for details) (1-1): a) Identify a targeted terrestrial natural heritage system, based on the system recommended in the watershed plan, and adopt policies to protect and restore natural cover. b) Manage for pre-development water balance (i.e., reduce excess runoff volume, maintain or restore natural levels of infiltration and evaporation) with particular emphasis on areas identified as locally significant recharge. C) Develop strategies and policies to promote sustainable urban form, including sustainable infrastructure, transportation and resource use. d) Conduct Master Environmental Servicing Plans (MESPs) in a subwatershed context to establish the environmental features, functions and linkages as part of the growth planning process. e) Recognize the regional open space system and the distinctive natural and cultural heritage that provides a basis for recreational experiences. f) Conduct comprehensive flood risk assessment plans where intensification is proposed in a flood vulnerable area and/or a Special Policy Area. g) Support stormwater retrofits in existing developments and redevelopment projects. h) Adopt policy to implement the Greater Golden Horseshoe Conservation Authorities' Erosion and Sediment Control Guideline for Urban Construction and update municipal Erosion and Sediment Control by-laws and Fill by-laws as necessary. i) Adopt policy to recognize and implement the Rouge River Watershed Based Fisheries Management Plan. 43 81 j) Support updated and expanded monitoring programs, including ambient monitoring, requirements for pre-development baseline monitoring, and the promotion and testing of new technologies and their cumulative watershed effects. 2. ORM Municipalities - recognize the Rouge River Watershed Plan in their official plans, as required by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) (1-7). 3. MPIR, MMAH, municipalities, TRCA, AMO, CO, BILD - should establish development standards for sustainable community design for application to new development proposals or urban expansions, consistent with the special recognition in the Greenbelt Plan for the Rouge Park and its watershed (1-3). 4. TRCA, municipalities and other approval agencies - Develop a strategy/procedure for streamlining approvals for innovative designs (1-4). 5. TRCA, BILD, municipality - Promote a sustainable greenfield neighbourhood demonstration project (1-5). 6. TRCA - Undertake a continuous simulation and event-based hydrologic modelling pilot study to determine the most conservative approach to sizing SWM ponds for flood control in future growth areas (1-10). 7. TRCA, municipalities - Undertake a scoped economic assessment of the implications of implementing the watershed plan's integral recommendations, including: valuation of ecosystem services; preparation of a methodology for applying the net gain approach; and development of recommendations for applying fairness and equity in implementation (1-18) Regeneration 1. All partners - Increase natural cover: 1) in Rouge Park - implement existing restoration plans; 2) in Whitebelt - prepare restoration implementation plans for the NHS identified in municipal plans and co-ordinate with developers; and 3) in Headwaters - prepare restoration implementation plans and implement prior to urban development (2-1,2,3). 2. TRCA, municipalities - Develop sustainable neighbourhood retrofit action plans (2-6). 3. TRCA, Rouge Park Alliance, municipalities - Undertake detailed planning and develop a long term funding strategy to implement the Rouge watershed inter-regional trails network (2-12). 4. TRCA, Rouge Park Alliance, Whitchurch-Stouffville - Develop a Northern Countryside recreation strategy (2-13). 44 82 5. Ministry of Culture and partners - Establish a facility for storage of archaeological artifacts and document collections that is accessible to researchers; secure funding for capital and operations (2-15). Land Securement 1. TRCA and Rouge Park Alliance - update priority list for land securement within the Rouge watershed based on the Rouge Watershed Plan's recommended priorities within the TNHS (3-1). 2. TRCA, municipalities and Rouge Park Alliance - Work with MPIR to investigate mechanisms, as may be necessary beyond planning measures, to secure the targeted TNHS lands in the "whitebelt" that do not have any legislated protection (3-2). Stewardship and Education TRCA and municipalities - Deliver technology transfer workshops, seminars and materials for sustainable technologies, erosion and sediment control, and sustainable urban form (4-1,2,7,8). 2: TRCA, municipalities and others - Develop a co-ordinated program to accelerate implementation of lot level retrofits by the business and residential and institutional sectors (4-11, 4-16, 2-6, 5-10). 3. TRCA, Rouge Park Alliance, MNR, Community groups, municipalities, Co-ordinate the development of educational materials on invasive species removal techniques and engage volunteer groups to help in monitoring and removal (4-14). 4. Municipalities, utilities, TRCA - Develop an outreach program based on the results from the Renewable Energy Road Map to promote the uptake of renewable energy technologies (4-26). 5. TRCA - Encourage all schools in the watershed to achieve Ontario EcoSchools Program certification (4-27). 6. Rouge Park Alliance - Implement the Rouge Park Interpretive Plan (4-30). 7. TRCA and others - Develop a pilot project for Ontario history and archaeology seminars for adults, featuring Rouge sites. Special attention to reaching out to new Canadians and descendents of past peoples of the watershed as target audience (4-40). 8. TRCA, municipalities, Aboriginal groups - Develop a communications plan in partnership with Aboriginal groups. (4-48). 9. GTA Agricultural Action Committee - Provide profile and recognition for institution, restaurants and businesses that feature local food selections (4-53). 45 Operations and Maintenance Municipalities - Conduct assessments of sediment accumulation in SWM ponds and develop a prioritized list of clean out projects. (5-1). 2. Municipalities, TRCA - Develop guidelines for design and establishment of municipal SWM facility maintenance programs, including monitoring, rehabilitation and financing mechanisms (5-2, 3, 4). 3. TRCA, Town of Markham - Prepare flood emergency response plan for SPAs, including an inventory of hazards, prioritization, and emergency response protocol (5-24). 4. TRCA - Undertake a flood risk reduction study to improve the hydraulic capacity of road and rail crossings in flood vulnerable areas (e.g., Markham (Unionville) Special Policy Area) (5-22). 5. TRCA - Track advances in the prediction of climate change and reassess local flood risks and management measures (5-25). Enforcement Various agencies, municipalities - Develop interjurisdictional compliance protocols for poaching (wildlife), erosion and sediment control, tree cutting, topsoil and land disturbance, dumping, trespassing, and encroachment). Identify gaps in regulatory capability and capacity. Identify options for addressing gaps. Develop resources and implementation plan (6-2). Monitoring TRCA and partners - Identify technologies that show promise and monitor their performance using Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP) - i.e. Rainwater collection and re-use, permeable pavement, groundwater and soil contamination risk with infiltration technologies, and long term performance and maintenance costs of any green technology (7-1, 7-2). 2. TRCA and partners - Launch cumulative.effects monitoring program for innovative development design (7-6). 3. TRCA, municipalities- Review recommendations for additional monitoring in the Rouge watershed as part of the 5 year review and update of the Regional Watershed Monitoring Network (RWMN). Priorities include specific recommendations for additional monitoring of precipitation, stream flow, fluvial geomorphology, groundwater, and aquatic systems (7-8, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 22). 4. Volunteers, TRCA - Develop a volunteer based detection program for aquatic invasive species (i.e., Round goby, rusty crayfish). See also stewardship section re terrestrial invasive alien species (7-25). 46 83 84 5. Municipalities - Develop and implement a program to monitor trail use and participation rates in other related recreational activities (7-29). Tracking progress TRCA is proposing to convene an annual multi-stakeholder forum to report on progress at implementing the watershed plan and update priorities for the coming year. Meetings will be held with municipal staff and other key stakeholders 2-3 times per year to plan and discuss follow up from the forum. Particular attention will be given to the status of top priority implementation projects set out in the workplan. Changes and trends in the watershed conditions will be monitored under the Regional Watershed Monitoring Network and reported on a regular basis through publication of a watershed report card. 47 85 Attachment 4 ORMCP Watershed Planning Requirements - Conformity Assessment for the Rouge River Watershed Subsection 24.(1) irement Conformitv Assessment Watershed planning and ongoing watershed management have been activities the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has carried out in partnership with its municipalities for a number of years. Therefore a watershed plan was deemed to have been initiated prior to April 22, 2003, although study components required updating to varying degrees. Document Reference Every upper-tier municipality and single-tier municipality shall, on or before April 22, 2003, begin preparing a watershed plan, in accordance with subsection 24.(3), for every watershed whose streams originate within the municipality's area of jurisdiction. A final draft of the Rouge River Watershed Plan was completed on November 30, 2006, subject to specified revisions approved by the Rouge Watershed Task Force. Approval of the final plan is pending a TRCA Board decision on March 24.(3) A watershed plan shall include, as a minimum, (a) a water budget and conservation plan as set out in section 25; (b) land and water use and management strategies; A watershed study was initiated by the TRCA, in partnership with the Region of York, Region of Durham and City of Toronto and area municipalities for the Rouge River watershed on June 27, 2003. 28, 2008. See conformity assessments for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). The Rouge River Watershed Plan describes recommended management strategies regarding existing and future land and water use that will help to protect the ecological and hydrological features and functions of the watershed, including the portions in the Oak Ridges Moraine Area. Key strategies include the need to expand natural cover and build sustainable communities, particularly with an aim to maintain or restore water balance. Approval to initiate the Rouge River Watershed Planning Study according to an initial work program was granted at the June 27, 2003 meeting of the TRCA (Authority Res. #A129/03). A Workplan to fulfil the watershed planning requirements of the ORMCP was approved by the Authority on Sept. 26, 2003 (Authority Res. #A196/03) Approval of the Rouge River Watershed Plan and its supporting technical documents is pending a TRCA Board decision on March 28, 2008. See document references for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). See Section 5.0 (Strategies) in the Rouge River Watershed Plan. 48 I 1. 86 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 24.(3) (c) a framework for Implementation direction and See Section 5.0 of the continued implementation, which initial considerations for priority Rouge River Watershed may include more actions and areas accompany the Plan. detailed implementation management strategies in the plans for smaller Rouge River Watershed Plan. The See Rouge River geographic areas, such Rouge River Watershed Plan Watershed Plan as subwatershed plans, Implementation Guide provides Implementation Guide. or for specific subject more detailed implementation matter, such as direction for policy, regeneration environmental projects etc., including supportive management plans; maps, criteria etc. (d) an environmental The Rouge River Watershed Plan See Section 6.7 of the monitoring plan; includes recommendations Rouge River Watershed regarding changes or Plan for recommended enhancements to existing enhancements to existing environmental monitoring monitoring programs. programs and other area, site-or issue-specific monitoring requirements. (e) provisions requiring the The Rouge River Watershed Plan See Section 5.0 of the use of environmental includes recommendations Rouge River Watershed management practices regarding the use of Plan. and programs, such as environmental practices and programs to prevent programs. The Implementation See Rouge River .pollution, reduce the use Guide further identifies practices Watershed Plan of pesticides and manage and policies applicable to the land Implementation Guide. the use of road salt; and, use planning and development process. (f) criteria for evaluating the The Rouge-River Watershed Plan See Appendix D of the protection of water quality includes a framework of watershed Rouge River Watershed and quantity, hydrological goals, objectives, indicators and Plan for a summary of features and hydrological targets to be used to track or watershed goals, functions. evaluate long term watershed objectives, indicators and health. targets used to track or evaluate watershed The accompanying Implementation health. Guide sets out recommended policies for the review of land use See the Rouge River proposals to evaluate the protection Watershed Plan of groundwater and surface water Implementation Guide for quality and quantity, hydrological a compilation of all features and functions, as well as policies and maps terrestrial features and functions, showing where the policy and aquatic communities and recommendations apply. habitat. 49 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 24.(4) Major development is prohibited Final approval of the Rouge Approval of the Rouge River unless, River Watershed Plan is Watershed Plan and its (a) the watershed plan for the pending a TRCA Board supporting technical relevant watershed, prepared in decision on March 28, 2008. documents is pending a accordance with subsection A final draft of the Rouge TRCA Board decision on 24.(3), has been completed; River Watershed Plan was March 28, 2008 completed on November 30, 2006, subject to specified revisions approved by the Rouge Watershed Task Force. (b) the major development See conformity assessment See document references conforms with the watershed for section 24.(3) for section 24.(3) plan; and (c) a water budget and See conformity See document references conservation plan, prepared in assessments for sections for sections 25.(1) and accordance with section 25 and 25.(1) and 25.(2). 25.(2) demonstrating that the water supply required for the major development is sustainable, has been completed. 24.(8) An application for major See conformity assessment See document references development to which this for section 24.(4) for section 24.(4) subsection applies shall not be approved unless, (a) the relevant municipality has complied with clause (c) of subsection 24.(4); or 50 87 88 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 24.(8) (b) the applicant, For any applications continued (i) identifies any hydrologically received prior to completion sensitive features and related of watershed plans, in hydrological functions on the site accordance with the and how they will be protected, ORMCP, conformity will (ii) demonstrates that an adequate have been reviewed and water supply is available for the confirmed through applicant development without submitted studies. compromising the ecological integrity of the Plan Area, and (iii) provides, with respect to the site and such other land as the approval authority considers necessary, a water budget and water conservation plan that, (A) characterizes groundwater and surface water flow systems by means of modelling, (B) identifies the availability, quantity and quality of water sources, and (C) identifies water conservation measures. 51 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 25.(1) Every upper-tier A water budget study was initiated -See TRCA 2003 Capital Budget municipality and in January 2003 by the Toronto Workplan and Authority approval single-tier municipality and Region Conservation to hire consultants to undertake shall, on or before April Authority, in partnership with the a study terms of reference. 22, 2003, begin Region of York, Region of Durham preparing a water and City of Toronto and area Approval to initiate the Rouge budget and municipalities for the Rouge River River Watershed Planning Study conservation plan, in Watershed, in advance of the according to an initial work accordance with overall Rouge River Watershed program, including water budget subsection 25.(2), for Planning study. study, was granted at the June every watershed whose 27, 2003 meeting of the TRCA streams originate within The Region of York began (Authority Res. #A129/03). the municipality's area preparing a water conservation of jurisdiction. plan for the entire Region in 1997. York Region Water Efficiency The program included a 6 year Master Plan Update, 2007. capital program along with a 2 year maintenance program. This 8 Approval of the Rouge River year program came to completion Watershed Plan and its in summer 2006, with a sustained supporting technical documents savings of 20.33 million litres per is pending a TRCA Board average day. decision on March 28, 2008. In February 2006 the Region began its Water Efficiency Master Plan Update. It was completed in spring of 2007. An implementation plan is now being developed to update the Water for Tomorrow program and include some or all of the measures recommended in the report. During this time the Water for Tomorrow program is maintaining its public and youth education programs along with a shower head and toilet flapper retrofit maintenance program. 52 89 90 Subsection Requirement 25.(2) A water budget and conservation plan shall, as a minimum, (a) quantify the components of the water balance equation, including precipitation, evapotranspiration, groundwater inflow and outflow, surface water outflow, change in storage, water withdrawals and water returns; (b) characterize groundwater and surface water.flow systems by means of modelling; Conformity Assessment The Rouge River Watershed Plan includes a quantitative description of the major components of the water balance equation on an average annual basis over the watershed surface area. The water budget was developed based on land use characteristics, interception abstractions, vegetation, surficial soil characteristics and spatial variations in long term average precipitation, temperature and evaporation across the watershed, using Water Balance Analysis System (WABAS) software. WABAS generated recharge estimates for input to the MODFLOW groundwater model, which was used to estimate the groundwater component of the water budget. The groundwater flow system of the Rouge River watershed has been characterized by development and calibration of a groundwater flow model that utilizes MODFLOW software. The surface water flow system of the Rouge River watershed has been characterized by development and calibration of a hydrologic model based on HSP-F software. 53 Document Reference Section 3.2 (Current Conditions) of the Rouge River Watershed Plan and Chapter 4 (Groundwater Quantity and Quality) of the Rouge River State of the Watershed Report present the overall water budget for the watershed. Section 4.5 of the Rouge Watershed Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report provides a more detailed description of the existing water budget, including maps and tabular summaries, and the effects of future land use and management scenarios on the water budget. See Section 3.2 (Current Conditions) of the Rouge River Watershed Plan and the Rouge River State of the Watershed Report Chapter 4 (Groundwater Quantity and Quality) and Chapter 5 (Surface Water Quantity) for descriptions of the current groundwater and surface water flow systems and issues. Sections 4.1 and 4.5 of the Rouge Watershed Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report provide a more detailed description of the existing surface and groundwater flow systems, including maps and tabular summaries, and the effects of future land use and management scenarios on these systems. 91 Subsection Requirement 25.(2) (c) identify, continued (i) targets to meet the water needs of the affected ecosystems, (ii) the availability, quantity and. quality of water sources, and (iii) goals for public education and for water conservation; Conformity Assessment The Rouge River Watershed Plan includes criteria in the form of maps and targets (both quantitative and qualitative) for the protection of groundwater and surface water quality and quantity, hydrological features and functions, as well as terrestrial features and functions and aquatic communities and habitat. The Region of York's Water for Tomorrow program outlined specific goals for both education and water conservation measures as outlined in the initial scope of work. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update recommends new and/or updated programs for public education and water conservation measures. New goals for education and water conservation measures will be set once the program implementation plan is completed and approved by council. Document Reference See 24(3)(f) above for targets. See Chapters 4.0 (Groundwater Quantity and Quality) and 5.0 (Surface Water Quantity) of the Rouge River State of the Watershed Report for a summary of the availability and quality of water sources. Section 5.5.3 (Resource Use) of the Rouge River Watershed Plan addresses water conservation and supports continuation of the Regional water efficiency and public awareness programs. (d) develop a water-use profile and forecast; All upper-tier and single-tier municipalities in the Rouge River watershed have developed water use profiles and forecasts as part of preparing water use assessment reports and/or water efficiency plans and programs. York Region has developed water-use profiles and forecasts as part of the Water Master Plan Update, 2004. The forecasts consider the effect of planned water conservation measures on future demand. These profiles and forecasts are updated with the master plans. Drawing on this information, a watershed-based water use profile and forecast was developed as part of preparing the Rouge River Watershed Plan. See Chapters 4.0 and 5.0 of Rouge River State of the Watershed Report. See Appendix A (Scenario Descriptions) of Rouge Scenario Watershed Modelling and Analysis Report for water use forecast assumptions (based on municipal forecasts). See section 4.0 of York Region's Long Term Water Project Master Plan Update, April 2004 54 92 Subsection Requirement 25.(2) (e) evaluate plans for continued water facilities such as pumping stations and reservoirs; (f) identify and evaluate, (i) water conservation measures such as public education, improved management practices, the use of flow restricting devices and other hardware, water reuse and recycling, and practices and technologies associated with water reuse and recycling, (ii) water conservation incentives such as full cost pricing, and (iii) ways of promoting water conservation measures and water conservation incentives; Conformitv Assessment A watershed-scale evaluation of the predicted effects of forecasted water and land use on groundwater levels was completed in support of the Rouge River Watershed Plan. Based on this evaluation, appropriate land and water use management strategies have been provided in the plan. Further plans for any such facilities are being evaluated by York Region as part of its updated water supply strategy and will be reviewed in the context of the updated watershed information. All upper-tier and single-tier municipalities in the Rouge River watershed have developed water efficiency plans and programs that identify and evaluate water conservation measures, incentives and ways of promoting water conservation measures and incentives. The Rouge River Watershed Plan supports the recommendations of the municipal water efficiency plans and programs and describes management strategies that would further contribute to achieving the objectives and targets of these plans/programs. York Region's water rates are currently based on full cost pricing. Document Reference See Section 4.3 of Rouge Watershed Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report for effects of forecasted water and land use on groundwater levels. See Chapter 5.0 of the Rouge River Watershed Plan for management strategies. York Region's Long Term Water Project Master Plan Update, April 2004 See Section 5.5.3 Rouge River Watershed Plan. See Sections 5.0 and 6.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (2007) for the identification, evaluation and recommendation of water conservation measures and education 55 a3 bsection Requirement (2) (g) analyse the costs itinued and benefits of the matters described in clause (f); (h) require the use of specified water conservation measures and incentives; (i) contain an implementation plan for those specified measures and incentives that reconciles the demand for water with the water supply; Q) provide for monitoring of the water budget and water conservation plan for effectiveness. Conformity Assessment All upper-tier and single-tier municipalities in the Rouge River watershed have developed water efficiency plans and programs that analyse the costs and benefits of their recommended water conservation measures, incentives and promotion strategies. York Region's Water for Tomorrow program used specific water conservation measures and incentives as part of the original capital plan. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update also recommends the use of specific water conservation measures and incentives. York Region developed an implementation plan for the program as part of the scope of work in 1998. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update has recommended an updated program strategy. An implementation plan for the updated program is being developed. York Region's Water Use Efficiency Master Plan Update recommends a monitoring and Evaluation program. The Rouge River Watershed Plan includes recommendations regarding changes or enhancements to existing environmental monitoring programs and other area, site-or issue-specific monitoring requirements that provide for, or improve capacity for monitoring of the water budget [e.g., additional climate stations, stream gauges, groundwater monitoring wells etc.]. Document Reference See Section 5.2.3 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update(2007) for the cost analysis of water conservation measures See Section 6.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (2007) for the recommended program strategy See Section 6.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (2007)for the recommended program strategy See Section 9.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update(2007) See Section 6.7 of the Rouge River Watershed Plan for recommended enhancements to existing monitoring programs. 56 94 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 27.(1) Except with respect to The Rouge River Watershed Planning See Rouge River Watershed land in Settlement study assessed the current and Oak Ridges Moraine Areas, all development projected future per cent impervious Subwatersheds Assessment and site alteration with cover for each Oak Ridges Moraine Technical Brief respect to land in a subwatershed (based on methods subwatershed are suggested in draft Technical Paper prohibited if they would #13 which excludes Settlement cause the total Areas, utilizing subwatershed percentage of the area boundaries defined in draft Technical of the subwatershed Paper #9). These estimates indicate that has impervious that no Oak Ridges Moraine surfaces to exceed, subwatersheds in the Rouge River (a) 10 per cent; or Watershed exceed the 10% impervious cover criteria for current conditions (based on 2002 land use), nor will they exceed 10% upon build-out of municipal official plans approved as of 2002. (b) any lower No lower percentage is specified. N/A percentage specified in the applicable watershed plan. 57 Councillor Jennifer O'Connell City Councillor -Ward 1 MEMORANDUM November 4, 2008 To: Debi Wilcox City Clerk From: Jennifer O'Connell City Councillor, Ward 1 Subject: - Regional Works Committee Report 2008-WR735 (Clear Bags Pilot Study Objectives and Procedures) 95 CIO Q ? „, , r t Nh The above mentioned report effects the broad community and has immediate impacts that effect the residents in the Amberlea neighbourhood, of which I represent. Therefore, I am formally requesting that the Regional Works Committee Report 2008- WR-35 be added as correspondence on the November 17, 2008 Council Agenda. I believe that this report should be formally addressed in the Council Chambers to allow for an open discussion on such an important matter for members of Council and this community. Specifically, I believe questions regarding the selection process, criteria, the monitoring program and community involvement in this process needs to be discussed by members of Council in an open forum. Thank you in advance. Cou cillor Jennifer O'Connell Attachments: Regional Works Committee Report 2008-WR-35 Copy: Tom Quinn CrIRR. FILE -eI - AP?R. A- 7'1CA! 96 DURHAM REGION SUBJECT: The Regional Municipality of Durham To: The Works Committee From: Commissioner of Works Report: 2008 WR-35 Date: November 5, 2008 Clear Bags Pilot Study Objectives and Procedures RECOMMENDATIONS: THAT the Works Committee recommends to Regional Council that: a) The clear bag pilot study be limited to a three (3) month duration from January 12 to April 10, 2009 for approximately 1,500 homes within two (2) distinct routes, one (1) each in the City of Pickering and the Municipality of Clarington; b) The objectives of the clear bag pilot project will be to-assess whether there is an increase in diversion and participation in the recycling/composting programs; c) High-rise apartments will not be included in the clear bags pilot study; and d) The collection contractor institute an enforcement regime whereby non- conforming refuse be left at the curbside. REPORT: Attachment No. 1: Proposed City of Pickering Clear Bag Routes Attachment No. 2: Proposed Municipality of Clarington Clear Bag Routes 1. BACKGROUND On June 18, 2008, Regional Council passed the following resolutions: i) THAT the Region implement a three (3) month clear bag pilot program for garbage collection for approximately 1, 500 homes (two collection routes), with one route in the City of I* Report No.: 2008-WR-35 Page No.: 2 Pickering and one route in the Municipality of Clarington commencing in January 2009 at an estimated cost of $30, 000 to be financed from the 2008 Solid Waste Management Services Budget, and ii) THAT Regional staff be authorized to investigate potential funding partnerships for the recommended three (3) month clear bag pilot program for garbage collection in two (2) highrise apartment buildings, one (1) in the Town of Ajax and one (9) in the City of Oshawa commencing January 2009." Subsequently, Regional Municipality of Durham (Region) staff convened an internal working group to develop the pilot study scope, objectives and procedures, and extended invitations to affected area municipal waste management staff to participate. The purpose of this report is to outline the proposed methodology for the curbside pilot program and to make recommendations regarding implementation of a clear bag pilot program in apartment buildings. The elements of the curbside pilot program that are proposed or that staff have been working on are outlined below. 2. DISCUSSION The objective of the clear bags pilot project should be to assess the effect of using clear bags on diversion rates and participation in the recycling/composting programs. It will compare the effect on diversion rates between two (2) municipalities with different existing service levels. Drawing from the experience of the Town of Markham (clear bags pilot project October to November 2007), where participation rates were low, staff would like to ensure that meaningful data is collected, and therefore proposes mandatory participation by residents on the selected routes. This is important to determine the full extent of potential additional waste diversion resulting from the use of clear bags. 2.1 Curbside Pilot Program The curbside pilot is proposed to run for three (3) months for approximately 1,500 homes broken out between two (2) collection routes, one (1) in the City of Pickering, and one (1) in the Municipality of Clarington. Currently, Regional staff have identified two (2) acceptable routes in the City of Pickering (Attachment 1) and three (3) acceptable routes in the Municipality of Clarington (Attachment 2). These five (5) routes meet the proposed route selection criteria, which includes: one truck route pickup, proximity to transfer station and historical participation rates. 97 98 Report No.: 2008-WR-35 Page No.: 3 As a next step, Regional staff will meet with the contractor and local municipal staff in early November when a final decision will be made and one route will be selected for the City of Pickering and one route will be selected for the Municipality of Clarington. Following the route selection process, members of Council of the affected areas will be notified. The intended start date is January 12, 2009. A three (3) month supply of clear bags plus Promotion and Education (P&E) information will be hand delivered to each home on the route well in advance of the start of the pilot program. A public information session will also be held the first week of December for the affected residents. As the implementation date approaches, the affected residents will receive hand delivered notices. A questionnaire and survey will also be provided to help in the evaluation of the clear bags acceptability. Regional staff has undertaken the following activities related to the pilot program: • Met with staff from the Town of Markham to obtain information on their clear bag pilot study investigations/results • Hired a consultant who has experience in implementing clear bag programs to develop the Region's approach • Worked with contractors to select pilot routes, work out collection protocol and logistics • Developed P&E materials for distribution to homes on the pilot routes in December • Arranged for a baseline waste audit in November 2008, and two (2) additional audits at mid point and end of the pilot study period to provide data on diversion results Staff will also keep waste management call centre staff informed of the details of the pilot study and provide them with information to respond to inquiries from residents in the pilot areas. A follow up report on the results of the pilot study will be prepared for Council.before the summer 2009 recess. 2.2 Apartment Pilot Program Staff has identified a number of issues with respect to implementing a clear bag pilot program in high rise apartment buildings, as discussed below. 1) Multi-storey high rise apartment buildings are typically served by front end load (FEL) bulk bins. In most high rise buildings, residents deposit bagged.waste directly in non-compacted FEL bins located in external enclosures, or drop bagged waste down chutes located on each floor that feed a basement compactor. There is no "ownership" of waste in the same sense as for curbside collection, and residents who choose not to C. Report No.: 2008-WR-35 Page No.: 4 participate in waste diversion programs or pilot programs cannot be readily identified. 2) There is presently no program in place to collect kitchen food waste from residents of high rise apartment buildings, except for buildings up to twelve (12) units that receive curbside municipal waste collection services. Each unit has the choice of participating, but setouts of green bins are typically low. 3) Collection of bulk containers is normally done by contracted forces that collect from many sites in one (1) day, and the operator typically does not check the bin contents other than to report concerns with large items such as mattresses or furniture being placed in the bins. These sites are often the victims of late night illegal dumping from off-property sources. The combination of these realities means that there is likely very little value in attempting a clear bag pilot program in a highrise building. In addition, funding partnerships for this highrise clear bags pilot program was not available at this time. Therefore, Region staff recommends that a highrise clear bag pilot program not be implemented at this time. 2.3 Waste Audits and Data Collection The clear bag program will be evaluated with respect to quantifiable objectives. Waste audits on a macro and micro level will be conducted prior to the commencement, half-way through and at the termination of the curbside pilot program. At the macro level, overall waste tonnage on the specific routes will be measured at the beginning and end.of the program to determine increases in diversion of recyclables and food waste. At the micro level, each waste stream tonnage will also be measured and waste audits will be conducted on randomly selected residents, to evaluate remaining diversion potential In order to increase the validity of the pilot study and improve the participation rate, an enforcement regime is recommended. Curbside waste that does not conform to the clear bag pilot specifications will be labeled and not collected. Residents will be advised of the mandatory nature of participation for the duration of the pilot program. Data related to changes in resident complaints and illegal dumping will also be collected to provide an indication of satisfaction with this new program. In addition, a survey will be distributed to the pilot participants to gauge acceptability of clear bags. C 99 100 Report No.: 2008-WR-35 Page No.: 5 3. CONCLUSION The scope of the clear bags pilot study should be limited to a three (3) month duration from January 12 to April 10, 2009; for approximately 1,500 homes within two (2) distinctive routes, one (1) each in the City of Pickering and Municipality of Clarington. The objectives of the clear bags pilot project should be to increase diversion and participation in the recycling and composting programs, and therefore mandatory participation is advised so that the full extent of potential additional waste diversion can be determined. The residents on the selected routes will be provided documentation regarding the pilot study and will be given an opportunity to comment at a public forum the first week of December. A survey will also be delivered to each residence on the selected routes along with a notification one (1) week prior to commencement of the pilot study. The collection contractor is currently obliged to collect waste quantities and types in accordance with their contracts with the Regional Municipality of Durham. The requirement to collect waste in clear bags only from the selected routes for the duration of the pilot study should be part of an enforcement regime whereby non- conforming refuse will be left at the curbside. Staff recommends that high-rise apartments not be included in a clear bags pilot program. P. Eng., MtsA, of Works Recommended for Presentation to Committee G. H. Cubitt, M.S.W., Chief Administrative Officer WM3/ms/em 7 500 Consumers Road Lorraine Chiasson North York, Ontario M2J 1P8 Regulatory Coordinator PO Box 650 Regulatory Affairs Scarborough ON M1K 5E3 phone: (416) 495-5962 fax: (416) 495-6072 Email: lorraine.chiasson@enbridge.com October 20, 2008 VIA COURIER ENBRI DGE C O 2-R , aS-o? 101 To: The Clerks of the Municipalities in which Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Supplies Natural Gas Re: EB-2008-0219 - Enbridge Gas Distribution 2009 Rate Adjustment Notice of Application ("Notice") dated October 20, 2008 As directed by the Ontario Energy Board ("Board") in its Letter of Direction to Enbridge Gas Distribution, attached hereto is a copy of the Notice in both the English and French versions, together with a copy of the Application filed by Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. on September 26, 2008. Yours truly, Lorraine Chiasson Regulatory Coordinator cc: ' Mr. Fred Cass, Aird & Berlis LLP Ms. T. Persad, Enbridge Gas Distribution (w/o attach Attach. _ ?. = PV c-v i 7 (C`? C?r > C- Y''"'' FILE rye ..__r`...:a on Ontario Energy Commission de I'energie loans, I& Board de ('Ontario 102 f Ontario EB-2008-0219 NOTICE OF APPLICATION ENBRIDGE GAS DISTRIBUTION INC. RATES FOR 2009 Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. ("Enbridge") filed an Application on September 26, 2008 with the Ontario Energy Board (the "Board") under section 36 of the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998, S.O. c.15, Sched. B, as amended, for an order of the Board approving or fixing rates for the distribution, transmission and storage of natural gas, effective January 1, 2009. The Board's decision on this Application may have an effect on all of Enbridge's customers. Enbridge has proposed a two-phased approach to the Board's review of its application. In Phase 1, the Board would review the mechanical rate adjustment under Enbridge's approved Incentive Rate adjustment mechanism. Enbridge has proposed a change to its delivery rates which, if approved by the Board, would result in an average increase of about 0.5% for all residential customers. For a typical residential customer consuming 3,064 m3 per year, the total bill impact would be less than $1 per year. Enbridge requests that the Board address this rate adjustment first. It seeks to have an Order of the Board in time to allow for the implementation of the new rates January 1, 2009. Under Enbridge's proposal, in Phase 2 the Board would consider a number of specific requests of Enbridge. These requests are: • approval of a new deferral account to record the incremental costs of complying with new international financial reporting standards guidelines; -2- Ontario Energy Board 103 • a change to some of the non-energy service charges listed on Rider G; • some revisions to wording in the rate handbook in respect of late payment penalties, the "force majeure" clause, and some other areas; • the discontinuation of an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) commitment stemming from the EB-2006-0034 proceeding requiring the submission of an EnVision benefit report on an annual basis; • a revision to the GDAR IVA fee, from a percentage of the absolute value of the adjustment, to a flat transaction fee; • approval of an In-Franchise Title Transfer fee, to account for additional costs for the provision of this service after the new CIS software becomes operational; and • a change in the requirements for the contracting of upstream transportation that would require direct purchase bundled service customers to contract for firm upstream transportation. According to Enbridge's application this change would provide Enbridge with an additional level of security of supply of gas into its territory in the event of an interruption of delivery upstream of its franchise area. This proceeding will not deal with the commodity cost of natural gas. Any changes to the commodity cost of natural gas for customers that purchase gas directly from Enbridge are addressed through the Quarterly Rate Adjustment Mechanism. Copies of the Application and the supporting written evidence are available for inspection at the Board's office and Enbridge's office at the addresses listed below. Participation You may participate in this proceeding in one of three ways: 1. You may send the Board a letter of comment. Your letter must be received by the Board no later than 30 days from the publication or service date of this notice. 2. You may request observer status in order to receive documents issued by the Board in the proceeding. Your request must be made by letter received by the Board no later than 10 days from the publication date of this notice. 1 0 `t Ontario Energy Board -3- 3. You may request intervenor status if you wish to actively participate in the proceeding. Your request must be made by letter of intervention received no later than 10 days from the publication date of this notice. Your letter of intervention must include a description of how you are, or may be, affected by the proceeding; and if you represent a group, a description of the group and its membership. The Board may choose to hold a written or an oral hearing. The Board will not hold a written hearing if a party satisfies the Board that there is good reason for holding an oral hearing. Your letter of intervention should indicate your preference for a written or oral hearing, and the reasons for that preference. The Board may order costs in this proceeding. You must indicate in your letter of intervention whether you expect to seek costs from Enbridge and the grounds for your eligibility for costs. 4. Your letter of intervention should include a comment about the advisability of the Board's proceeding with Enbridge's proposed two-phased approach to the review of the application. 5. You must provide a copy of your letter of intervention to the Board with a copy to Enbridge at the following address: Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. 500 Consumers Road Toronto, Ontario M2J 1 P8 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 650 Scarborough, ON M1 K 5E3 Attn: Norm Ryckman Director, Regulatory Affairs Tel: 416-495-5499 or 1-888-659-0685 Fax: 416-495-6072 Email: egdregulatoryproceedings(a)-enbridge. com Need More Information? Further information on how to participate may be obtained by visiting the Board's Web site at www.oeb.gov.on.ca or by calling our Consumer Relations Centre at 1-877-632- 2727. Ontario Energy Board -4- 105 How To Contact Us In responding to this notice please reference Board file number EB-2008-0219. It is also important that you provide your name and postal address and, if available, an e-mail address. All communications should be directed to the attention of the Board Secretary at the address below, and be received no later than 4:45 p.m. on the required date. If you already have a user ID, please submit your intervention request through the Board's web portal at www.errr.oeb.gov.on.ca. Additionally, two paper copies are required. If you do not have a user ID, please visit the Board's website under e-filings and fill out a user ID password request. For instructions on how to submit and naming conventions please refer to the RESS Document Guidelines found at www.oeb.gov.on.ca, e-Filing Services. The Board also accepts interventions by e-mail, at the address below, and again, two additional paper copies are required. For your convenience, the Board accepts letters of comment by either post or e-mail. Our e-mail address is Boardsec(a-)oeb.gov.on.ca. Please include the file reference numbers in the subject line of your e-mail. Ontario Energy Board P.O. Box 2319 2300 Yonge Street, 27th Floor Toronto ON M4P 1 E4 Attn: Kirsten Walli Board Secretary Tel: 1-888-632-6273 (Toll free) Fax: 416-440-7656 IF YOU DO NOT FILE A LETTER STATING YOUR WISH TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, THE BOARD MAY PROCEED WITHOUT YOUR PARTICIPATION AND YOU WILL NOT BE ENTITLED TO FURTHER NOTICE OF THE PROCEEDING. Ce document est disponible en frangais. 1 0 LV Ontario Energy Board ll -5- DATED at Toronto, October 20, 2008 ONTARIO ENERGY BOARD Original Signed By Kirsten Walli Board Secretary 107 Filed: 2008-09-26 EB-2008-0219 Exhibit A Tab 2 Schedule 1 Page 1 of 4 IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 15 (Sched. B), as amended; AND IN THE MATTER OF an Application by Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. for an Order or Orders approving or fixing rates for the sale, distribution, transmission and storage of gas. APPLICATION 1. The Applicant, Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. ("Enbridge", or the "Company") is an Ontario corporation with its head office in the City of Toronto. It carries on the business of selling, distributing, transmitting and storing natural gas within Ontario. 2. Enbridge hereby applies to the Ontario Energy Board (the "Board"), pursuant to section 36 of the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998, as amended (the "Act") for an Order or Orders approving or fixing just and reasonable rates for the sale, distribution, transmission and storage of gas commencing January 1, 2009. 3. As of January 1, 2009, Enbridge will be entering the second year of a five year Incentive Regulation plan approved by the Board in EB-2007-0615. The Board- approved Settlement Agreement in EB-2007-0615 (the "Settlement Agreement") establishes a revenue per customer cap framework for Enbridge's rates over the period from 2008 to 2012. Specifically, the Settlement Agreement provides that the Company's distribution revenue, in each year of the period January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2012 shall be determined by the application of a Distribution Revenue Requirement Per Customer Formula (the "Adjustment Formula"). 4. The Settlement Agreement provides for an annual rate adjustment process and, in that regard, states as follows: 108 Filed: 2008-09-26 EB-2008-0219 Exhibit A Tab 2 Schedule 1 Page 2 of 4 The Company shall file ... information, by October 1St, for the purpose of receiving a Board-approved rate order by December 15th, stipulating new rates in each rate class, in time for implementation on January 1St of the following year 5. The Settlement Agreement also specifies information to be filed by Enbridge for the purposes of the annual rate adjustment process. The information to be filed by Enbridge includes a draft rate Order and a Rate Handbook (Exhibit B, Tab 1, Schedule 9), together with supporting documentation detailing how rates have been adjusted to reflect the application of the Adjustment Formula. 6. Enbridge therefore applies to the Board for such final, interim or other Orders, accounting orders and deferral and variance accounts as may be necessary in relation to: (i) the application of the Adjustment Formula for the year commencing January 1, 2009; (ii) the approval of the Company's draft rate Order and Rate Handbook (Exhibit B, Tab 1, Schedule 9), subject to such changes, if any, that the Board may deem appropriate; and (iii) the determination of all other issues that bear upon the Board's approval or fixing of just and reasonable rates for the sale, distribution, transmission and storage of gas by Enbridge for the year commencing January 1, 2009. The Company further applies to the Board pursuant to the provisions of the Act and the Board's Rules of Practice and Procedure for such final, interim or other Orders and directions as may be appropriate in relation to the Application and the proper conduct of this proceeding. 7. The Company respectfully requests that the Board establish a process for the aspects of this Application referred to in paragraphs 6(i) and 6(ii), above (namely, the Filed: 2008-09-26 EB-2008-0219 Exhibit A Tab 2 Schedule 1 Page 3 of 4 application of the Adjustment Formula for 2009 and approval of the draft rate Order and Rate Handbook), that will meet the timelines established by the Settlement Agreement (as set out in paragraph 4, above). 8. As a result of this Application, average rate increases will be approximately 0.5% or less for all customer classes on a T-service basis (that is, excluding commodity costs). For residential customers, the average T-service increase will be approximately 0.5%, or about $3 annually. 9. There are other issues to be determined in this proceeding, as referred to in paragraph 6(iii), above, that bear upon the Board's approval of fixing of just and reasonable rates, but that do not need to be decided in order for the Board to issue an Order regarding the application of the Adjustment Formula for 2009. The Company proposes that the Board implement a two-phase proceeding in order to accommodate the hearing of these other issues. Specifically, the Company requests that the matters referred to in paragraphs 6(i) and 6(ii), above, be reviewed in Phase I of the proceeding and that the matters referred to in paragraph 6(iii), above, be reviewed in Phase II of the proceeding. 11. Enbridge requests that a copy of every document filed with the Board in this proceeding be served on the Applicant and the Applicant's counsel, as follows: 109 110 The Applicant: Mr. Norm Ryckman Director, Regulatory Affairs Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Address for personal service: Mailing address: Filed: 2008-09-26 EB-2008-0219 Exhibit A Tab 2 Schedule 1 Page 4 of 4 500 Consumers Road Willowdale, Ontario M2J 1 P8 P. O. Box 650 Scarborough, Ontario M1 K 5E3 Telephone: 416-495-5499 or 1-888-659-0685 Fax: 416-495-6072 Email: egdregulatoryproceedings@enbddge.com The Applicant's counsel: Mr. Fred D. Cass Aird & Bedis LLP Address for personal service Brookfield Place, P.O. Box 754 and mailing address Suite 1800, 181 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario MW 2T9 Telephone: 416-865-7742 Fax: 416-863-1515 Email: fcass@airdberlis.com DATED September 26, 2008 at Toronto, Ontario. ENBRIDGE GAS DISTRIBUTION INC. Per: • arm n Ener Ontario Ocber 28, 2008 Pat Madill Clerk Regional Municipality of Durham 605 Rossland Road, 4`h Floor P.O. Box 623 Whitby, ON, L1 N 6A3 Dear Ms. Madill: RE: PROTECTION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND WITHIN THE WHITE BELT FILE NO.: A01.CL At a meeting held on October 27, 2008, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington considered correspondence from the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington, regarding the above matter and passed the following resolution: "THAT Correspondence Item D-12 be referred to the Director of Planning Services for consideration in preparing comments on the Durham Growth Plan; and ill THAT the resolution of the Agriculture Advisory Committee of Clarington be forwarded to the Region of Durham, the Durham Agriculture Advisory Committee, the Durham Environmental Advisory Committee and other local municipalities in Durham Region." Enclosed is a copy of the subject correspondence. Your truly (Pa I , CMO ?7lunicipal Clerk .- PLB/ta cc: Durham Agricultural Advisory Committee Durham Environmental Advisory Committee Martin de Rond, Clerk,The Town of Ajax T.G. Gettinby, Clerk, The Township of Brock Sandra Kranc, Clerk, The City of Oshawa --? Debi Wilcox, Clerk, The City of Pickering Kim Coates, Clerk, The Township of Scugog Paul Jones, Clerk, The Town of Whitby Debbie Leroux, Clerk, The Township of Uxbridge Tom Barrie, Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington r .?F K kpPR David Crome, Director of Planning Services CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 112 October 21, 2008 Patti Barrie Municipal Clerk Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1 Dear Ms. Barrie: 1013OCT21 Fr-1 3:10:10 REVIEWED BY??J??.?..... OQIOMIAL ft wl?twx O DIRECTM 00"TION 00" T0: D MAYOR O AIEIIE ICa O CAO O CONMNNTY O tARPORATE O SEANCES SERVICES SERKES • ENSWER" O INJNIwk O pVWM SEAMS CLERK'S O SEAS O SOLICROR 9 TREASM 0 OOTNER muNW6RLaEtrrtru 01 C'(_- RE: AACC RESOLUTIONS PASSED u' F-1 ?lanr-?gtar'? Please be advised that the following resolutions were passed at a meeting of the Clarington Agricultural Advisory Committee. 08-21 WHEREAS farming is the #1 industry in Clarington; and WHEREAS the Greenbelt and Places to Grow legislation was designed to help protect farmland; and WHEREAS the best farmland in southern Ontario is within sight of the CN Tower; and WHEREAS the most productive farmland within the "white belt" has now been identified by the Region of Durham as the future employment and urban residential lands to 2031 and 2056; and WHEREAS identifying the lands would eliminate the urban separators between Courtice and Bowmanville and Bowmanville and Newcastle in Clarington, contrary to the Durham Region and Clarington's current Official Plans; and WHEREAS farmland is necessary for food security; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington is requesting Clarington Council, all other local municipalities in Durham Region, the Durham Agricultural Advisory Committee AACC Resolution age 2 113 and the Durham Environmental Advisory Committee to call on Regional Council to support protection of agricultural lands within the white belt by redirecting the Grow Durham planning initiative focus to exploration of alternate solutions for urban development and intensification with appropriate planning measures to protect responsible agricultural practices (e.g. buffers and setbacks). Sincerely, om Barrie, Chair 40?Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington cc: Gary Jeffery, Vice-Chair Gord Robinson, Council Liaison TORONTO AND REGION f onservation i for The Living City October 28, 2008 Ms. Debi Wilcox City Clerk City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 I Vic` v:..rn 4 . ,m_ CORR ) FILE TAKE APPR. ACTION Sent via email Dear Ms. Wilcox: THAT the Regional Municipality of Durham and their consultants be credited for reducing the 2031 projected urban footprint by over 1,000 hectares by meeting the intensification targets of the provincial Places to Grow Growth Plan; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) supports the recommended policy directions to encourage and demonstrate sustainable community design practices; THAT an environmental monitoring component be added to the proposed "Five Year Growth Management Reviews" to ensure development also proceeds in an environmentally sustainable manner, THAT TRCA does not support the incorporation of lands in the headwaters of the Carruthers Creek watershed into the Durham Region 2031 urban boundary until such time as the following issues have been satisfactorily addressed. • completion of an update to A Watershed Plan for the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek to assess the environmental carrying capacity of the watershed, define a sustainable natural heritage system, and address potential flooding and erosion impacts to downstream residents and infrastructure, • an analysis to show when the subject lands would be needed within the ten-year local urban boundary, • a comparison of the agricultural viability of the Carruthers lands to other whitebelt lands currently being excluded from the urban boundary, and • the completion of Durham's Master Water and Wastewater Servicing Study; AND FURTHER THAT a copy of this report be sent to the Region of Durham, the four other conservation authorities within Durham Region, the Town of Ajax, the City of Pickering, the Municipality of Clarington, the ministries of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Natural Resources, and Energy and Infrastructure and to the City of Toronto Public Works and Infrastructure, and Parks and Environment committees. At Authority Meeting #8/08, of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), held on October 24, 2008, Resolution #A236/08, in regard to Growing Durham was approved as follows: Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416} 661-6600 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca 115 Enclosed for your information and any action deemed necessary is the report as presented to the Authority. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact the undersigned at 416-661-6600 extension 5264 (kstranks@trca.on.ca) or David Burnett at extension 5361. Sincerely Kathy Stranks Manager, Chair and CAD's Office cc. David Burnett, Manager, Provincial and Regional Policy, TRCA /Encl. DISTRIBUTION LIST Patty Barrie, Municipal Clerk, Municipality of Clarington Donna Cansfield, Minister of Natural Resources Glenn De Baeremaeker, Chair, Public Works and Infrastructure Committee, City of Toronto Martin de Rond, Clerk, Town of Ajax Paula Fletcher, Chair, Parks and Environment Committee, City of Toronto Linda Laliberte, GM/Secretary-Treasurer, Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority Patricia Madill, Regional Clerk, Regional Municipality of Durham Russ Powell, Chief Administrative Officer, Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority George Smitherman, Deputy Premier and Minister of Energy and Infrastructure Wanda Stephen, Acting CAO, Kawartha Conservation Jim Watson, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Debi Wilcox, City Clerk, City of Pickering Gayle Wood, CAO/Secretary-Treasurer, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority 116 TO: Chair and Members of the Authority Item 7.6 Meeting #8/08, October 24, 2008 FROM: Carolyn Woodland, Director, Planning and Development RE: GROWING DURHAM KEY ISSUE Draft recommended growth scenario and policy directions. RECOMMENDATION THAT the Regional Municipality of Durham and their consultants be credited for reducing the 2031 projected urban footprint by over 1,000 hectares by meeting the intensification targets of the provincial Places to Grow Growth Plan; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) supports the recommended policy directions to encourage and demonstrate sustainable community design practices; THAT an environmental monitoring component be added to the proposed "Five Year Growth Management Reviews" to ensure development also proceeds in an environmentally sustainable manner; THAT TRCA does not support the incorporation of lands in the headwaters of the Carruthers Creek watershed into the Durham Region 2031 urban boundary until such time as the following issues have been satisfactorily addressed: • completion of an update to A Watershed Plan for the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek to assess the environmental carrying capacity of the watershed, define a sustainable natural heritage system, and address potential flooding and erosion impacts to downstream residents and Infrastructure, • an analysis to show when the subject lands would be needed within the ten-year local urban boundary, • a comparison of the agricultural viability of the Carruthers lands to other whitebelt lands currently being excluded from the urban boundary, and the completion of Durham's Master Water and Wastewater Servicing Study; AND FURTHER THAT a copy of this report be sent to the Region of Durham, the four other conservation authorities within Durham Region, the Town of Ajax, the City of Pickering, the Municipality of Clarington, the ministries of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Natural Resources, and Energy and Infrastructure and to the City of Toronto Public Works and Infrastructure, and Parks and Environment committees. 68 BACKGROUND Staff last reported on the Growing Durham initiative (phase 3 and 4) at Authority Meeting #6(08, held on July 25, 2008. The Growing Durham initiative is the planning process of the Regional Municipality of Durham to amend their official plan to be in conformity with the provincial Places to Grow Act and Plan. Several issues of concern in the report to the Authority were identified including: • the entire remaining headwaters .of the Carruthers Creek watershed would be placed in an urban designation; • no previous watershed studies had taken place in the headwaters portion of the watershed; • previous watershed studies that assessed flooding and erosion hazards in the lower reaches of the watershed were done on the basis that the headwaters would remain in a natural or agricultural state. One of staff's recommendations in the report was: THAT should the Region of Durham decide to consider future urban growth in the headwaters of the Caruthers Creek, an update to the watershed plan for the Carruthers Creek be completed prior to the approval of the local official plan amendment to redesignate these lands for urban uses; Authority members felt this recommendation was not strong enough and amended it to request that the update to the watershed plan be completed prior to the approval of the regional and local official plan amendment to redesignate the lands for urban uses. A Watershed Plan for the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek was published in August 2003. Growing Durham - Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions This new document dated September 23, 2008 refines the population numbers and recommended preferred growth scenario from the previous Phase 3 and 4 document. Some of the changes and policy recommendations contained in the document include: • the provincial density targets for new greenfield developments (50 residents and jobs combined per hectare) and residential intensification targets for existing urban areas (40% annually by 2015) now appear to be being met, resulting in over 1,000 ha less land needed for urban development to 2031; • a recommendation to encourage sustainable community design practices and require a demonstration of how development will address issues such as permeability, water quality and conservation, energy conservation, air quality protection, increased (transportation) modal splits and walkable communities, and green buildings and infrastructure; • a recommendation for "Five-year Growth Management Reviews" to ensure growth proceeds in a logical and orderly manner, meets provincial intensification and density targets, and appropriately phases development over the next five year period; • a specific recognition of the Carruthers Creek watershed headwaters as a sensitive area and a general recommendation for natural heritage studies and watershed plans to be required as part of the secondary plan process (as opposed to being required at the regional official plan amendment stage, as per the Authority amended resolution); • a recommendation to use holding provisions on lands designated urban until natural heritage system and watershed planning studies have determined the appropriate development limits; 59 117 118 • a recommendation to limit expansion into greenfield lands until such time as intensification targets are being met and to require 75% build-out of approved secondary plans prior to the approval of sequential secondary plans; • a recommendation to encourage the continuation of agricultural uses on lands designated for urban uses within the regional official plan but which are not yet designated for development in the local official plan; and • a recommendation to direct local municipalities to provide within their urban boundary sufficient lands to accommodate a ten-year supply of land for housing and employment needs and to ensure logical and sequential development patterns with each phase. Discussion At Authority Meeting #5/03, held on June 27, 2003, A Watershed Plan for the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek was approved. The key issue for Authority members based on discussions at the July 25 Authority meeting was that "an update to A Watershed Plan for the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek be completed prior to the approval of the regional and local official plan amendment to redesignate these lands for urban uses;". This resolution (#A177/08) was based on taking "a precautionary approach to the upper Carruthers Creek watershed in order, to protect and enhance the remaining environmental attributes and to prevent potentially expensive infrastructure remediation projects in the lower reaches of the creek in the existing downstream Ajax community.". The consultant's recommendation in the current Growing Durham report did not incorporate the resolution, as amended by the Authority, to update the watershed plan prior to the regional official plan amendment (OPA). Neither was TRCA staff's initial recommendation to update the watershed plan prior to th e local OPA included. Instead, the consultant's recommendation is to require a watershed plan at an even later stage in the planning process -in advance of or concurrent with the secondary plan process. There are many issues that are appropriate to study and resolve at the secondary plan level. However, staff feels there are a number of high-level issues associated with the headwaters of the Carruthers Creek that need to be addressed prior to designating all these lands for urban uses. These high-level issues include: • A comparison of the agricultural viability of the subject lands to other whitebelt lands currently being excluded from the urban boundary. The headwaters of the Carruthers Creek contains some very high quality agricultural operations that may have increasing value as near urban, close-to-market agricultural lands. The subject lands are surrounded by Greenbelt lands and may have better long-term viability for agriculture as compared with other whitebelt agricultural lands in Clarington. The Clarington lands are contiguous with adjacent urban lands and closer to the lakeshore urban corridor. A comparison of these lands for their long term agricultural viability should be undertaken in accordance with policy 2.2.8.2 f) of the provincial Places to Grow Growth Plan. • The completion of Durham's Master Water and Wastewater Servicing Study to determine if the subject lands can be serviced in accordance with Durham's goal to provide servicing in a logical, sequential and cost-effective manner, as compared to other whitebelt lands. This is also recommended by the Region's consultants. The lands in the Carruthers Creek headwaters are surrounded by Greenbelt Plan lands and isolated from other urban lands, making servicing to this area potentially more difficult and costly. 60 . • An analysis to show when the subject lands would be needed within the ten-year local urban boundary given the uncertainty around the airport, the current economic uncertainty and the projected time for the build out of the Seaton lands. Seaton is being planned for 70,000 residents and 35,000 jobs over a projected period of 15 to 25 years. If efforts at intensification in existing urban areas and the provision of improved transit to serve these areas bears fruit, the full development of Seaton, and the need for additional urban fringe lands in the headwaters of the Carruthers Creek, may be many years in the future. • Completion of an update to A Watershed Plan for the Duffins Creekand Carruthers Creek to, among other things, assess the environmental carrying capacity of the watershed, define a sustainable natural heritage system and address potential flooding and erosion impacts to downstream residents and infrastructure. In summary, there are too many unknown and outstanding issues to be addressed for the lands in the headwaters of the Carruthers Creek watershed to warrant their inclusion in the regional urban boundary at this time. Report prepared by: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: dburnett@trcaon.ca Date: October 07, 2008 61 119 Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration Office of the Minister 61° Floor 400 University Avenue Toronto ON M7A 2R9 Tel.: (416) 325-6200 Fax: (416) 325-6195 120 October, 2008 Dear friends, Ministere des Affaires civiques at de ('Immigration Bureau du Ministre e etage 400, avenue University Toronto ON M7A 2R9 Tel.: (416) 325-6200 Telic.: (416) 325-6195 =04 AM= Ontario 3240-e.19-0-8 As the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, I am once again very pleased to invite you to participate in Ontario's volunteer recognition programs for the year 2009. Many of you know these award ceremonies are an Ontario tradition. Volunteers play a significant role in building strong and diverse communities and give back in so many ways through and with a strong sense of civic responsibility. The Ontario government recognizes volunteers from all sectors through the following programs: ¦ Volunteer Service Awards (VSA) - in recognition of continuous years of service with a community organization ¦ June Callwood Outstanding Achievement Award (JCOAA) - awarded for superlative volunteer work undertaken by individuals, groups or businesses ¦ Ontario Medal for Young Volunteers (OMYV) - presented to outstanding young volunteers between the ages of 15 and 24 Nomination forms and additional information on each program are available on the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration website at www.ontario.ca\honoursandawards or you can phone the Ontario Honours and Awards Secretariat at 416-314-7526. The nomination closing dates for each program are highlighted below. Please take this opportunity to nominate volunteers from your organization for the appropriate award program and feel free to share this letter with other organizations that would be interested in participating in these worthwhile programs. By submitting a nomination you can help ensure that volunteers receive the recognition they deserve. Thank you for participating. Yours truly, t C,{ TO: The Honourable Michael Chan Minister 10-107A CORR. FILE Nomination Closing Dates: j VSA - January 25, 2009 j I JCOAA -January 15, 2009 i I OMYV - January 10, 2009 i i i i i ----------------------- -Rn cc v:= car October 31, 2008 Cbd2(? ?9-0_ , W. Michael Fenn i 2 1 Office of the Chief Executive Officer Metrolinx 20 Bay Street, Suite 901., TORONTO ON M5J 2N8 The Regional RE: METROLINX DRAFT REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Municipality AND INVESTMENT STRATEGY FOR THE GREATER of Durham TORONTO AND HAMILTON AREA Clerk's Department CORRESPONDENCE DATED OCTOBER 6, 2008 FROM W. ,ND RD. E. MICHAEL FENN, CEO, METROLINX RE: RELEASE OF THE PO soy BOOX X 623 623 WHITBY ON LIN 6A3 DRAFT REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND DRAFT CANADA INVESTMENT STRATEGY 905-668-7711 1-800-372-1102 Fax: 905-668-9963 STANDING COMMITTEE CORRESPONDENCE NO. 2008-112 E-mail: clerks@regi on.durham.on. ca DATED JULY 16, 2008 FROM C. ANNE GREENTREE, DEPUTY cl CLERK, MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON (2008-J-39) www.region.durham.on.ca Pat M. Madill, A.M.C.T., CMM Mr. Fenn, please be advised the Planning, Works, and Finance & Regional Clerk Administration Committees of Regional Council considered the above matter and at a meeting held on October 29, 2008 Council adopted the following recommendations of the Committee: "a) THAT the comments and concerns on the draft Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and draft Investment Strategy (IS) outlined in Joint Report #2008-J-39 and Appendix 1 attached thereto, with the following key elements, be endorsed and forwarded to Metrolinx as Durham Region's input to the consultation process related to these two draft documents: i) The Metrolinx RTP and Investment Strategy should be aligned with the Province's Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) for Seaton to be a showcase for sustainability and therefore the RTP and IS should provide for the regional transit network to support Seaton as a "transit first" _`... , community of 70,000 people and 35,000 jobs by 20211 including: r .._.,w A) East-west rapid transit connections to North Toronto and to York Region; : B) Road widening and but, rapid transit (BRT) service in the Steeles-Taunton corridor as a top priority in the 15 year plan; CORR. FILE •,?' apc? "h ( t QL)C G C lJ servi for our Comr} unjt7 ACTION _ Ci Ic.'k j f? 100% Post Consumer Q/ Page 2 October 31, 2008 1 22 Metrolinx C) The extension of the Brock Road bus rapid transit (BRT) line beyond Seaton to the 407 in the 15 year plan; D) The 407 transitway to be built concurrent with the highway to save on construction time and costs and provide a "transit first environment as new employment and residential development along this corridor proceeds; and E) Bundling construction of the Seaton transit connections into a single project to accelerate their completion. ii) The policies in the RTP relating to mobility hubs should: A) Recognize that each mobility hub will be unique.to its location and community; B) Align the types, locations and phasing of mobility hubs in Durham'with the population allocations, density decisions and other results of the Growth Plan compliance exercise now underway; - C) Locate the GO Stations associated with the Oshawa anchor hub and the recommended: Bowmanville, gateway hub on the CP Belleville line (north-of the 401) close to transit connections, population, and retail or employment centres; and D) Recognize municipal capacity to manage the development of the hubs if the Province provides suitable financial incentives and tools to promote and resource hub development. iii) The direction on goods movement in the RTP' should be considered a higher priority and include a timeline for completing the strategy and the next steps that.will result from the work of the proposed goods movement stakeholder roundtable such as modelling of a goods movement network including agricultural products and aggregates and proposals for inter-modal hubs. iv) THAT the RTP should recognize planned improvements to the Provincial Highway system and should be supported by Metrolinx as major improvements to the both the passenger and goods movement network in the GTHA, including: • widening and new interchanges along the Highway 401 corridor east of .the Rouge Valley, with provision for future HOV lanes by 2024; • widening of Highway 7 in Durham by 2024; and, • widening. of Highway 12 around the east side of Lake Simcoe from Highway 404 to Highway 11 by 2034. Page 3 1 2 3 October 31, 2008 Metrolinx v) The Investment Strategy should include: A) An operating cost model for all new infrastructure proposed under the RTP, to be developed before the RTP is approved, to enable municipalities and transit agencies to gauge affordability and provide sufficient notice to include into their long-term business planning and annual budgets; B) A financing plan for funding the post- 2018 RTP infrastructure for municipal consideration and review, prior to the RTP being approved, using a range of financing tools for transit and transportation, that recognizes the need for financing mechanisms that respond to or are matched to different geographic contexts.and circumstances (i.e.* rural, suburban, dense urban) across the. Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area.(GTHA); and C) To ensure growth pays for growth, a development charge strategy which includes the elimination of the historical service -level cap and the elimination of the GO Transit DC; vi) A study of the need and feasibility of a transit transfer hub at the junction of the 407 Transitway with the Lakeshore East GO facility,. south of Highway 401 at Lake Ridge. Road. b) THAT the Province. acknowledges that the Regional Transportation Plan. or Investment Strategy cannot supercede any agreements already.in place between the Province of Ontario and the Federal Government; C) THAT Metrolinx makes the following specific changes to Figures 4 and 5 and Section 2.4, Results, of the draft Regional Transportation Plan (RTP): i) With respect to the Highway 407 east extension: A) Amend Figure 4 (the 15 year plan) to clear) reflect the Provincial commitment to complete the Highway 407 eastextension by 2013 and the.transitway within the first 15 years of the RTP; B) Amend Figure 5 (the 16 to 25 year plan) to show the. highway and its links and transitway as completed; and C) Revise the text referring the 407 east extension on page 75 of the draft RTP to reflect the. Province's commitment to complete this highway and its links by 2013 (i.e. in the first 5 years of the RTP). . 1 2 4 . Page 4 October 31, 2008 Metrolinx ii) With respect to Highway 404, the extension of the highway from Ravenshoe Road to Highway 12 in Brock Township be shown in Figure 5. . iii) With respect to Highway 7, widening and improvement of the highway west of Brock Road to four lanes through. - Seaton to support development and transit service must be included early in the first 1,5 years of the RTP and shown appropriately on. Figures 4 and 5. iv) With respect to the Taunton-Steeles rapid transit connection: A) Resolution of the Taunton-Steeles traffic bottleneck be recognized in the Section 2.4.3, as a priority within the 15 year plan to support.to the development of Seaton (Central Pickering Development Plan); B) The reference to the Taunton-Steeles rapid transit connection on page 76 therefore be moved:from Section 2.4.4, Years 16 to 25, to Section 2.4.3, The First.15 Years, under the sub-heading of New East- West Transit Connections as afifth essential east - west connection project in the 15 year plan; and C) Amend Figures 4 and 5 to accurately depict these revisions. v) With respect to the Highway.2 Rapid Transit, amend Figures 4 and 5 and, Section 2.4.3 to show:. A) The Highway 2 Rapid Transit service connection to the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) system at the Kennedy subway station rather than Scarborough Town Centre to enable a single direct transfer. from the Durham system to,the TTC systems; and B) Extension of the Highway 2 Rapid Transit service to Bowmanville in the. 15 year plan. vi) Extension of the Brock Road rapid transit line beyond Seaton to the 407 be included in Section 2.4.3 within the 15 year plan and on Figure 4 to support connectivity of Seaton to the 407 employment areas and York Region. vii) To service planned growth along the 407 corridor and a transit hub at the UOIT campus, the extension of the proposed Simcoe Street bus rapid transit (BRT) to, and beyond, the Taunton-Steeles'LRT/BRT to the 407 highway corridor be included in the 15 year plan, Section 2.4.3, and shown accordingly on Figures. 4 and 5. Page 5 October 31, ,2 T L Metrolinx viii) With respect.to transportation services to the future - Pickering Airport that: - A) The RTP be revised to acknowledge that the proposed Pickering airport will be a major new. component of the GTHA transportation system and generator of trips; B) Consistent with the MoveOntario 2020 announcement, that the 15 year plan, Section 2.4.3, and. Figure 4 be revised to extend. peak rail service to the Pickering airport site concurrent with development of the airport; C) Figure 5 be revised to show the rail connection to the Pickering airport as full-day, two-way service when the airport is built; and D) A mobility hub be added at the Pickering airport site in the 25 year plan and on Figure 5. ix) With, respect to extension of regional rail to Uxbridge as provided for in the MoveOntario 2020 announcement, that this extension be shown in Figure 5. x) Amend Section 2.4.3 within the 15 year plan and on Figures 4 and 5 to show Express Rail service extending to Bowmanville. xi) Further with respect to mobility hubs, that., . A) Two more hubs be added to Figures 4 and 5 in Durham Region, one in the UOIT/Durham. College/North Oshawa area and one at the eastern. gateway to the GTHA in Bowmanville on the CP Belleville line; B) The mobility hub shown on Figures 4 and 5.in South Oshawa and the related new rail station should be moved north of the 401 on the CP line instead of the CN .line to facilitate access to-the Oshawa Urban° - - Growth. Centre and major office and retail, uses in the Stevenson Road area north of the 401; and C) Revise Figures 4 and 5 to show the crossover from the CN to the CP rail lines for the Lakeshore East extension in Oshawa rather than in Clarington; d) Amend Figure 6 within the 15 year plan to extend the arrow to identify Clarington as part of the GTHA; and .1 26 Page 6 Metrolinx October 31, 2008 e) THAT a copy of Joint Report #2008-J-39 be forwarded to Metrolinx, the Ministers of Transportation and Municipal Affairs and Housing, and Durham Region MPs and municipalities." MPPs, and the eight area As directed, please find enclosed a copy of Report #2008-J-39. at M *iII , CT, CMM Regional Clerk PMM/If Encl. c: The Hounourable J. Bradley, Minister of Transportation The Honourable J. Watson,. Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Dr. C: Carrie MP (Oshawa) The Honourable J. Flaherty MP (Whitby/Oshawa) Mr. D. McTeague MP (Pickering/Sc Mr arborough East) . B. Devolin MP (Kawartha Lakes/Brock). - The Honourable Bev Oda MP (Clarington/Scugog/Uxbridge) Mr. M. Holland MP (Ajax/Pickering) Ms. L. Scott, MPP (Haliburton/Victoria/Brock) Mr. W. Arthurs, MPP (Pickering/Ajax/Uxbridge) Ms. C. Elliott, MPP (Whitby/Ajax) _ Mr. J. O'Toole, MPP (Durham) Mr. J. Ouellette, MPP (Oshawa) Mr. J. Dickson, MPP (Ajax/Pickering) Mr. M. deRond, Clerk, Town of Ajax Mr. T. Gettinby, Clerk, Township of Brock____ _ Ms -P:- Barrie; Clerk, Municipality of Clarington Ms. S. Kranc, Clerk, City of Oshawa Ms. D. Wilcox Clerk Cif?'?cLcex?ng_-r.z. Ms. K. Coates, Clerk, Township of Scugog Ms. D Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge Mr. P. Jones, Clerk, Town of Whitby Lorne D. Almack P.Eng., cmc. RR95, Claremont, ON. Phone: 905 649 2202 1 2 7 FAX.- 905 649 3566 C v2R . I oo-m E ` City Clerk, City of Pickering For didtribution to Members of Copuncil 'In the light of present financial and environmental crises expansion of urban boundaries of Oshawa, Whitby and Pickering is unacceptable. Creating more commutersheds will impoverish Ontario who can not afford to subsidize the infrastructure to accommodate such folly. Durham/Pickering should abide the Provincial Planning Policy Statement and redevelope /intensify urgently to become more efficient and better prepared for a flat, hot, crowded future. The peoples interest not those of powerful developer/Speculators must be Councils priority. Yours truly, Lorne D. Almack f i-i?s 128 To whom it may concern... C_o(?2, 1p1-off We have entered an era when sustainability is no longer just an admirable goal, it is a necessity. `Business as usual' is not an option. We must change our profligate ways if we want to have affordable food and shelter for our children, let alone theirs. In fact, the very future of the planet is at risk. Municipalities have `lived' off the money developers paid up front only to realize later they were going broke providing the infrastructure the developments needed. To support previous errors more developments were needed. How can we even consider continuing this well-documented dead end, especially when we call ourselves Sustainable Pickering? We cannot afford, literally and/or figuratively, to destroy class 1 farmland. It has to stop. Growth is not an appropriate goal now that our biggest problems are a direct result of our size. The fragility and importance of the North Pickering watershed are known but not fully understood. We need study. The main things we need to develop are creativity, communication, cooperation, intelligence and spirituality. Let's infill; Lets live. Sincerely Michael Robertson LandOverLandings 905 294 2536 Dto C?? ?,ai_LA RECEIVED CITY OF PICKERING NOV 1 2 2008 Ai. Cop-p-' f00 ?62 ' T. Clayton, Chair* B. Boyle, Member CLERKS DIVISION ,? R. Anderson, Member * J. Drumm, Member * A. Furlong, Member A. Malik, Member * D. Ryan, Member 07 November 2008 Durham Regional Police Services Board (DRPSB) Information Sheet for the Mayors of the Durham Region The DRPS is proud of the men and women of the Durham Regional Police Service (DRPS) and the work performed by those members, civilian and sworn, everyday. Employing a professional public relations firm, attacking specific individuals using the media, attempting to gather favour among individual politicians and spreading misinformation are all tools the DRPA are using in an attempt to leverage more than our community can afford. In employing these tactics the DRIPS, community leaders, and the public have been misled. For this reason the Durham Regional Police Services Board (DRPSB) felt it was important for you, our community leaders, to have a clear understanding of the key facts. The DRPSB's approach to governance and corporate oversight during the last decade is a clear indication of our respect and appreciation for the work of all the members of the DRPS. The members' efforts have ensured that a high quality of community safety services is delivered every day. The following is an overview of some of the key facts that have created the reality to which the DRPSB has governed over the past 10 years and the subsequent steps the Board has taken to assist in managing this reality. From 1998 to the end of 2008 the Durham Region population has grown from 498,400 to an expected 611,900. This will result in a total growth -f time period. To_ -J 605 Rossland Road East, Box 911, Whitby, ON L1N OB8 v Phone: 905-579-1520, Ext. 4307 * Fax: 905-721-4249 lZ Email: kbeeson@drps.ca CORR. FILE tl TAKE APPR. ACTION DRPSB Information Sheet for the Mayors of the Durham Region Page Two 130 For the same time period the DRPS sworn authorized strength has increased from-604 officers to an expected 858 officers. This is an increase of 42.05%. As well, the DRPS budget for this time period increased over 122%. This increase does not include over $30 million in capital investments during the same time period. In addition, the DRPSB has supported and assisted with establishing the current 5 year $40 million capital plan to ensure the community's policing infrastructure needs can be met in the future. The DRPSB understands the crucial role the women and men of the DRPS play in our community. We also understand the need to ensure these great women and men are properly supported. We believe our efforts in the past and our planned support in the future provide the support to these essential public servants as well as ensure Durham Region citizens' fiscal interests are appropriately considered. We have one of the greatest police services in the country. The women and men of the DRPS ensure that this remains a fact every day and the DRPSB works hard to ensure as much as possible can be done to provide them with the resources required. Summary of Facts For the Time Period 1998-2008 Population Growth 22.77% DRPS Sworn Strength Increase 42.05% DRPS Budget Increase 122% 605 Rossland Road East, Box 911, Whitby, ON L1 N OB8 Phone: 905-579-1520, Ext. 4307 * Fax: 905-721-4249 Email: kbeeson@drps.ca "V Wilcox, Uebl NUV From: Kristin Robinson [kristinrobinson@rogers.com] c o p-p- 1 o 3-O? Sent: November 13, 2008 10:33 AM 5 i To: Wilcox, Debi; clerks@region.durham.on.ca; Debbie.BrideaA & LgAV 9 ; jwatson.mpp@liberal.ola.org; victor.doyle@mah.gov.on.ca; minister. pir@ontario. ca: Clerks Clarington Subject: Urban Sprawl in Durham Region Clerks, please copy the councils. Thank you. Clarington Council, Pickering Council, the Region of Durham Council & Planning Committee and the Provincal Ministry of Infrastructure Renewal, and Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing: I am very concerned about the future of Durham Region, and am afraid that the same 'urban sprawl' will continue, as it has done so in the past. We are losing important farmlands, wetlands, woods etc, and not considering our native flora anti fauna in the process. Please see PSD-115-08 and GPA-607-08 for important information from Clarington Council regarding 'growing durham'. An example of poor planning from Pickering follows: Considering an urban expansion into north east Pickering lands is premature without having completed a watershed study to determine it's sensitivity; without having information from the fiscal study to determine the financial costs of hard & soft infrastructure, or mitigation costs to protectthe watershed. The Regional consultants have recommended a review of the growth plan every 5 years, providing plenty of time for Councils' to do their due diligence and make an informed decision first. Going forward without this information greenwashes the good name of "Sustainable Pickering" environmentally, socially, and economically. Please do your due diligence, and protect all municipalities in Durham Region for the future. Thank you for your time, Kristin Robinson Bowmanville, ON TO: COPY TO: s ?7p J 11 ? ®? ?.... PILE =Or- TAKEAPTIN' c ?'D 4-Q 0fj IRcC2c11 ve -Rd' IV-Tc VW CO %Oh ? 1 3 2 c cry---Ole Mr. P. E. Mattson 838 Miriam Road, Pickering, Ontario. LIW 1X6 October 9, 2008 2, Mr. Thomas Quinn Chief Administrative Officer Pickering Civic Complex w c r One The Esplanade /j j,4 N ou CIL Pickering, Ontario cAOoW rco y a LIV 6K7 _.___---_-- ^? ` 971cr S 1sTR,It, Dear Mr. Thomas Quinn:.. t /,r One behalf of our Committee I would like to thank you for our meeting of September 30, 2008. This letter will confirm the matter we discussed, concerning EaYl Costello who has been diagnosed with terminal cancer. Our committee is planning to hold an event to raise funds to assist Earl and his wife Marilyn with medical and living expenses. Background: Earl Costello is a self employed plumber with no pension or benefits to rely on. He has lived and worked in Pickering for over 40 years, raising five children and he and Marilyn have I I grandchildren. Earl has been a strong leader and volunteer in the Pickering Community for many years. He was recognized by the City and Council Members of Pickering for his many hours of work on the amalgamation of Pickering Hockey and Bay Ridges AllStars and the creation and development of the P.H.A. Constitution. Earl and his family have volunteered and worked on many Fu isers and --,I-? , Events in the City of Pickering. Roo o -Santa Claus Parades - Accident Victim - Bay Ridge Branch Legion 606 Events - Many Sports Associations and Fund Raisers. TO: CC's FILE TAKE APPR. ACTION Earl has coached Hockey, Baseball and has sponsored Hockey, Baseball, Soccer, Ringette, and Football under the Erlmar name. He has many plaques in his home from the City and teams he has sponsored in recognition for his support and volunteer work over the years. Earl has been a voting member of the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 606 for 36 years. Our committee was formed from a number of hockey players, their wives, friends and Moe's Old Timers Hockey Players previously played in the Pickering Old Timers Hockey League. We recognize Earl and Marilyn are having a difficult time financially and mentally coping with treatment schedules, medical bills and they need assistance at this time. I/We are proposing to hold a Fund Raiser Event at the Pickering Recreation Complex on Friday January 30, 2009. ---------------------- - - We are requesting a Grant to waive the Fees and Expenses for this Event. Projected Costs as follows: - Hall Rental $1165.00 - Socan 123.38 - Taxes 64.42 - Liability Ins. 259.20 - License 75.00 - Ticket Printing 200.00 Total Cost $1887.00 Summary: Earl has been a very active volunteer and supporter of our Community for many years and has definitely been a contributor and a great asset to us all. In closing, our Committee would like to thank you, the Mayor and Members of Council for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely P. E. Mattson Committee Chairman 133 Co?R c OS -oa To: Debi Wilcox October 24, 2008 City Clerk From: Lindsey Brenner Supervisor, Animal Services Copy: Deputy Clerk Subject: lams Home 4 the Holidays S-3010-002-08 Since it began in 1999, lams Home 4 the Holidays has helped place more than 2 million pets into happy homes. Last year alone, lams Home 4 the Holidays helped nearly 500,000 families experience the joy of pet adoption. Today there are more 2,500 shelters in 15 countries around the world helping orphaned animals find loving homes and families. lams is committed to this program and the mission of enhancing the well-being of dogs and cats by not only helping place orphaned pets into homes, but by bringing together people and pets for a lifetime of health, happiness, and love. Every cat, dog, puppy or kitten that is adopted during lams Home 4 the Holidays will go home with an lams Adoption Starter Kit that contains food samples, coupons and important tips and information about pet care, behaviour, training and nutrition. , We are requesting that the City of Pickering declare the month of December as the official lams Home 4 the Holidays month. ? Dc -_1 0 TO: p P i i J l? FILE 1? A PPR. ACTION lams,Q? Home t t , Holidays HELEN WOODWARD ANIMAL CENTER PICKERING Animal ii-Services PROCLAMATION- lams Home 4 the Holidays Whereas The City of Pickering is participating in the international 1 oth annual lams Home 4 the Holidays pet adoption campaign; Whereas the staff of The City of Pickering have agreed to devote their time, resources and energy to this united effort to bring attention to orphaned pets; Whereas The City of Pickering will work throughout the holiday season with a goal of helping place orphaned animals into loving, lifelong homes throughout the Pickering area; Whereas The City of Pickering has joined animal shelters and rescue groups from around the world to achieve its overall campaign goal of 1 million pet adoptions during the holiday season; Whereas The City of Pickering. is working in cooperation with other animal shelters and rescue groups from around the world in partnership with lams and Home 4 the Holidays founder Helen Woodward Animal Center; Whereas the lams Home 4 the Holidays pet adoption campaign not only saves the lives of orphaned animals in Pickering, lams Home 4 the Holidays has resulted in the adoptions of more than 2 million pets since the program began in 1999; Therefore, let it be proclaimed that The City of Pickering declares that the month of December is the official lams Home 4 the Holidays month. 135 0,)6> 'c. 106-6?? MEMO To: Debi Wilcox City Clerk From: Marisa Carpino Supervisor, Culture & Recreation Copy: Chair, Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity Chief Administrative Officer Director, Operations & Emergency Services Department Division Head, Culture & Recreation Members of the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity Oct. 29, 2008 Subject: Proclaim Cultural Celebrations A-1400-005-08 On behalf of the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity, please accept this memorandum as a formal request that the City of Pickering proclaim the following: Eid al-adha begins December 8, 2008 to December 11, 2008 (Islamic, Muslim) Chanukah begins sunset December 21, 2008 to sunset December 29, 2008 (Jewish) Christmas on December 25, 2008 (Christian, Roman Catholic, International) Kwanzaa begins December 26, 2008 to January 1, 2009 (African-Canadian, African- American, Pan-African) The City of Pickering is among the most and faith groups will be celebrating these Committee on Race Relations "& Equity celebrations taking pace this December. diverse in the Durham Region and many of our ethnic significant. events. As such, the Pickering Advisory would to formally recognize these significant holiday Throughout the month of December, banners describing the holiday cel( in the Lobby of the Pickering Civic Complex. The banners will be ; images that help tell the story. We invite members of the public to co cultural and/or religious celebrations of others in our community. Visit our website at cityofpickering.com for more information or to find our community. rations will be on d :companied by syr eve ?1 l`t CORR• FILE TAKE APPR. ACTION I 137 November 17, 2008 COMMITTEE REPORTS a) REPORT PD 2008-12 OF THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE P & D Pages Blue Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 37-08 57-70 Rinal Enterprises Inc. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1906 Cougs Investments Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1913 Ballymore Building (Pickering) Corp. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1915 Dare-Dale Developments Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1916 Rondev Homes Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1920 Rondev Homes Ltd./ACPA Corporation Ltd./Bianchi; Vincenzo, Lisa, Gabriale and Liliana/Digirolamo, Filomena and Anna Plan of Subdivision 40M-1923 Woodsmere Properties Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1943 Marshall Homes (Altona) Limited/D'Oliveira, Anthony and Allison Helbling, Gertrude Plan of Subdivision 40M-1958 Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision RECOMMENDATION That Report PD 37-08 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958 be received; 2. That the highway being Monica Cook Place within Plan 40M-1915 be assumed for public use; 3 8 3. That the highway being Holbrook Court within Plan 40M-1916 be assumed for public use; 4. That the highway being Granby Court within Plans 40M-1920 and 40M-1923 be assumed for public use; 5. That the highways being Stroud's Lane and Treetop Way within Plan 40M- 1943 be assumed for public use; 5. That the highways being Fawndale Road, Stover Crescent, Littleford Street and Stonehampton Court within Plan 40M-1958 be assumed for public use; 6. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M- 1943 and 40M-1958, which are constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by the City, or on lands lying immediately adjacent thereto, including lands that are subject to easements transferred to the City, be accepted and assumed for maintenance, save and except from Blocks 10 and 11, Plan 40M-1906; Blocks 28 and 29, Plan 40M-1915; Blocks 23, 24 and 25, Plan 40M-1920; Blocks 42, 43, 44 and 45, Plan 40M-1923; Block 16, Plan 40M-1943 and Blocks 35, 36, 37 and 38, Plan 40M-1958; 7. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958, save and except from Blocks 30, 32, 33 and 34, Plan 40M-1923 and Block 16, Plan 40M-1943, be released and removed from title; 8. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Block 26, Plan 40M-1920 as public highway; and 9. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1943 as public highways. 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 43-08 71-90 Zoning By-law Amendment -A 11/08 Grant Morris Associates Ltd. 1789, 1795, 1801 & 1805 Pine Grove Avenue 1790, 1792, 1794, 1804, 1806, 1808 & 1810 Woodview Avenue (Part of Road Allowance Between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1 Parts 2, 3, 5 - 9, 11 -13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26 - 30, 32, 33 & 35, 40R-25121) City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION 1. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A11/08 submitted by Grant Morris Associates Ltd. to amend the existing zoning on the rear of the subject properties to permit reduced side yard widths, reduced building height and an increased lot coverage on lands situated on Part of Road Allowance Between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1, Parts 2, 3, 5 - 9, 11 - 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26 - 30, 32, 33 & 35, 40R-25121 be approved. 2. That City Council endorse the creation of more than 3 lots to proceed by Land Division for the properties at 1795 Pine Grove Avenue and 1804, 1806 & 1,808 Woodview Avenue; and 3. Further, that the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A11/08 as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 43-08 be forwarded to City Council for enactment. 3. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 42-08 92-126 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham - Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. et al, dated September 23, 2008 - Phase 5 RECOMMENDATION That Report PD 42-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, dated September 23, 2008, presenting the draft recommendations for Phase 5 of the Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study, be received; 39 2. That the comments contained in Report PD 42-08 on the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report for the Region of Durham Growth Plan Implementation Study be endorsed, and further that the Region of Durham and its consultants be requested to make the following changes: a) Expand the extent of land identified for future living area around Kinsale, extending both to the west and to the east to Lake Ridge Road, so as to create a threshold of growth for a complete neighbourhood; b) Revise the policy restricting major office development from employment areas, such that it permits major office development at selected freeway interchanges, thereby taking advantage of transit and increasing employment densities; c) Reconsider the timing of the lands in the centre of northeast Pickering identified for future employment in the post-2031 period, so as to maximize the logical and orderly extension of services and infrastructure; and d) Implement the timing changes recommended by Regional Planning Committee on October 14, 2008, to bring lands for future living area at the north limit of northeast Pickering from post-2031 to pre-2031, and to change the lands in northeast Pickering adjacent to Lake Ridge Road from pre-2031 to post-2031; and 3. Further, that a copy of Report PD 42-08 and Pickering Council's resolution on the matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham, Urban Strategies Inc. et al, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. COMMITTEE REPORTS 140 November 17, 2008 b) REPORT EC 2008-08 OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Executive Pages Buff 1. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 37-08 27-45 Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project -Tender No. T-17-2008 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 37-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding T-17-2008 for the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project be received; 2. That Council ratify the approval by the Chief Administrative Officer during Council's summer recess of proposal no. RFP-4-2008 for the supply of energy ventilation and pool dehumidification systems for the Dunbarton Pool; 3. That Tender T-17-2008 submitted by BWK Construction Company Ltd., at a cost of $1,782,900 (PST and GST included) be accepted; 4. That the total gross project cost of $1,995,000 (GST included) and a net project cost of $1,900,000 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 5. That Council approve the re-allocation of the Federal Gas Tax funds associated with the 2008 capital project for the Frenchman's Bay - Master Plan Phase One (5410.0805.6182) and that these funds be re-submitted in the 2009 Capital Budget; 6. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the sum of $1,000,000, as provided for in the 2008 approved Capital Budget, to be funded from Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; b) the sum of up to $500,000, as provided for in the 2008 approved Capital Budget, to be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional 1 41 Municipality of Durham, over a period not exceeding fifteen (15) years, at a rate to be determined; c) the additional project costs estimated to be $400,000 be funded from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund ($200,000) and from the funding the City will receive from the "Investing in Ontario Act, 2008" ($200,000) including any additional unanticipated costs; d) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $49,800 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2009, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any financing cost to be paid out of the Current Budget; e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has updated the City's 2008 Annual Repayment Limit and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit for debt and financial obligations, as established by the Province for municipalities in Ontario and would not cause the City to exceed the updated limit, and therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required prior to City Council's authorization; f) undertake the financing of this project or portions thereof that cannot be accommodated through the foregoing through internal loans, Infrastructure Ontario - OSIFA Loan Program, or a financial institution offering long term financing under similar terms and conditions; g) the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; 7. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 8. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 2. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 39-08 46-49 Facility Snow Removal -Quotation No. Q-69-2008 RECOMMENDATION That Report OES 39-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Facility Snow Removal be received; 2. That Quotation No. Q-69-2008 submitted. by C&R Paving Inc. for Snow Clearing and Salting Service - Facility Parking Lots Schedule A in the amount of $89,000 plus GST for Year 1 and $95,500 plus GST for Year 2 and Schedule C (hourly rates) Year 1 and Year 2 be accepted; and 142 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 40-08 50-57 Building Canada Fund - Communities Component Intake One -Pickering Museum Village Restoration and Upgrade Project RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 40-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Building Canada Fund - Communities Component (BCF-CC) Intake One be received; 2. That the Corporation of the City of Pickering participate in the BCF-CC Intake One through the submission of an application by the application deadline of November 21, 2008; 3. That the City of Pickering's application to BCF-CC Intake One shall consist of various building restoration programs and upgrades to the infrastructure at the Pickering Museum Village, at a total estimated (gross) cost of $885,000 and a net estimated City cost of $295,000; 4. That the Council of the City of Pickering endorse the Pickering Museum Village Restoration and Upgrade Project as the City's Intake One BCF-CC application; 5. That the BCF-CC Intake One project be identified as a Capital priority in the 2009 Capital Budget, subject to receiving approval of funding by BCF-CC; and 6. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 41-08 58-61 City's Traffic & Parking By-law No. 6604/05 - Updating Amendment RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 41-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding proposed amendments to the City's Traffic & Parking By-law No. 6604/05 be received; and 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Section 15 to By-law No. 6604/05 to provide for the prohibition of on street parking between the hours of 2:00 am and 5:00 am from December 1 St to March 31 St annually. 143 5. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 45-08 62-67 2008 Internal Loan and External Debentures RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 45-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be approved; 2. That Council approve an internal loan in the amount of $200,000 for a maximum term of ten (10) years, to be borrowed from the Development Charges Reserve Funds, for the External Subdivision Works-Roads: Brock Road, Third Concession Road to Taunton Road and furthermore, that the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized and directed to take whatever actions necessary; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. 6. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 49-08 68-71 Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 49-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for information be received for information. 7. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 50-08 72-74 Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 50-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the write-off of taxes in the amount of $40,283.47 as provided under Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act, 2001 be approved; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 51-08 75-111 2008 Year End Audit RECOMMENDATION 1. That the Audit Plan as submitted by Deloitte & Touche LLP, included as Attachment 1 to this report be received for information; and, 144 2. That the Chief Administrative Officer and the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to sign the Auditor's Engagement Letter on behalf of the City. 9. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 07-08 112-138 Review of Appointments to Boards and Committees - Council Direction December 14, 2006 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CAO 07-08 of the Chief Administrative Officer be received; 2. That Policy ADM 040 for Boards & Advisory Committees, included as Attachment # 1 to this report be approved; 3. That the Boards & Advisory Committees, included as Attachment # 2, as amended, to this report be formally closed based on project completion, dissolution and/or inactivity; 4. That the Boards & Advisory Committees, included as Attachment # 3, as amended, to this report be formally reconfirmed; 5. That the Public Library Board composition be increased by one member fora total of 10 members effective December 1, 2008; 6. That the Advisory Committee on Race Relations composition be increased by two community appointments for a total of five members and the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee be increased by three community appointments for a total of eleven members; 7. That the term for the Property Stand a rd s/Fen ceviewe rs be extended to December 31, 2008 pending the outcome of a fence by-law review; 8. That a Special Meeting of Council (including an In Camera session) be held on Monday, December 8, 2008 at 7:00 pm for the purpose of review and appointment to Boards and Advisory Committees; and 9. That the City Clerk be directed to take the appropriate action. 10. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 45-08 139-190 Draft Regional Transportation Plan (September 2008) Draft Investment,Strategy (September 2008) Metrolinx EBR Registry Number: 010-4717 145 RECOMMENDATION That Report PD 45-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Draft Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Draft Investment Strategy (IS), both dated September 2008 and released by Metrolinx, be received; 2. That Metrolinx be requested to revise the Draft Regional Transportation Plan; The Big Move: Transforming Transportation in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area, dated September 2008, as follows: a) implement the vision for Seaton as a "transit first" community by adding the following to the 15-Year Plan (2024): (i) resolution of the Steeles-Taunton traffic bottleneck as a priority; (ii) identify a new east-west rapid transit connection on the Steeles-Taunton Corridor to Brock Road on Figure 4; (iii) prioritize passenger rail service on the C.P. Bellville Rail Line to Brock Road as one of the "Top 15 Priorities"; (iv) widen and improve Highway 7 west of Brock Road to four lanes through Seaton to support development and transit service; (v) extend the Brock Road rapid transit line (Other Rapid Transit (BRT/LRT/AGT) line) through Seaton to Highway 407 on Figure 4 b) support and invest in developing Transportation Master Plans (TMPs) addressing all modes of transportation and identifying policies and a course of action for implementing the RTP, as well as other critical transportation infrastructure within Pickering's Urban Growth Centre by establishing an Eastern GTA Anchor Mobility Hub, including: (i) the City's planned pedestrian bridge over Highway 401; (ii) a full Highway 401 interchange at Liverpool Road; and (iii) a shared vehicle parking structure serving commuters and downtown visitors; c) support the easterly extension of Highway 407, its links and transitway by: (i) identifying the easterly extension of Highway 407 to Highway 35/115 by 2013 and transitway within the first 15 years in Figure 4 of the RTP; (ii) identifying the easterly extension of Highway 407 and its links and transitway as completed on Figure 5 (the 25-Year Plan) of the RTP; (iii) revising the text referring to the Highway 407 east extension on page 75 of the Draft RTP to reflect the Province's commitment to complete the highway and its links by 2013; d) correct Figures 4 and 5 by: (i) revising mapping of 'built-up' area for Pickering to reflect the approved Provincial built boundary; 3. That Metrolinx be requested to revise the Draft Investment Strategy: A Plan for Implementation Action, September 2008, by: a) developing an operating cost model for new infrastructure proposed under the RTP; 146 b) considering the broader relative benefits of investments in key road infrastructure versus investments in improved transit operations; c) developing a financing plan for the operating, rehabilitation and capital infrastructure needs of the RTP, in consultation with municipalities; and 4. Further, that a copy of Report PD 45-08 be forwarded to Metrolinx, the EBR, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, the Ministry of Transportation, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Regional Municipality of Durham, and Durham Area Municipalities. NEW AND UNFINISHED 14! November 17, 2008 PAGES Director, Planning & Development Report PD 47-08 148-190 -Addendum to Report Number PD 36-08 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. -Parkland Conveyance [At the October 20, 2008 meeting of Council the matter of Report PD 36-08 was referred to the November 17th meeting of Council.] RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 36-08 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; and, 2. Further, that Council confirm the requirement that S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland in relation to the redevelopment of the lands in the former Bay Ridges Plaza. 2. Director, Planning & Development Report PD 39-08 191-208 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/07 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road (Part of Lot 32 & Part of Block C, Plan M 1040) City of Pickering (At the October 20, 2008 meeting of Council the matter of Report PD 39-08 was referred to staff for further information and discussion with the Region of Durham and the Region of York and brought back to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council] RECOMMENDATION That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/07 submitted by Dalar Properties Limited, on lands being Part of Lot 32 & Part of Block C, Plan M 1040, City of Pickering, to amend zoning of the subject property to add commercial recreational uses including a gymnastics facility, a dance studio, karate club and a soccer club, in addition to the currently permitted industrial uses be refused. city o? I K RI REPORT TO COUNCIL Report Number: PD 47-08 Date: November 17, 2008 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Addendum to Report Number PD 36-08 - Parkland Conveyance - File: S 2/07 Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 36-08 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; and 2. Further, that Council confirm the requirement that S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland in relation to the redevelopment of the lands in the former Bay Ridges Plaza. Executive Summary: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. ("SR&R") disputes the amount that City staff have calculated to be payable in lieu of the conveyance of parkland. Report #PD 36-08 was considered by the Planning & Development Committee on October 6, 2008 and was referred back to staff for further discussion with the applicant, with direction to the report to Council on October 20, 2008. At the October 20, 2008 Council meeting, Report #PD 36-08 was referred to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council at the request of SR&R. This report is an addendum to Report #PD 36-08 that set out the positions of both SR&R and staff. Staff continue to support the recommendation contained in Report #PD 36-08 that SR&R pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland for this project. Financial Implications: If Council adopts the recommendation contained in this addendum report, the City will collect a total of $533,250 as payment in lieu of parkland conveyance for the redevelopment of the property. If Council accepts the offer contained in a letter from SR&R's lawyer (William Friedman) dated June 18, 2008, the City will only collect a total of $150,000. Sustainability Implications: Other than the financial implications set out above, there are no sustainability implications. 148 Report PD 47-08 November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 2 149 1.0 Background: At the October 6, 2008 meeting of the Planning & Development Committee, Report #PD 36-08 was referred back to staff for further discussion with the applicant, with direction to bring it back to Council on October 20, 2008. At the October 20, 2008 Council meeting, Report #PD 36-08 was referred to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council at the request of SR&R. Prior to the October 6, 2008 Planning & Development Committee meeting, the Director, Planning & Development and the City Solicitor met with representatives of SR&R (William Friedman and Steven Warsh) on two separate occasions to discuss parkland issues. At the conclusion of the second meeting (July 7, 2008), the Director, Planning & Development and the City Solicitor advised Mr. Warsh and Mr. Friedman that staff could not accept any of SR&R's arguments in relation to parkland dedication except to the extent set out in Report #PD 36-08. On October 24, 2008, the Chief Administrative Officer, City Solicitor and the Mayor met with representatives of SR&R (David Friedman, William Friedman and Steven Warsh). At the conclusion of this meeting, the Chief Administrative Officer and the City Solicitor advised the representatives of SR&R that none of the information that had been provided by SR&R either at the October 6, 2008 meeting of Planning & Development Committee or subsequent to that meeting had persuaded staff to alter any of the professional opinions set out in Report #PD 36-08. However, subsequent to the October 24, 2008 meeting, SR&R was advised that staff could support a phased approach to the parkland payments-in-lieu. This addendum report identifies and provides staff responses to some of the issues raised since Report #PD 36-08 was prepared. 2.0 Discussion/Issues Set out below are some of the issues that were raised during the October 6, 2008 Planning & Development Committee meeting, the October 24, 2008 meeting described above, and several telephone conversations with representatives of SR&R subsequent to the October 6 Planning & Development Committee meeting, along with staff's response to each of them. Were the buffer lands "conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes" as per subsection 42(1) of the Planning Act? Report PD 47-08 November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 3 150 Subsection 42(1) of the Planning Act provides the authority for the City to require the conveyance of land "for park or other public recreational purposes". It reads as follows: 42(1) As a condition of development or redevelopment of land, the council of a local municipality may, by by-law applicable to the whole municipality or to any defined area or areas thereof, require that land in an amount not exceeding, in the case of land proposed for development or redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes, 2 per cent and in all other cases 5 per cent of the land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes. There are numerous memoranda, letters and reports to and from representatives of SR&R, including Watershed Management Ecology (SR&R's environmental consultants), in the records of the Planning & Development Department referencing the fact that the buffer lands are an integral component of the natural heritage system and that SR&R would be required to convey them for the purpose of protecting the ecological function of the valleylands. Prior to the letter from Mr. Friedman dated June 18, 2008, there was no documentation in these same records stating that the buffer lands were conveyed "for park or other public recreational purposes". At no time prior to SR&R executing the development agreement (which created the obligation to convey the buffer lands without any credit for parkland contribution) did anyone from SR&R ever allege that the buffer lands were conveyed "for park or other public recreational purposes". It was never intended that the buffer lands were to be conveyed "for park or other public recreational purposes". The purpose of the conveyance of the buffer land was always to protect the natural heritage features in the valley as required by the Provincial Policy Statement, TRCA policy, and City Official Plan policy. The applicable Natural Heritage sections of the Provincial Policy Statement are set out in the Scoped Environmental Impact Statement dated May 2006 prepared for SR&R by Watershed Management Ecology. TRCA policies for defining valley corridor boundaries are set out in its "Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program". As set out in its initial letter to the City dated September 6, 2006 (see Attachment #1 to this Addendum Report) commenting on SR&R's rezoning application, these policies require protection to the top of valley bank "plus a minimum 10 metre buffer". This buffer requirement is set out in all of TRCA's subsequent letters to the City. Watershed Management Ecology confirmed this TRCA requirement in their Scoped Environmental Impact Statement. City Official Plan Policy 10.5 states that "City Council recognizes the importance of its stream corridors, and acknowledges the health of its valley and corridors can be affected by uses and activities anywhere in the watershed; accordingly, Council shall, ... c) require conveyance of the valleylands and associated vegetation, and/or buffers to the City or other public agency as a condition of development approval, where appropriate". Report PD 47-08 November 17, 2008 Subjec : S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 4 44 1 5 2. Does the fact that the TRCA permitted SR&R to install a walkway within the buffer lands mean that the purpose of the conveyance of the buffer lands was "for park or other public recreational purposes"? SR&R was required to convey lands for walkway purposes in order to comply with the site plan control provisions (section 41) of Planning Act and the Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Development Guidelines. Subsection 41(7) of the Planning Act reads as follows: 41(7) As a condition to the approval of the plans and drawings referred to in subsection (4), a municipality may require the owner of the land to, (a) provide to the satisfaction of and at no expense to the municipality any or all of the following: 4. Walkways and walkway ramps, including the surfacin_g thereof, and all other means of pedestrian access. 5. Facilities for the ligghting, including floodlighting, of the land or of any buildings or structures thereon. This requirement for the conveyance of land for the purpose of a walkway is separate and distinct from SR&R's obligation to convey lands for the purpose of protecting the valleylands. However, in order to maximize its developable footprint, SR&R sought permission from TRCA to locate the required walkway within the buffer lands and City staff supported the request. TRCA agreed to permit the construction of the walkway within the buffer lands, in part because walkways can enhance the protection of natural heritage features by controlling where people walk. To now characterize the buffer lands as having been conveyed for "park or other public recreational purposes" because the walkway was allowed to be located in the buffer area is a mischaracterization of the purpose of the conveyance of the buffer land and the construction of the walkway. The applicable City policies are set out in the Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Development Guidelines which were approved by Council on October 3, 2006 concurrently with Council's approval of SR&R's rezoning application. The Guidelines explicitly obligate SR&R to provide "a pedestrian walkway ... on public lands along or near the top of bank of the. ravine to provide a link to the Bayly Street sidewalk and the Pickering GO Station" (Section C3.2). The purpose of the walkway is to ensure that the development is truly transit-oriented and pedestrian friendly. The Guidelines also require lighting "to enhance [the] development's attractiveness and safety of the built environment" (Section C3.8). Attachment #2 to this Addendum Report shows that all existing and future lighting is or will be located outside of the buffer lands on private property. Attachment #2 also shows that the walkway extends only as far as the tot lot within the development and that it only occupies a very small percentage (13.8%) of the buffer lands. Report PD 47-08 November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 5 1 J 2 The extent of the walkway was minimized to reduce impacts in the natural heritage system and to provide a pedestrian transit connection focused on serving the residents of the development. The lands covered by the walkway only constitute 0.7% of the net developable area of the site. The balance of the buffer lands (i.e. all of the land other than the walkway) cannot be used for any purpose other than as a buffer. Neither the Guidelines nor any other policy document of the City requires SR&R to convey the buffer lands or any part of the development lands to provide a connection to a recreational trail system. In other words, the purpose of the walkway is not recreational; it is intended to provide connectivity to transit. Even if all of the buffer lands were conveyed to the City at the request of the City and for the sole purpose of creating a walkway, staffs opinion would still be that these lands are not lands conveyed "for park or other public recreational purposes". Lands are required to be conveyed to municipalities for sidewalks and walkways primarily for the purpose of ingress and egress. The City requires the construction and conveyance of sidewalks and walkways in all major developments and it would be wrong to suggest that these conveyances are "for park or other public recreational purposes". Simply put, installing a walkway and related features (e.g. lighting) on a piece of land cannot mean that the land is converted for a recreational purpose. Trails, on the other hand, can serve a recreational purpose. However, as stated above, the walkway on this site does not serve such purpose. There is a distinctive difference in the use of the words "pedestrian pathway", "walkway', and "parkland" in the Planning Act. They are not synonymous. 3. Does the fact that the buffer lands were conveyed to the City and not TRCA mean that they were conveyed for purposes other than protection of the valley system? Staff do not agree with SR&R's suggestion that the buffer lands should be treated as lands that were conveyed "for park or other public recreational purposes" simply because they were conveyed to the City and not to TRCA. TRCA repeatedly requested that the buffer lands be conveyed into public ownership (see, for example, their letter to the City dated July 3, 2007). The buffer lands and the valleylands were put into City ownership in order to be consistent with adjoining valley system lands which. are in City ownership. City Official Plan Policy 10.5 makes it clear that lands conveyed for the purpose of environmental protection can be held by the City or another public agency. It reads as follows: City Council recognizes the importance of its stream corridors, and acknowledges the health of its valley and corridors can be affected by uses and activities anywhere in the watershed, accordingly, Council shall, ... c) require conveyance of the valleylands and associated vegetation, and/or buffers to the City or other public agency as a condition of development approval, where appropriate". Report PD 47-08 November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 6 Official Plan Policy 15.28 reads as follows: City Council, ... (c) shall not accept as parkland conveyance lands required for drainage; valley and stream corridor or shoreline protection purposes, lands susceptible to flooding; steep valley slopes; hazard lands; lands required to be conveyed to a public agency other than the City of Pickering; and any other lands unsuitable for park development. Policy 15.28(c) prohibits the City from accepting any lands required for "valley and stream corridor or shoreline protection purposes" and "lands unsuitable for park development" irrespective of whether the lands are conveyed to another public agency. In the opinion of staff, because the buffer lands were conveyed for environmental protection purposes and because none of the buffer land is capable of being programmed for any parkland use by the City's Culture & Recreation Division, Policy 15.28 (c) prohibits the City from accepting such land for parkland conveyance. In the opinion of staff, to suggest that who owns the buffer lands is determinative of the purpose of the conveyance of such lands is inconsistent with Policies 10.5 and 15.28 (c) of the City's Official Plan. 4. What are the correct figures to be used when calculating the amount of the parkland payment? SR&R claims that it has exceeded its statutory parkland obligations because the buffer lands represent approximately 6% of the net developable area of the site. Area calculations based on the final approved site plan are set out in Attachment #3 to this Addendum Report. Staff do not qualify the buffer lands as parklands and have requested cash-in-lieu of parkland for this development. The net site area of this development is 3.174 ha. The cash-in-lieu value is calculated at 5% of the value of the land the day before the issuance of a building permit. Based on the appraisals provided by SR&R, the parkland payment is 5% of $10,665,00, being $533,250. 5. Is it appropriate to reduce the parkland amount by an amount equal to SR&R's cost of constructing the walkway within the buffer area? The opinion of staff on this issue was set out on page 5 of Report #PD 36-08. Requiring a developer to pay for the construction of a walkway and related lighting. (whether on the developable footprint or on lands conveyed from the developer into public ownership) is a standard City requirement in accordance with Section 41 of the Planning Act (see question 2 above) and staff therefore feel that no reduction should be given. 6. Who bears the onus of proving that a developer is entitled to a credit for prior parkland conveyances? Report PD 47-08 November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 7 1 j The issue of credits for previous parkland conveyances or payments-in-lieu was discussed at the October 6, 2008 Planning & Development Committee meeting. Notwithstanding the fact that the onus is on an applicant to establish that there has been a previous conveyance of parkland in order to be entitled to a credit, City staff diligently tried to determine if there had been any previous conveyances of payments- in-lieu relating to the Bay Ridges Plaza lands. Significant staff resources were spent searching through City and Registry Office records. Staff could not locate any documentation and SR&R has not provided any documentation to show that there was any such parkland conveyance or payment-in-lieu. 7. Is it appropriate to phase the payment of the parkland levy to coincide with what is in essence a development with three phases - the first being the construction of 110 townhouses, the second being the construction of Building/Tower A (236 units), and the third being the construction of Building/Tower B (141 units) and the remaining 10 townhouses. Staff would not have any objection to phasing the payments based on building permit issuance for each phase, provided the total parkland payment remain at $533,250. SR&R was advised of this position. SR&R was also advised that staff could support payment of the parkland payments upon the issuance of the building permits for above ground works on Building/Tower A and Building/Tower B. In other words, the issuance of a demolition permit, a shoring permit and a permit for construction of the underground parking garage would not trigger a parkland payment. Finally, SR&R was advised that, consistent with a phased approach, staff could support the return of a portion (approximately $82,000) of the monies already paid in relation to the first phase. SR&R indicated that it could not accept these terms. 8. If it is appropriate to phase the parkland payments, should the payments be triggered by the issuance of a building permit for the phase to be constructed or by the registration of the plans of condominium? In the opinion of staff, a parkland payment-in-lieu is most appropriately triggered by the issuance of a building permit. This is consistent with subsection 8(2) of the Building Code Act which states that a chief building official must issue a building permit unless the proposed building, structure or demolition will contravene the Building Code Act, the building code or any other "applicable law", and "applicable law" is defined in the building code (section 1.4.1.3) to include payments-in-lieu of parkland conveyances required by subsection 42(6) of the Planning Act. The registration of a condominium plan establishes tenure - it does not by itself constitute development. Residents could be occupying their dwelling units for months or in some cases years prior to the registration of a condominium plan. In the opinion of staff, it would be inappropriate to delay the collection of parkland payments-in-lieu for an uncertain period of time when the new residents who will be placing demands on the City's park services have already moved into their units. Report PD 47-08 November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 8 9. Is the City's approach to parkland levies on this development consistent with the City's approach to the Tridel development at Kingston Road and Valley Farm? The original 1987 development agreement for the Tridel project required Tridel to pay a 5% of the appraised value of the property. The parkland payment-in-lieu amounted to $1,225 per unit (as compared to SR&R's $1,073 per unit). Tridel was permitted to pay the total parkland amount in phases as the project was built out, but any deferred payments were increased by 10% each year. In 1998, Council agreed to amend the escalation provision in the development agreement, as a result of which Tridel paid a total of $1,598,738.48 or an average of $1,406 per unit in lieu of parkland conveyance. None of the walkways or the pedestrian rest areas in the project were counted as parkland dedication. 3.0 Concludina Comments None of the information that SR&R has provided subsequent to the preparation of Report #PD 36-08, including case law supplied by SR&R's solicitor, has caused staff to alter any of the professional opinions set out in that report. In the opinion of staff, SR&R's position on the issue of parkland conveyance (a) is contrary to subsection 42(1) of the Planning Act; (b) is inconsistent with the City's Official Plan policies; (c) is inconsistent with City practices; and (d) would set an undesirable precedent with serious long-term City parkland program implications. Attachments: 1. TRCA letter to the City dated September 6, 2006 2. Extract from SR&R's Approved Landscape Plan 3. Area Calculations 4. Report PD 36-08 Report PD 47-08 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 9 156 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Z?Lo Ross Pym, MCIP, Th a J. uinn Principal Planner - evelopment Review Chief Administrati Officer Approved/Endorsed By: r Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development RP:ks Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Approved/Endorsed By: Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate S. ervices & Treasurer Approy60Wcjbrcll By Director, Opergtioyfs & Emergency Services Approved/Endorsed By: Andrew C. Allison City Solicitor Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Ci fur ,T,MoKas J. PuKh, RDK/fK, CMM III Chief Admi trative Officer November 17, 2008 TORONTO AND REGION-.-,*,, Attachment #1 to Report #PD 47-08 onserva ton 7for The Living City. September 6, 2006 Re k CFN 37347.06 VIA E-MAIL AND MAIL SEP 12 2006 Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP 'CITY OI~;t,?KRIN Planning and Development Department ??NMNG ""'"E C DEPaa E"Zt T MENT City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade - ----Pickering; AN--LlA-/-6K7- - -- -- Re: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application No. A 06/06 1215.-1235 Bayly Street (Bay Ridges Plaza): City of Pickering S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Limited Dear Mr., Pym: Thank you for the opportunity to review Zoning By-Law Amendment Application No. A 06/06 for the redevelopment of the Bay Ridges Plaza.. We have reviewed the following documents: • Survey, prepared by R. O. McKibbon Limited, signed October 13, 2004, received June 23, 2006 from the applicant; • Scoped Environmental Impact Statement, prepared by Watershed Management Ecology, dated May 2006, received June -12, 2006; • Preliminary Report - Slope Stability Assessment, prepared by'Jaques Whitford, dated August 16, 2006, received August 23, 2006 from the applicant. • Master Plan, prepared by Kirkor Architects,. dated August 17, 2006, received on August 30, 2006 in a meeting with the applicant: - We offer the following comments: TRCA Permit Requirements The subject property is partially within a TRCA Regulated Area.. In accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06 (Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses), a permit is required from the TRCA prior to any. of the following works taking place: 1. straightening, changing, diverting or interfering in any way with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse, or for changing or interfering in any way with a wetland; 2. development, if in the opinion of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or the conservation of land may be affected by the development. Development is defined as: 1. the construction, reconstruction, erection or placing of a building or structure of any kind; 2. any change to a building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or FAHOMEIPUBLICOEVELOPMENT SERVICESOURHAM REGIONTICKERING11215 -1235 BAYLY -2.DOC 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario W N 1S4 (416) 66176600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca Attachment #1 to Report #PD 47-08 158 Ross Pym -2- September 6, 2006 potential use of the building or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure or increasing the number of dwelling units in the building or structure; 3. site grading; 4. the temporary or permanent placing, dumping or removal of any material, originating on the site or elsewhere. The applicant should contact TRCA staff to obtain permit approval prior to the issuance of any municipal grading or building permits. TRCA Policy and Program Interests Notwithstanding permit requirements,. the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's policies for defining valley. corridor boundaries are guided byour "Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program" (VSCMP). The VSCMP guides our review of development proposals and permit and planning applications. The overali objectives of these policies is to prevent new development from occurring within areas that may introduce a risk to life and property associated with flooding, erosion and slope instability, or is not compatible with the protection or rehabilitation of these areas in their natural state. For the subject.property, the VSCMP policies define the valley corridor boundary as follows: 1. If the valley slope is stable, a minimum of 10 metres inland from the top of the valley bank;. or 2. 'if the valley slope is not stable, a minimum of 10 metres from the predicted long term stable slope projected from the existing stab lelstabilized toe (base) of slope, or the predicted location of the toe of the slope as shifted as a result of stream erosion over a 100 year period; or 3. If there is significant vegetation, the limit of this vegetation plus ten metres In summary, the limits of the valley corridor will be defined by the greater of the top of bank, the predicted long term stable slope. line or the limit of vegetation, plus a minimum 10 metre buffer. No development is permitted within the valley corridor. Identification of Development Limits The development limits on the subject property have been identified, as follows: 1. ' The top of bank as staked in 2004 has been accurately illustrated as °TRCA staked top of bank - staked September 2004" on the Survey signed October 13, 2004. The top of bank is valid for a period of five years, at which time if development is not substantially underway then a new top of bank staking will be required. 2. The Preliminary. Report - Slope Stability Assessment dated August 16, 2006 is appropriate and we concur with the process for identifying and locating the stable top of bank in the Assessment. As such, the stable top of bank is considered to be the same as the staked top of bank. We do note, however, that in the extreme southeast of the site, the existing drain or stormwater sewer pipe is broken and, its discharge has caused an erosion gully descending to the creek. This should be remediated as part of any future development application. FAHOMETUBLIMDEVELOPMENT SERVICESOURHAM REGIONTICKERING\1215 - 1235 BAYLY 2.DOC 1 5 9 Attachment #1 to Report #PD 47-08 I ,, Ross Pym -3- September 6, 2006 3. The limit of vegetation associated with the valley is approximately coincident with the top of bank. As such, the valley corridor includes the top of bank plus 10 metres. This area should be renaturalized with native trees and shrubs appropriate for the soil conditions, re-zoned to an Open Space designation and transferred to public ownership. Development, including rear yards, roads, and accessory structures, etc, are not permitted in the buffer. We are willing. to discuss the appropriate location for a public access trail relative to the buffer zone if such access is required by the City of Pickering. Please note that the Master Plan dated August 17,2006 does not respect a.1 0 metre buffer from-top of bank. In addition, we request that the Regional -- Storm an3-iDTYear storm oo a eva ions be plo a on-tfieSite-Plan in ar?futuwd-evelapm-ent---- applications. Environmental Impact Stud We did not request to review an Environmental Impact Study, provided the appropriate buffer was-achieved. However, our Ecologist has reviewed the Study and has significant concerns with the section entitled Opportunities and Constraints, including: 1) the recommendation for a 10 metre buffer is inconsistent with the Figure 7, Development Concept; 2) a planting plan for the buffer should be recommended; 3) stormwater should not be directed to a new outfall to the valley, if at all possible; and 4) the study should identify best management practices for stormwater management and groundwater infiltration. Recommendation In light of the above, we have no objection to the approval of the Zoning Amendment subject to the valley corridor.(including 10 metres from the illustrated top of bank) being re-zoned in an open space category that would have the effect of prohibiting development, including rear yards, roads, and accessory structures, etc. We request that the valley corridor be renaturalized and transferred into public ownership as part this or arty future planning application. We trust this is satisfactory. Please feel.free to contact me if you have any further questions. Sinc ly, Steven H.. Heuchert, MCIP, RPP, MRTPI Manager, Development Planning and Regulation Planning and Development Extension 5311 cc: Steven M. Warsh, Partner, S & R Development Group Limited (by e-mail) Stephen.l. Fagyas, Commercial Focus Advisory Services Inc. (by e-mail) F:\HOME\PUBLIC\DEVELOPMENT SERVICES\DURHAM REGION\PICKERING\1215 -1235 BAYLY_2.DOC Attachment #2 to Report #PD 47-08 16 0 0 -? O ? SS 2 1 1 ? ?I 1 b O w I uu ? \ ` lT ? \if 1 W 720 \ 4 _ 11 L.S e J ? I? nn I p I\/ gyp, 21 I N ? I J E _ = p I - 1 Attachment #3 to Report #PD 47-08 Net Developable Area of the Site Buffer Lands Valleylands Walkway Area Calculations* 3.174 ha (7.840 ac) 0.199 ha (0.494 ac) 0.609 ha (1.505 ac) 277 sq. m. Buffer Lands as a % of Net Developable Area Walkway as a % of Buffer Lands Walkway as a % of Net Developable Area 6.27% 13.8% 0.7% * Based on Final Approved Site Plan SP-01 last revised September 27, 2007 161 I ~ KERIN Attachment #4 to Report #PD 47-08 _ REPORT TO PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Report Number: PD 36-08 Date: October 6, 2008 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Parkland Conveyance File: S 2/07 Recommendation: 1. That Council confirm the requirement that S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland in relation to the redevelopment of the lands in the former . Bay Ridges Plaza shown on Attachment #1 to Report PD 36-08. Executive Summary: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. ("SR&R") disputes the amount that City staff have calculated to be payable in lieu of the conveyance of parkland. This report sets out the positions of both SR&R and staff, and recommends that Council confirm the $533,250 parkland payment calculated by staff. Financial Implications: If Council adopts the recommendation contained in this report, the City will collect a total of $533,250 as payment in lieu of parkland conveyance for the redevelopment of the property. If Council accepts the offer contained in a letter from SR&R's lawyer (William Friedman) dated June 18, 2008, the City will only collect a total of $150,000. Sustainability Implications: Other than the financial implications set out above, there are no sustainability implications. 1.0 Background: The relevant background information is as follows: 1. On October 3, 2006, Council approved SR&R's zoning by-law amendment application to permit a mixed use development on the lands in the former Bay Ridges Plaza site, shown in Attachment #1 and Attachment #2 (the "Lands"). The issue of parkland was addressed in the recommendations report (PD 45-06) as follows: Report PD 36-08 October 6, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 2 6 3 The City will be requiring cash-in-lieu of parkland from the applicant in order to satisfy the full provisions of Section 42(1) of the Planning Act. Further, the applicant will be required to design and construct certain amenity areas, including a 'parkette' within the development in order to provide outdoor amenity space for residents of the project. For development of this nature, and in accordance with the Planning Act, the City of Pickering Official Plan provides two options for the calculation of required parkland dedication. The first is the conveyance of land or cash-in-lieu of land at an amount of five percent of the proposed land to be developed. The second option, as an alternative for High Density Residential Area or Mixed Use Areas, requires land or cash-in-lieu of land at a rate of up to one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed. It is recognized that the second option may have significant financial impact on the viability of the project. The first option, being the five percent calculation, is recommended as this may assist the economics of site development, especially when considering the significant costs associated with sanitary sewer upgrades and installation. If Council had chosen to use the second option, SR&R's payment in lieu of parkland conveyance would have been up to approximately $5,578,000 based on the current zoning for 497 units and the most recent appraisals that show that the market value of the residential portion of the Lands is $10,665,000. Even if SR&R's payment was calculated based on the price SR&R paid to purchase the Lands prior to rezoning ($6,333,000), this second option would have required SR&R to pay up to approximately $3,312,000 in lieu of parkland conveyance based on the current zoning for 497 units. 2. Section 5 of Schedule C to the Development Agreement signed by SR&R and registered against title to the Lands on February 14, 2008 provides as follows: CALCULATION OF AMOUNT PAYABLE IN LIEU OF PARKLAND CONVEYANCE Prior to the issuance of the first permit for the construction of any building on the Lands, the Owner shall: (1) Obtain a written appraisal, prepared by a professional land appraiser acceptable to the City, of the value of the Lands, as of the day before the issuance of the permit; and (2) Pay the sum equal to 5% of the appraised value, which sum shall be provided in the form of cash or certified cheque, and which sum the City shall accept in full satisfaction of the Owner's obligation to provide parkland. 3. SR&R disputes the amount that staff have calculated to be payable in lieu of parkland conveyance (the "parkland amount") in relation to the redevelopment of the Lands. Pending a resolution of the issue, staff agreed to process up to 110 building permits for the townhouse units on the Lands (areas zoned SA-8, SA-LW and MD-H6 on Attachment #2) on the condition that SR&R paid $200,000 to the City to be applied against whatever amount Council determines should be paid. SR&R also agreed to provide the City with an appraisal showing the current market value of both the commercial and residential components of the Lands. Attachment #3 to this report is a copy of a letter dated February 29, 2008 confirming this agreement. I)egl PD 36-08 October 6, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 3 4. SR&R has provided two appraisals dated March 17, 2008 and July 24, 2008. The March 17, 2008 appraisal indicates that the market value of the Lands is $12,765,000. The July 24, 2008 appraisal indicates that the market value of the commercial portion of the Lands is $2,100,000. Therefore the residential portion of the Lands is $10,665,000. 5. The first building permits were issued on March 13, 2008. 6. By letter dated June 18, 2008 from SR&R's lawyer (William Friedman) to the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer (see Attachment #4), SR&R has set out its position on the issue of parkland dedication. SR&R has clarified that its offer is to pay the City a total of $150,000 in lieu of parkland; in addition to the costs it will incur to implement improvements in the buffer lands and the ravine stewardship plan. Consequently, SR&R requests that it be reimbursed $50,000 of the $200,000 payment already made to the City. 7. The laws, by-laws and policies relevant to the calculation of the parkland amount are as follows: (a) Section 42 of the Planning Act (extracts in Attachment #5); (b) Section 15.28 of the Pickering Official Plan (Attachment #6); and (c) City Parkland By-law 5373/98 (Attachment #7). 8. The City has recently received applications from SR&R to amend the City's Official Plan and zoning by-laws to facilitate the redevelopment of the former 'Square Boy Plaza' lands. If these applications are approved, SR&R will be required to pay a further parkland amount. 2.0 Discussion: Staff's responses to each of the points raised in Mr. Friedman's letter dated June 18, 2008 as well as two other arguments that SR&R has previously put forward in relation to this issue are set out below. Valley Land and Buffer Land Contributions SR&R Position 1. "Bay Ridges has conveyed to the City 4.94 acres, the Buffer Lands, for park or public recreation purposes. This represents the entire 5% required to be conveyed for Parkland. " 2. "In addition Bay Ridges has been required to convey an area equal to 1.505 acres. This area is known as the valley lands." Report PD 36-08 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance October 6, 2008 165 Page 4 Staff Response In accordance with the registered Development Agreement, SR&R conveyed Part 2 (517.88 m2), Part 3 (139.50 m2), Part 4 (48.44 mz) and Part 6 (1,287.41 m2) on Plan 40R-25170 for Buffer Lands. These parts total 0.1993 hectares or 0.492 acres, not 4.94 acres. The valley lands total 1.505 acres. Therefore, SR&R has conveyed just under two acres of land for such purposes. The buffer lands and valley lands are shown separately on Attachment #1. They are shown together as the area zoned OS-HL in Attachment #2. The conveyance of the buffer lands into public ownership is a requirement of the TRCA and is necessary for the protection of the natural heritage system. Buffer lands constitute an integral component of the natural heritage system. They provide space for the protection and ecological function of valley lands. The City does not accept valley lands, environmental buffer areas, or other lands unsuitable for park development as parkland dedication. This policy is outlined in the City's Official Plan (section 15.28(c)) and this approach has been upheld by the Ontario Municipal Board (K.P. Isberg Construction v. Toronto (City) (2007), 56 O.M.B.R. 418). Conveyance of environmental buffer areas to public authorities has become common in. development approval processes. For example, the Environmental Servicing Plan for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood has identified significant buffer areas beyond the physical top-of-bank of the Ganatsekiagon Creek that must be conveyed to an appropriate public authority through the development approvals process. While these buffers are beyond the physical top-of-bank of valley systems, they are considered part of the ecological function of the natural heritage system and are therefore contained outside of the development area. These buffer lands will not be considered as parkland conveyance or as any amount payable in lieu of such conveyance. If they were to be accepted as parkland in fulfillment of Planning Act dedication requirements, the City would not be able to secure sufficient lands for its active neighbourhood parks without purchasing such lands at market value and passing this cost on to the taxpayer. Consequently, qualifying buffer lands as parkland conveyance in fulfillment of Planning Act requirements would have serious implications on the City's parks program. Ravine Stewardship Plan SR&R Position 3. "Bay Ridges has also agreed to provide a three year Ravine Stewardship Plan for the Valley lands at a cost of $50, 000.00" Rep i %T 36-08 October 6, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 5 Staff Response The Development Agreement requires that SR&R secure $36,000.00 (not $50,000.00), which represents 100% of the anticipated cost of preparing and implementing the Ravine Stewardship Plan. TRCA required that SR&R fund the cost of the Plan as a condition of site plan approval (see letter from TRCA dated July 3, 2007 - Attachment #8). The value of the Ravine Stewardship Plan ($36,000.00) was determined by TRCA. This TRCA requirement has nothing whatsoever to do with the City's requirements for parkland dedication. While the Stewardship Plan is an initiative in support of environmental responsibility and is commendable, the cost of such program initiatives should not be credited against parkland amounts. Site Plan Improvements SR&R Position 4. 'Bay Ridges has agreed to make certain improvements to the Buffer Lands conveyed to the City at a cost of $46, 000, 00." Staff Response - SR&R has agreed to make certain improvements to the buffer lands as a condition of site plan approval. Staff cannot determine if the cost estimate of $46,000 is accurate without more detailed information from SR&R. Site improvements are a standard requirement for any major development in the City of Pickering. They can be on private property and/or on public property (i.e. boulevard planting; pedestrian connections to existing sidewalks). As a condition of the City's approval of the site plan for this redevelopment and with the approval of TRCA, SR&R was required to construct a walkway within a section of the Douglas Ravine buffer area. Certain landscaping, features have been incorporated into the walkway design. The costs associated with these site improvements are part of the overall site development requirements. The City does not credit the cost of improvements like these against parkland dedication requirements. Previous Parkland Dedications SR&R Position 5. "Bay Ridges is entitled to (sic) pursuant to Section 42(9) of the Planning Act to a credit for any amounts previously conveyed with respect to the Lands for park or other recreational purposes or paid in lieu thereof." Report PD 36-08 October 6, 2008 167 Subiect: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 6 Staff Response Staff have reviewed all development agreements and subdivision agreements relating to the Lands and most of the lands that make up the communities of Bay Ridges and West Shore. We did not find any evidence of any parkland dedications in relation to the Lands. In fact, staff did not find any parkland dedications relating to any commercial lands in either the Bay Ridges community or the West Shore community. Staff did, however, locate several parkland dedications and cash-in-lieu contributions in relation to residential development in these communities. For example, a combination of parkland and cash-in-lieu was given to the City to facilitate the construction of the East Shore Community Centre as a condition of the development of all three of the residential condominium projects located immediately south of the Bay Ridges Plaza (agreements were dated February 12, 1969 and December 30, 1970). Consistent with the City's current parkland policy, staff are not aware of any situation in which the City has taken parkland or cash-in-lieu for any commercial development (including the Bay Ridges Plaza). Based on the foregoing, it is staffs opinion that no credit is available to SR&R pursuant to subsection 42(9) of the Planning Act. Commercial Component Credit SR&R Position 6. "Bay Ridges is entitled to a credit for the value of the commercial component of the development. This is estimated as follows: a) Total commercial/retail space is 24,721 sq. ft and assuming a typical yield from commercial land of 27%, then the total acreage required to develop and build this amount of commercial/retail space would be 89,892 sq. ft or 2.063 acres. b) Land for commercial purposes in Pickering is worth $800, 000 to $1,100, 000. And by taking the mid-point of say 950,000 the land required to build this amount of commercial/retail would be $1,959,850. c) Therefore (sic) the residual land value of the commercial/retail space that will be built amounts to $1,959,850 and should be deducted from any values before calculating the 5% in lieu. ". Repo 1313) 36-08 October 6, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 7 Staff Response Staff agree that the base figure used to calculate the parkland amount should be reduced to reflect the fact that a portion of the development is commercial. In fact, City staff made SR&R aware of the need to make this adjustment to the parkland amount at a meeting held on February 27, 2008 and committed in writing to make the adjustment based. on an appraisal from a qualified land appraiser (see Attachment #3). This approach ensures that SR&R's parkland amount is calculated in a manner consistent with Section 3 of the. City's Parkland By-law (see Attachment #7) which provides that parkland conveyance is not required as a condition of any development or redevelopment of land for commercial or industrial purposes. In the opinion of staff, the City should not rely upon the calculations in Mr. Freidman's letter dated June 18, 2008. Instead, the proper figure to use is the appraiser's estimate of the value of the commercial portion of the Lands ($2,100,000). Accordingly, the figure used to calculate the parkland amount is $10,665,000 which represents the difference between the appraised value of the Lands ($12,765,000) less the appraised value of the commercial portion of the Lands ($2,100,000). Purchase Price v. Market Value SR&R Position In discussions with staff, SR&R representatives have repeatedly argued that the parkland amount should be calculated based on the price it paid to purchase the Lands. They feel that City staff previously advised them of this. SR&R purchased the Lands on July 29, 2005 for $6,333,000. If the initial purchase price was accepted as representing land value, SR&R would be required to pay 5% of $6,333,000 or $316,650 as its parkland dedication. Staff Response In the opinion of staff, for the purpose of calculating the parkland amount, the value of the Lands should be determined as of the day before the first permit was issued (March 13, 2008) and not as of the date that SR&R purchased the Lands. This is what is explicitly provided for in subsection 42(6.4) of the Planning Act and section 5 of Schedule C of the Development Agreement between SR&R and the City. In fact, it is only as a result of the rezoning of the Lands (which happened after the Lands were purchased) that the City acquired the legal authority to collect a parkland amount (see subsection 42(7) of the Planning Act). Report PD 36-08 October 6, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 8 169 Staff have previously used a developer's purchase price as the basis to calculate a parkland amount, but only where (a) the payment was made within 1 year of the date that the property being developed or redeveloped was purchased and there was no reason to believe that the property value had materially increased; and (b) there had not been any intervening change in land use or increase in the density for the site. This is done to save the developer an unnecessary expense. The City does not use a developer's purchase price to calculate a parkland amount where there has been an intervening change in land use or increase in. density. Tot Lot SR&R Position In discussions with staff, SR&R representatives have argued that the parkland amount should be reduced because they are providing a tot lot on the Lands. Staff Response A tot lot is being constructed on the Lands. It is an important component of the condominium project. With developments that produce the density that is planned at this site, there is always a need for outdoor amenity space, and specifically an area for children's play facilities. This is a common City requirement for any residential development of this nature and it represents an important site design component. The tot lot is located on private property for the use of the residents of the condominium project. The City does not credit the cost of a site improvement like this against parkland dedication requirements. 3.0 Conclusion: As discussed above, SR&R already received the benefit of a significantly lower parkland amount when Council elected not to require land or cash-in-lieu of land at a rate of up to 1 hectare for each 300 dwelling units in the development. SR&R will also receive the benefit of a deduction in the amount payable to reflect the fact that a portion of the redevelopment is commercial. In the opinion of staff, there are no other reduction options or credits available under the Planning Act, the City's Official Plan or the Parkland By-law. Accordingly, it is staff's position that the proper parkland amount in relation to the redevelopment of the Lands is 5% of the appraised market value of the residential portion of the Lands as of the day before the first permit was issued. The amount payable should therefore be 5% of $10,665,000 or $533,250. Repo"IPY a6-08 October 6, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 9 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Schedule II to By-law 6705/06 as amended by By-law 6786/07 3. Letter dated February 29, 2008 from City Solicitor to William Friedman 4. Letter dated June 18, 2008 from William Friedman to the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer 5. Extracts from Section 42 of the Planning Act 6. Section 15.28 of the Pickering Official Plan 7. City Parkland By-law 5373/98 8. Letter dated July 3, 2007 from TRCA to Tyler Barnett Report PD 36-08 October 6, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 10 7 1 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: 0too Ross Pym, MCIP, P T etas J. Qui Principal Planner - Development Review Chief Administ tive Officer Approved/Endorsed By: lee Neil Carr Director, Panning & Development Approved/Endorsed By: Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Approved/Endo ed By: Evere untshra' Director, Operations & Emergency Services Approved/Endorsed By: Andrew C. Allison City Solicitor RP: jf Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Cou cil ?` Th,IA s J. Quinn, D , CMM III Chief Administrative Officer ,/ ATTArHAIEN7 ,: p[j 1 72 HIGHWAY 401 LY STREET w rY 0 V) z Q V) DO UGLA RA RADOM STREET City of Pickering Planning & Development Department a DEVELOPMENT SITE-7.823 acres (3.166 ha) SATE: AUG. 26, 2008 w ® VALLEY LAND . BUFFER-0.492 acres (0.1993 ha) opt, S.„rp..: '/` ® 7--t Enterp?lsee Inc. and fts wpPlte re. All rlghee Reserved.MPACNote pndlan dsupplle ,peerr. N aa. ® VALLEY LAND-1.505 acres (0.6091 ha) 2005 Al. rights Reserved. Not p pldnispf Survey. 401 H1GHw F? w ry 0 WAYFARER LANE z a 51REE, ® BUILD-TO-ZONE II ------- BUILDING ENVELdPE I I I SCHEDULE H TO BY-LAW 6705/06 AMENDED BY BY-LAW 6786/07 PASSED THIS 23rd DAY OF J U LY 2007 ORIGINAL SIGNED BY MAYOR - DAVID RYAN ORIGINAL SIGNED BY CITY CLERK - DEBI A. BENTLEY N I I I I 173 Litq o4 174 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT Legal Services Division 905.420.4626 Facsimile 905.420.3534 legal@city.pickering.on.ca February 29, 2008 William Friedman Barrister & Solicitor 3550 Victoria Park Avenue Suite 110 Toronto, ON M2H 2N5 Subject: SR&R Bay Ridges Ltd. File: L-3210-001-06 Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario Canada L1V 6K7 Direct Access 905.420.4660 Toll Free 1.866.683.2760 cityofpickering.com I can confirm that the City is prepared to issue up to 110 building permits for single attached units on lands zoned SA-LW, MD-H6 and SA-8 within the property legally described as Parts 1, 5 and 7 on Plan 40R-25170 (the "Property") provided, (a) all requirements relating to the issuance of building permits of the City's Chief Building Official are met; and (b) SR&R Bay Ridges Ltd. ("SR&R) pays $200,000.00 to the City to be applied towards the amount owed by SR&R in lieu of parkland dedication. I can also confirm that City staff, if requested by SR&R, will prepare a report for consideration by Council at its meeting on March 25, 2008 seeking direction on the total amount payable in lieu of parkland dedication provided,' (a) SR&R has conveyed the valley lands legally described as Parts 12, 13, 14 (save and except Part 3 on Plan 40R-25170), 15 and 16 on Plan 40R- 24800 to the City free and clear of all encumbrances save and except the encumbrances set out in Schedule A attached; (b) SR&R has provided a certified appraisal showing the current market value of both the commercial and residential components of the Property; and (c) SR&R agrees to remit whatever amount Council determines to be the appropriate amount payable in lieu of parkland dedication (less the SR&R Bay Ridges Ltd. February 29, 2006 a Page 2 $200,000.00 already paid) forthwith after Council's decision subject however to any rights of appeal to the OMB. Finally, I can confirm that the commercial component of the market value of the Property will be deducted from the overall market value for the purpose of calculating the amount owed in lieu of parkland dedication. If these conditions are acceptable to your client, please sign and forward to my office . the enclosed copy of this letter. Yours truly Andrew C. Allison City Solicitor ACA:ks Attachment Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Operatlons & Emergency Services Director, Planrung & Development Manager, Development Review Supervisor, Property & Development Services Senior Planner - Site Planning SR&R Bay Ridges Ltd. agrees to the conditions set out in this letter. AIIW04?? /j ?e R&R ay Ridges Ltd. Dated: uD>? by its Ilicitor, William Friedman '17 5 ATTACH?IIENT 0 ?a TQ E ]PORT # PD--IL--- 76 ? z Schedule "A" I. The reservations, limitations, provisions and conditions expressed in the original grant from the Crown and all unregistered rights, interests and privileges in favour of the Crown under or pursuant to any applicable statute or regulation. 2. Liens for taxes, local improvements, assessments or governmental charges or levies not at the time due or delinquent. 3. Zoning restrictions, restrictions on the use of the Lands. 4. Any unregistered right-of-way, watercourse, rights-of-water or other easements not disclosed by the registered title and the survey, if any, provided to us and any defects in or omissions disclosed by the survey. 5. Any subdivision, servicing, development, engineering, site plan, performance agreement or other similar agreement with a municipal or other public authority. 6. All applicable governmental orders, laws, by-laws and regulations. 7. The reservations, limitations, conditions and exceptions to title set out in the Land Titles Act (Ontario). 8. Part Lot Control By-Law registered March 7, 1961 as Instrument No. LTC 2527; WILLIAM FRIEDMAN ACL., 11 Barrister & Solicitor 150 Ferrand Drive, Suite 802 Tel: 416.496.3340 Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Fax: 416-497-3809 M3C 3ES E-mail: wfiiilc;al gca By Email epatersonCuciA,.pickerine.on.ca June 18, 2008 By Courier Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer The Corporation of the City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario, Canada LiV 6K7 Dear Sir: Re: Parkland Dedication - SR & R Bay Ridges-Mixed Use Development 1215-1235 Bayly Street, Pickering, Ontario Pursuant to Section 42(1) of the Planning Act (the "Act'), the council of the City of Pickering as a condition of development or redevelopment of land may require that land in an amount not exceeding 2%, in case of a commercial or industrial development or redevelopment and in all other cases S% of land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other recreational purposes. Section 42(6) of the Act permits the City to require payment of money to the value of the land otherwise required to be conveyed in lieu of a conveyance. DETERMINATION OF VALUE Pursuant to the Planning Act the value of the land shall be determined as of the day before the day the building permit is issued in respect of the development or redevelopment or if more than one permit is required on the day before the day the first permit is issued. Section 42(9) of the Act then provides that in the case where land has been previously conveyed for park or recreational purposes or a payment of money has previously been made in lieu a conveyance and the land was originally proposed for commercial or 177 MACr;MEW >#a? : rp 78 industrial purpose and has now been proposed for another purpose then the land previously conveyed or money previously paid shall be included in determining the amount of land or money required to be conveyed or paid in connection with the new development or redevelopment. Accordingly this section requires the City to credit the amount of previous payment or conveyance against what is now to be paid or conveyed. If there is a dispute as to value of the land or as to the credit for previous payment then the matter can be brought before the OMB. POSITION OF SR & R BAY RIDGES LTD. Bay Ridges takes the position that: 1. Bay Ridges has conveyed to the City 4.94 acres, the Buffer Lands, for park or public recreational purposes. This represents almost the entire 5% required to be conveyed for Parkland. 2. In addition Bay Ridges has been required to convey an area equal to1.505 acres. This area known as the valley lands. 3. Bay Ridges has also agreed to provide a three (3) year Ravine Stewardship Plan for the Valley lands at a cost of $50,000.00 4. Bay Ridges has agreed to make certain improvements to the Buffer Lands conveyed to the City at a cost of $46,000. 5. Bay Ridges is entitled to pursuant to Section 42(9) of the Planning Act to a credit for any amounts previously conveyed with respect to the Lands for park or other recreational purposes or paid in lieu thereof. 6. Bay Ridges is entitled to a credit for the value of the commercial component of the development. This is estimated as follows: a) Total commerciallretail space is 24,271 and assuming a typical yield from commercial land of 27%, then the total acreage required to develop and build this amount of commerciallretail space would be 89,892 sq. ft. or 2.063 acres. b) Land for commercial purposes in Pickering is worth $800,000 to $1,100,000. and by taking the mid-point of say $950,000 the land required to build this amount of commercial/retail would be $1,959,850 c) Therefor the residual land value of the commerciallretail space that will be built amounts to $1,959,850 and should be deducted from any values before calculating the 5% in lieu. The value of the lands as at the issue of the first building permit was determined by appraisal to be $12,800,000. Five (5%) percent thereof is $640,000.00. Based on the foregoing it would appear that no R&er sum is owed or needs to be conveyed to the , !, r) i?ril,rr '! r` City. Moreover an argument can be made that Bay Ridges has conveyed and/or paid an amount in excess of what it is required to convey or pay under the Planning Act.. Rather than enter into a prolonged dispute resolution process, Bay Ridges is prepared to resolve the issue relating to the parkland conveyance by paying an additional amount of $150,000.00. It is more than a reasonable amount given the various credits noted above to which Bay Ridges believes it would otherwise be entitled. cc. Mayor Dave Ryan Councillors Bonnie Littley, Bill McLean, Rick Johnson, Jennifer O'Connell, Doug Dickerson, David Pickles 179 wrnC1=,"M,uT Conveyance of land for park purposes 42. 1 As a condition of development or redevelopment of land, the council of a local municipality may, by by-law applicable to the whole municipality or to any defined area or areas thereof, require that land in an amount not exceeding, in the case of land proposed for development or redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes, 2 per cent and in all other cases 5 per cent of the land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes. Alternative requirement Subject to subsection (4), as an alternative to requiring the conveyance provided for in subsection (1), in the case of land proposed for development or redevelopment for residential purposes, the by-law may require that land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes at a rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed or at such lesser rate as may be specified in the by-law. Official plan requirement The alternative requirement authorized by subsection (3) may not be provided for in a by-law passed under this section unless there is an official plan in effect in the local municipality that contains specific policies dealing with the provision of lands for park or other public recreational purposes and the use of the alternative requirement. Payment instead of conveyance 6 The council of a local municipality may require the payment of money to the value of the land otherwise required to be conveyed under this section in lieu of the conveyance. No building without payment. 6.1 If a payment is required under subsection (6), no person shall construct a building on the land proposed for development or redevelopment unless the payment has been made or arrangements for the payment that are satisfactory to the council have been made. Determination of value 6.4 For the purposes of subsections (6) and (6.2), the value of the land shall be determined as of the day before the day the building permit is issued in respect of the development or redevelopment or, if more than one building permit is required for the development or redevelopment, as of the day before the day the first permit is issued. Where land conveyed u If land has been conveyed or is required to be conveyed to a municipality for park or other public purposes or a payment of money in lieu of such conveyance has been received by the municipality or is owing to it under this section or a condition imposed under section 51.1 or 53, no additional conveyance or payment in respect of the land subject to the earlier conveyance or payment may be required by a municipality in respect of subsequent development or redevelopment unless, ATTACHMENT INTO REPORT # PDT ?' (,a) there is a change -in the proposed development or redevelopment which would increase the density of development; or (b) land originally proposed for development or redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes is now proposed for development or redevelopment for other purposes. Changes If there is a change under clause (7) (a) or (b), the land that has been conveyed or is required to be conveyed or the payment of money that has been received or that is owing, as the case may be, shall be included in determining the amount,of land or payment of money in lieu of it that may subsequently be required under this section on the development, further development or redevelopment of the lands or part of them in respect of which the original conveyance'or payment was made. Disputes 10 In the event of a dispute between a municipality and an owner of land on the value of land determined under subsection (6.4), either party may apply to the Municipal Board to have the value determined and the Board shall, in accordance as nearly as may be with the Expropriations Act, determine the value of the land and,' if a payment has been made under protest under subsection (12), the Board may order that a refund be made to the owner. Same 11 In the event of a dispute between a municipality and an owner of land as to the amount of land or payment of money that may be required under subsection (9), either party may apply to the Municipal Board and the Board shall make a final determination of the matter. Payment under protest ,(12) If there is a dispute between a municipality and the owner of land under subsection (10), the owner may pay the amount required by the municipality under protest and shall make an application to the Municipal Board under subsection (10) within 30 days of the payment of the amount. Notice f13) If an owner of land makes a payment under protest and an application to the Municipal Board under subsection (12), the owner shall give notice of the application to the municipality within 15 days after the application is made. ATTACMM I ? 1 8 2 REPORT # PD Enabling Policies This section of the Plan provides policies that outline how the City will obtain its park land through development applications, and how road widenings will be secured. 15.28 City Council, CITY POLICY Parkland: Conveyance of (a) shall as a condition of residential Land for Park or Other development, and may as. a condition of Public Recreational Purpores other development, except for the uses described in (b), (i) require the conveyance of land to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes in an amount not exceeding 5% of the proposed land to be developed; (ii) may, as an alternative to requiring conveyance of land as provided for in (i) above, in -the High Density Residential Areas and Mixed Use Areas, require land to be conveyed for park or other public recreational purposes at a rate of up to one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed, whichever is greater; and (iii) may, in lieu of a portion or all of the land conveyance stipulated by (i) or (ii) above, require the payment of money to the value of the land that would otherwise be required to be conveyed for park purposes; (b) may, as a condition of commercial or industrial development, (i) require the conveyance of land to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes in an amount not exceeding 2% of the proposed land to be developed; and (ii) may, in lieu of a portion or all of the land conveyance stipulated by (i) above, require the payment of money to the value of the land that would otherwise be required to be conveyed for park purposes; and inn CITY POLICY Parkland: Conveyance of Land for Park or Other Public Recreational Purposes I'cont'd) CITY POLICY Road Wlidenings ATTACHIVILN'T # __, f I (c) shall not accept as parkland conveyance lands required for drainage; valley and stream corridor or shoreline protection purposes; lands susceptible to flooding; steep valley slopes; hazard lands; lands required to be conveyed to a public agency other than the City of Pickering; and other lands unsuitable for park development. 15.29 City Council shall secure, at no charge to the municipality, the right-of-way widths in accordance with section 4.10 for roads shown on Schedule If, through the subdivision, land severance and/or site plan control process, and/or through development agreements, and/or by dedication or conveyance, subject to, (a) exact right-of-way widths being determined at the time of development, considering the proposed land use, intensity of development, road function, cultural and heritage features of the area, and development guidelines prepared for Detailed Review Areas; and (b) road widenings being taken equally from both sides of the road measured from the centreline, except in areas where special circumstances exist (such as areas containing unusual soil, topographic or other environmental features; areas where existing buildings or structures warrant protection; and where jog-eliminations are proposed at intersections), which circumstances require that more of the required road widening is taken from one side than the other. 183 PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN EDITION 4; Chapter Fifteen -- Development Revie- 301 ATTACHMENT # TA 184 REPORT # PD aA2 THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 5373/98 Being a by-law to require the conveyance of land for park or other public recreational purposes as a condition of development .or redevelopment, or the subdivision of lands. WHEREAS sections 42, 51.1, 51(25) and 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 provide that the Council of a local municipality may by by-law require that land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes as a condition of development or redevelopment or the subdivision of lands; WHEREAS sections 42 and 51.1 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, provide for an alternate parkland rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed for development provided the municipality has an official plan that contains specific policies dealing with the provision of lands for park or other public recreational purposes at such a rate; WHEREAS the Official Plan of the Town of Pickering contains specific policies dealing with the provision of lands for park or other public recreation purposes at the conveyance rates referred to in the Planning Act; WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Pickering wishes to use these provisions to further the acquisition of lands for parks or other public recreational purposes. NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. For the purposes of interpretation of this by-law, the following definitions shall apply: (a) "Development" means the construction, erection or placing of one or more buildings or structures on land or the making of an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of substantially increasing the size or usability thereof; and (b) "Redevelopment" has the same meaning as Development. (c) "Subdivision" means the process referred to in section 50 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13. 2. This By-law shall apply to the whole of the Town of Pickering. 3. As a condition of development or redevelopment of lands for any purpose other than commercial or industrial purposes, Council shall require that land be conveyed to the Town, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, for park or other public recreational purposes in the amount of five percent (5%) of the land proposed for such development. .4. As a condition of subdivision of lands for any purpose other than commercial or industrial purposes, Council shall require that land be conveyed to the Town, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, for park or other public recreational purposes in the amount of five percent (5%) of the land proposed for such development. 5. As an alternative to sections 3 and 4 above, as a condition of development or redevelopment or in the case of subdivision of land as a condition of approval of ATTACHMENT sudivision of lands for development in the High Density Residential Areas and Mixed Use Areas in accordance with the Town of Pickering Official Plan, Council may require that land be conveyed to the Town for park or other public recreational purposes at a rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed. However, in no case shall the parkland dedication be less than that required in sections 3 and 4 above. 6. As an alternative to sections 3, 4 and 5 above, Council may require the payment of money equal to the value of any land otherwise to be conveyed under this by-law, or such combination of land and money as Council may require. 7. This By-law shall at all times be subject to the provisions of sections 42, 51.1, 51(25) and 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P..13, as amended from time to time, or any successor thereto. 8. By-Law No: 4152/93 of The Corporation of the Town of Pickering being a by-law "To require that land be conveyed to the Town for park or other public recreations purposes as a condition of development or redevelopment anywhere in the Town", is hereby repealed. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this. 8th day of September, 1998. Wayne Arthurs, Mayor Bruce Taylor, Clerk TOWN CF' PICKFF Ilia 185 186 C TORONTO AND REG;ON"1- --- onserva tlon for The Living City July 3, 2007 RECENED CFN 38686.01 XREF CFN 39234 VIA E-MAIL AND MAIL JUL 10 2007 Tyler Barnett CITY OF PICKERING Planning and Development Department PUNNIN & DE ELOPM? City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One.The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Re: Site Plan Application No. S02/07 1215 -1233 Bayly Street (San Francisco by the Bay, Bay Ridges Plaza) City of Pickering S. R. 4 R. Bay Ridges Limited Dear Mr. Barnett: Thank you for the opportunity to review the second Site Plan application submission. We have reviewed, the following documents: • Drawing Nos. SP-01 to SP-04, prepared by Kirkor Architects, dated April 4, 2007, Revision No. 3, revised April 9, 2007, received.on May 8, 2007; SWM Report, prepared by Sernas, dated May 8, 2007, received May 14, 2007; • Drawing No. GEO-1, Pine Creek Bank Stabilization and outfall Channel Design, prepared by Sernas, dated May 2007; • Drawing No. SD-1, Site Drainage Area Plan, prepared by Sernas, dated October 2006,- Drawing. No. SG-1, Site Grading Plan, prepared by Sernas, dated October 2006; • Drawing No. SS-1, Site Servicing Plan, prepared by Sernas, dated October 2006; • Drawing No. ERS-1, Erosion/Sediment Control Plan, prepared by Sernas,'dated October 2006; and • Drawing Nos. L-1 to L-7, prepared by James McWilliam Landscape Architect, dated March 2007;• Revision 3, revised April 5, 2007, received on May 8, 2007. We offer the fIcHov:ing comments. Slope Stablifty 1. The'proposed outfall and limits of development are satisfactory with respect to slope stability. Stormwater Management 2. Please provide confirmation whether the proposed future development was taken into account for total imperviousness calculation and Visual Otthymo calculation for total contribution from Catchment 116. Please provide a summary of the total area and percent imperviousness of the existing, proposed and future development. Please provide an electronic copy of the . modified V02 model. Review of all details regarding minor system flow, flow capacity and conveyance of on site flows through minor systems, and major overland flow conveyance 1s deferred to City staff. Confirmation should be provided via a copy of City comments that City staff has no concerns in this regard. FAHOMSPUBLICIDEVELOPMEN7 SERVICESMURHAM REGIONTICKERINGU215 -1235 BAYLY 4.DOC Member of Conservation Ontario -- . - - - - - rte:. F? 1 ?) / 1 8 Tyler Barnett - 2 July 3. 2007 3. Figure SD-1 shows that major overland flow is directed towards the valley wall on the east side of the property. Please be advised that TRCA policy does not support discharge of unattenuated concentrated major.flow into the valley as shown in Drawing No. SG-1. Acceptable alternatives to the current proposal would include grading of the southeast corner of the site to provide temporary attenuation of flow and dispersal of flow into the valley wall through a level spreader or curb acting as a weir, or conveyance of major system flows via a pipe to an outfall located at the bottom of the valley wall. 4. Please describe the implications of site construction phasing on the function of the temporary. pond and stormwater flow patterns on site, and confirm that the function of the pond will be maintained through all phases. 5. Please provide appropriate proposed contours of the pond and volume calculation on Drawing No. ERS-1. 6. The outlet of the pond is very close to the inlet of proposed temporary swale for proposed ponds on the east and west side, as shown on Drawing No. ERS-1. This will reduce retention time and therefore affect the performance of the pond to effectively settle sediment. Please change the location of the inlet of the temporary swale or orient the temporary pond so that there is sufficient travel time provided to the outlet of the pond. 7. Please note that the TRCA Erosion and Sediment Control Guideline require a minimum 48 hour drawdown time with minimum 75 mm orifice. Please provide calculation of the drawdown time. Further, an emergency spillway must be provided to safely pass the 100 year storm event and supporting calculations must be provided. Please provide a note on the plan stating sediment basin must be constructed prior to any construction activities except for topsoil stripping and grading operations associated with the construction of the ESC pond.. All details and calculations regarding to the pond should confirm.to the TRCA Erosion-and Sediment Control Guideline for Urban Construction, December 2006. The Guideline can be downloaded from www.sustainabletechnoloaies.ca. 8. Please provide appropriate drawings to demonstrate erosion and sediment control measures that will be provided during construction of the temporary pond, site stripping and. grading, outlet structures, stormwater pipes, sanitary sewer and manhole. Appropriate notes on construction staging, phasing,. maintenance and good site practice should be provided. Additionally, erosion control and site stabilization will be required during and after construction of the 250 mm sanitary sewer in the valley. 9. Please provide some spot elevations for the swale on Drawing No. ESC-1, and provide . rational for temporary interceptor swale sizing calculation. It is preferred the swale conveys `the "first flush" with majority of the sediment laden water directed to the temporary sediment control pond. A preliminary hydrologic calculation (rational method or V02) for an estimate of flows from a 15-25 mm storm event to confirm. the flow that can.be conveyed through the temporary. interceptor channel. 10. Please provide the location of topsoil stockpile on Drawing No. ERS-1 or a separate drawing and provide heavy duty sediment fence at the perimeter of topsoil stockpile. Please provide details. of the seeding or other stabilization measure for the topsoil stock pile. 11. The proposed outfall should join the watercourse at a flat angle and avoid the outside bend if possible. Please look into opportunities to orient the outfall, if possible, so that the outfall is F:IHOME\PUBLIC\DEVELOPMENT SERVICESIDURHAM REGIONIPICKERING11215 - 1 235 BAYLY 4.DOC 1 ? ?3 ` ? ?E=:? CSC? :_ _ Tyler Barnett -3- July 3. 2007 south of the proposed location and intercepts the watercourse at a 'flatter angle. Please provide velocity calculations of all proposed erosion control treatment types. Please provide a note on Drawing No. GEO-1 to avoid disturbance to the low flow channel of the watercourse. Further, please indicate sediment control fence around the perimeter of the proposed cascade pool and modify "construction phasing" on Drawing No. GEO-1. 12. Page 2 of the Stormwater Management Report states the infiltration trench will be able to handle all runoff to the 25 year design storm event and refers to an attached spreadsheet. Please forward this spreadsheet to TRCA staff Shahzad Khan by e-mail at skhan@trca.on.ca. The approximate 25 year storm runoff from a 600 sq. m roof is 22 cu.m where as the volume of the infiltration trench is 14 cu m. It would appear that for a 25 year runoff capture the size of the infiltration trencli should be larger; please explain this discrepancy. Further, please confirm*whether roof flow control device will be provided for the building in front of Street G. 13. Further to the previous comment, .it would appear that the infiltration. facility could capture a greater total volume of rainfall if it received drainage from other parts of the site.. For example, if the trench volume provided could capture runoff from up to the 25 mm storm over the entire site instead of the 25 year storm runoff from a small portion, a much greater.. proportion of the total annual runoff from the site could be managed in this facility. 14. Please provide appropriate drawings and details to describe the configuration of the infiltration facility, including a typical cross-section. .15. It is not typical for an infiltration basin design to allow excess flows to surcharge to the ground. through a catch basin and discharge overland. Typically, the overflow system is directly connected to the storm sewer if feasible; we recommend investigation of this alternative as most proponents have found this to be an improved design. Further the catch basin connected to the infiltration basin will allow runoff from the paved area to enter the basin which, if not the intent of the design, will decrease the lifespan and the performance of the facility due to poor water quality. 16. The City of Pickering has Identified, in its ongoing Frenchman's Bay Stormwater Management Master Plan, that Pine Creek and Frenchman's Bay are highly degraded and will require dramatic water quality improvements to restore their ecological function. While the proponent should be recognized for providing an innovative infiltration facility as a component of their stormwater management strategy, this treats only a small portion of the site and additional measures should be provided to maximize.erosion control and water quality treatment.. While we note that oil/grit separators have been provided, it is our opinion that these typically do not . achieve Level 1 water quality control in real-world conditions, which is supported by recent research and the evolving position of other municipalities such as the City of Toronto on OGS. use. Please revise the stormwater management strategy to include other measures in addition to OGS that will provide an additional degree of erosion control and water quality treatment. Potential measures include parking lot bioswales.and enhanced drainage swales plus enhanced capture from the proposed infiltration facility, although there are many other measures that could be applied. Landscape Plans 17. A Ravine Stewardship Plan should be prepared for the valley slopes. The plan should be prepared by a qualified Ecologist or Forestry specialist and include a plan and costing for staged removal of invasive species and replacement with native species over an appropriate time period. We recommend that the City hold.a Letter of Credit for this work. FAHOMETUBLODEVELOPMENT SERVICESOURHAM REGIONVICKERING1i215 -1235 BAYLY 4.DOC 89 T I Barnett -4- July 3; 2007 18. Please replace sod in the majority of the 10 metre buffer with a native seed mix. A small strip of sod along the edge of the visitor parking area may be appropriate. We may have some minor adjustments to the species list and will respond shortly. We apologize for the delay. Conveyance of Valley Lands 19. The valley lands including the buffer should be conveyed to public ownership. This requirement may be included in the Site Plan Agreement. Sewer Connection 20. We are currently reviewing preliminary design for the proposed sanitary sewer crossing of the Pine Creek south of Radom Street, west of Douglas Avenue in Douglas Park. We. understand this sewer connection is required to service the San Francisco by the Bay development. The existing sewer. crossing, to be replaced, is located within an earthen embankment as it crosses the creek. The embankment itself is located on top of five corrugated steel pipe culverts. The culverts convey the Pine Creek and are perched at the downstream end. A pedestrian trail is located on the top of the embankment which connects Douglas Park to the townhouse complex at Radom Street. As currently proposed in the preliminary drawings, the new sewer line is to be constructed within the embankment, leaving the five culverts in place. Based upon our observations during a site visit on March 16, 2007, we note that the present preliminary proposal for the crossing (with the five culverts and embankment) has several significant ecological drawbacks: a. Hydraulics. Based upon our review of the profile of the Regional Storm Floodplain at this location, it is evident that there is a significant backwater behind the crossing due to the high embankment of this crossing as well as the Radom Street crossing. A more open crossing at this location could help to reduce the larger problem of the Pine Creek. Floodplain upstream north of Highway 401. b. Fish Passage, The perched culverts are a barrier to fish passage and prevent any movement of fish upstream of this location. C. Erosion. The location of the culverts is causing significant undercutting of the embankment and erosion of the downstream banks of the Pine Creek. The.culverts have created a large plunge pool downstream and have constrained the natural meander of the watercourse, preventing it from continuing to form naturally. d. Wildlife Passage. The culverts and embankment may impair wildlife passage along the Pine Creek valieylands. e. Maintenance/Replacement. It appears that the upstream end of the culverts regularly becomes blocked with detritus flowing down the creek. A larger opening may reduce this. The CSP culverts will eventually require repair or replacement. In addition, the new sewer infrastructure may be at risk from storm events. Therefore, it may be advantageous to avoid a future need to repair or replace the culverts with an improved design now. The proposed sanitary sewer improvements continue to utilize the present culvert/ embankment configuration of the crossing and do not resolve the issues identified above. New sewer infrastructure at this location using the present configuration precludes any improvement to the present situation in the near-term. Given this, we strongly encourage an alternate design be considered which would not utilize the culvert/embankment configuration F:\HOME\PUBLICOEVELOPMENT SERVICES\DURHAM REGION\PICKERING\1215 .1235 BAYLY 4.DOC 190 A FFACHAM ENT [REPORT A PD, ,`i'0 - 5 = July 3. 2002 T yler Barnett but would allow for improvements to the watercourse and valleylands. For example, it may be possible to provide for a siphon underneath the creek or a new, wider, open-footed culvert. TRCA staff is more than willing to discuss this matter further with the Region, City and proponent in order to arrive at a satisfactory solutipn. 7-RCA Permit Requirements '2 1The applicant has applied for an Ontario Regulation 166/06 permit for the development and new outfall. Upon final Site Plan approval, the applicant should submit three sets of the following drawings, revised as necessary, to TRCA: Drawing Nos. L-1, L-4 and L-7; Drawing Nos. GEO-1; ERS-1, SS-1, and SG1. In addition, a permit application will be required for the sewer crossing downstream. Recommendation In light of the above, we have no objection to the approval of the Site Plan application subject to the owner addressing Comment Nos. 2 to 16, above, to TRCA satisfaction, and the Owner agreeing in the Site Plan Agreement to the.following: 1. Owner to gratuitously convey the valleylands and buffer to the City of Pickering. 2. Owner to prepare and implement a Ravine Stewardship Plan for the valley slopes, to TRCA satisfaction. The Plan shall be prepared by a qualified Ecologist or Forestry specialist and include a plan and costing for staged- removal of invasive species and replacement with native species over an appropriate time period. 3.• Owner, shall provide a Letter of Credit to the City of Pickering for 100% of the cost of the Ravine Stewardship Plan. .4. Owner shall revise the Landscaping Plans to TRCA satisfaction. 5. Owner shall apply for and receive. a TRCA permit under Ontario Regulation 166/06. We request that the applicant respond in a cover letter addressing each comment above by number. We trust this is satisfactory. Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Steven H. Heuchert, MCIP, RPP, MRTPI Manager, Development Planning and Regulation Planning and Development Extension 5311 cc: Steven M. Warsh, Partner, S & R Development Group Limited (by e-mail) Stephen I. Fagyas, Commercial Focus Advisory Services Inc. (by e-mail) Bob Starr, City of Pickering (by e-mail) Peter Castellan, Region of Durham (bye-mail) F:IHOMEIPUBLICIDEVELOPMENT SERVICES\DURHAM REGIONIPICKERING\1215 -1235 BAYLY 4.DOC City o0 I KERI REPORT TO PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Report Number: PD 39-08 Date: October 6, 2008 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/07 Dalar Properties Limited. 1050 Squires Beach Road (Part of Lot 32 & Part of Block C, Plan M 1040) City of Pickering Recommendation: That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/07 submitted by Dalar Properties Limited, on lands being Part of Lot 32 & Part of Block C, Plan M 1040, City of Pickering, to amend the zoning of the subject property to add commercial recreational uses including a gymnastics facility, a dance studio, karate club and a soccer club, in addition to the currently permitted industrial uses be refused. Executive Summary: The applicant proposes to rezone the subject property, located on the northwest corner of Squires Beach Road and McKay Road to permit the establishment of commercial recreational uses, including a gymnastics facility, a dance studio, karate club and a soccer club, in addition to the currently permitted industrial uses (yard storage and heavy manufacturing). The applicant proposes to utilize the existing building, subject to site and building alterations/conversions to accommodate the requested commercial recreational uses. The Region is delegated review responsibility for compliance with Provincial Policy (matters of provincial interest applicable to the application) and has advised. that the applicant's proposal does not comply with the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Guideline D-2-Compatibility Between Sewage Treatment and Sensitive Land Uses recommended separation distance for residential or other sensitive land uses adjacent to sewage treatment facilities. The Region does not support the proposed commercial recreational uses at 1050 Squires Beach Road as this property is located within the recommended separation distance of the MOE Guideline D-2. In view of the Region's position on this matter, the proposed land use change is considered inappropriate for this location and it is recommended that the application be refused. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. 191 Report PD 39-08 SuIb: Dalar Properties Limited (A 11/07) . October 6, 2008 Page 2 Sustainability Implications: The applicant's proposal is aligned with the principle of adaptive reuse of buildings and utilization of existing buildings for additional purposes. Re-use of the site also takes advantage of existing infrastructure and retains an existing business within the City. However, as the proposed use is considered a sensitive land use under the MOE Guidelines and is within 150 metres of the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP), approval of the requested rezoning would not contribute to a healthy environment or represent responsible development. Background: 1.0 Introduction The owner of the property, Dalar Properties Limited proposes to develop the subject lands, located on the northwest corner of Squires Beach Road and McKay Road, to permit the establishment of commercial recreational uses, including a gymnastics facility, a dance studio, karate club and a soccer club, in addition to the currently permitted industrial uses (yard storage and heavy manufacturing, (see Location Map Attachment #1). The property currently supports an industrial building. The applicant proposes to utilize the existing building, subject to site and building alterations/conversions to accommodate the requested commercial recreational uses (see Applicant's Submitted Plan, Attachment #2) 2.0 Comments Received 2.1 At the January 7, 2008 Public Information Meeting No public comments were received at the Public Information Meeting (see text of Information Report and Meeting Minutes, Attachments #4 & #5). Report PD 39-08 Subiect: Dalar Properties Limited (A 11/07) October 6, 2008 Page 3 2.2 Agency Comments Region of Durham - a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was undertaken as a means of addressing the subsurface and ground water conditions on the site for environmental impact associated with a previous manufacturing facility; - the Phase II ESA indicates that the potential for significant contamination is considered low; - the ESA recommends environmental management be undertaken for the removal of a spill containment UST (Underground Storage Tank) and a hydraulic lift as well as the removal of all remaining drums of chemicals on the site; - a reliance letter and record of site condition is required; - municipal water supply and sanitary sewer services are available to the subject property (see Attachment #6); - the proposed recreational uses are within the recommended separation distance requirements of the MOE Guideline D-2-Compatibiltiy Between Sewage Treatment and Sensitive Land Uses; - the Region does not support the proposed uses at 1050 Squires Beach Road (see Attachment #7); 3.0 Discussion 3.1 The proposed recreational use does not comply with the MOE Guideline D-2-Compatibiltiy between Sewage Treatment and Sensitive Land Uses The existing zoning for the subject property permits yard storage and heavy manufacturing uses. The applicant intends to convert the existing building to accommodate a gymnastics facility, a dance studio, karate club and a soccer club, in addition to the currently permitted industrial uses. The Region is delegated review responsibility to indentify matters of provincial interest. 193 Report PD 39-08 October 6, 2008 Subject: Dalar Properties Limited (A 11/07) Page 4 194 The subject property is situated within the recommended separation distance of the MOE Guideline D-2 pertaining to Sewage Treatment and Sensitive Land Uses. The proposed uses are considered to be a sensitive receptor due to the public congregation nature of a gymnastics facility. Consequently such uses should not be permitted to locate within 150 metres of the Water Pollution Control Plant (see Attachment #3) The proposed uses may be sensitive to objectionable noise and/or odours from the WPCP, and it is not appropriate to locate these new land uses within this area. Further, if complaints occurred from the users of the recreational facility the MOE may find the WPCP to be out of compliance with the Environmental Protection Act. The change in zoning to add the requested uses increases the potential for future problems for both the recreational users and for the WPCP. The Region has advised that it does not support the application due to the property's location adjacent to the WPCP and has also requested that the City consider an Official Plan Policy to address land uses in this area of the City. This request will be considered through the City's review of its Official Plan. 3.2 Site Alterations would be required to accommodate the use if it was permitted If the property was not located within the MOE 150 meter radius of the WPCP and complied with the MOE Guideline, several site function issues would need to be addressed to accommodate the proposed recreational uses. The site would need to be redesigned to separate recreational use traffic from manufacturing/industrial traffic. Several site plan revisions would be required to address safety and site functioning issues including lighting, parking location and number of spaces, on site traffic, fencing, improved front yard landscaping, grading and stormwater management and building alterations. Despite requests to the owner for conceptual site designs to address the functioning of the site, to date, staff have not received any drawings for review. 3.3 An Order To Comply has been issued for the building construction and change of use The building on the subject site was converted to a gymnastics facility without City approvals. On January 23, 2008 an Order to Comply, for construction and change of use of a building without a permit, was issued by the City. Since the Order has not been complied with, the City is pursuing legal action. Report PD 39-08 Subiect- Dalar Properties Limited (A 11/07) Page 5 195 4.0 Applicant's Comments The applicant is aware of the contents of this report. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant's Conceptual Site Plan 3. 150 m Radius Map / WPCP 4. Text of Information Report No. 02-08 5. Minutes from January 7, 2008 Statutory Public Information Meeting 6. Agency Comment - Region of Durham Planning Department - Jan. 8/08 7. Agency Comment - Region of Durham Planning Department - Feb. 20 /08 Prepared By: Lynda Tayl r, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development eview LT: cs Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Cqpncil afnas'J. Quinn, RDMA, C ief Administrative Officer Approved/Endorsed By: Neil Ca roll, M , RPP Director, anning & Development r.2 October 6, 2008 I TT A CH %,.' Z ? eT #- I TO 196 FRPORT # PD?- ?_ Q a 0 x W z = o l- U < w w M a 0 W U 0! 0 N CLEM N S ROAD CLEMENTS ROAD d z U Q 0 W M C.N.R. N W K C7 N McKAY ROAD McKAY ROAD SUBJECT PROPERTY City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PLAN M1040, PT LOT 32,PT BILK C RP 40R-10559 PART 5,6 0 OWNER DALAR PROPERTIES LTD. DATE NOV. 30, 2007 DRAWN BY JB 7\ FILE No. A 011/07 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY RC AV aTsro netroEnterpriees Ino. and its suppliers. All right" Reserved. Not a Plan of e„rve,,. 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. A11 ri hts Reserved. Not o plan o/ Surve . PN-4 1-71 197 i i I I INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS SUBMITTED PLAN A 011/07 - DALAR PROPERTIES LTD. 130.3m TO AMEND THE ZONING TO ADD COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL USES, INCLUDING A GYMANSTICS FACILITY, A DANCE STUDIO, A KARATE CLUB, AND A SOCCER CLUB AS PERMITTED USES. d f z i•. Y co et I? { +Y THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN, SEPT. 17, 2007. I PARKING McKAY ROAD ANT ON fP YOe o,gN, p ++ C E cc d Q a? O 98 z 0 ° ° T- 111 J Q U d Q Q co dYON ??o l3NOd p W C C Y C Q a co J ° s CV iNtlO NY515 g w a s ? ... L.L. c ? W a Q c o p a ? 0 c L U c c 0 0 2 o O ? o a O L N a -- o N ' o OYON MNM AN31M)911M)11 / y/ L m oroa ?? C C 0 LO t r 3 8 - ? Z ° o CL L rooae OL z O ? _ U C co O.. d _ I s 0 O 0 e J z ?_ CLry Do I I I I PICKERING INFORMATION REPORT NO. 02-08 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF January 7, 2008 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Zoning Amendment Application A 11/07 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road Part of Lot 32 & Part of Block C, Plan M-1040 (Part 5 & 6, 40R-10559) City of Pickering 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION the subject property is located on the northwest corner of Squires Beach Road and McKay Road (see Attachment #1 - Location Map); a one-storey industrial warehouse building currently exists on the property; the property is surrounded by a mix of warehousing, trucking and manufacturing uses to the north, south, east and west. 2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL the applicant has requested to amend the existing zoning to permit the establishment of commercial recreational uses on the subject property including a gymnastics facility, dance studio, karate club and soccer club; the proposal would utilize the existing building, subject to minor alterations / conversions to accommodate the requested uses; the applicant's submitted plan is provided for reference (see Attachment #2). 199 -11 Il To ' ..... _ Information Report No. 02-08? 0 Page 2 700 3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING 3.1 Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as Urban Area - Employment Area; establishes that designated Employment Areas shall be used for manufacturing, . assembly and processing of goods, service industries, research and development facilities, warehousing, business parks; the subject application will be assessed against the policies and the provisions of the Durham Region Official Plan during the further processing of the application; 3.2 Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as Employment Area - General Employment within the Brock Industrial Neighbourhood; permits manufacturing, assembly, research and development, warehousing, storage of goods and materials, offices as a minor component to an industrial operation, limited personal service uses serving the area, retail sales as a minor component to an industrial operation (i.e. sales outlets); also permits community, cultural and recreational uses with similar performance characteristics that are more appropriately located within the Employment Area; 3.3 Compendium Document to the Official Plan there are no current development guidelines specific to the Brock Industrial Neighbourhood; 3.4 Zoning By-law the subject lands are zoned "M2S" Yard Storage and Manufacturing Zone by By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 61/74 and 4824/86; a zoning by-law amendment is required to implement the applicant's proposed uses on the property; the applicant has requested that the permitted uses for the subject property be expanded to include commercial recreational uses such as a gymnastics facility, dance studio, karate club and soccer club. 4.0 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION 4.1 Resident Comments - no objections or concerns received to date; ATTACHMENT ? 70 REPORT # PD Information Report No. 02-08 4.2 Agency Comments Toronto and Region Conservation Authority - no objections (see Attachment #3); Page 3 4.3 Staff Comments 5.0 - in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: • reviewing the application in terms of its level of sustainable development components; • reviewing the proposed development in terms of compatibility with, and sensitivity to, surrounding lands; • reviewing the adequacy and location of on-site parking to support commercial recreational uses on the property • reviewing the driveway/internal road pattern to ensure appropriate vehicle flow; • reviewing the proposal to ensure that adequate information is provided, that technical requirements are met and that the proposed site design is appropriate and pedestrian friendly for the requested additional uses; - the Planning & Development Department will conclude its position on the application and its design after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public. 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-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 City Clerk. 201 ATTACHMENT # TO ?EIauRT ? PD Information Report No. 02-08 Page 4 202 6.0 OTHER INFORMATION 6.1 Appendix No. I list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing 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 Pickering Planning & Development Department; the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department received a Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment with the Zoning Amendment Application; the need for additional information will be determined through the review and circulation of the applicant's current proposal. 6.3 Company Principal - the owner of the subject property is Dalar Properties Limited.; - the applicant and company principal is Dennis Large. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Rick Cefaratti Planner II RC:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Lynda Taylor, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review .A TlA {?Ji1-fJ7 #,? ? TO REPORT # PD ` c ?. ...? APPENDIX NO. I TO INFORMATION REPORT NO. 02-08 COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS (1) none received COMMENTING AGENCIES (1) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, December 7, 2007 COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS (1) none received ?03 2 0 RE OR ?i Pb 39- ___ -----?-?.- Excerpts from City o0 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, January 7, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Pickles (II) PART W- PLANNING INFORMATION MEETING 2. Information Report No. 02-08 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/07 Dalar Properties Limited 1050 Squires Beach Road Part of Lot 32 & Part of Block C, Plan M-1040 (Part 5 & 6, 40R-10559) City of Pickering A public information meeting was held under the Planning Act, for the purpose of informing the public with respect to an application submitted by Dalar Properties Limited for property municipally known as 1050 Squires Beach Road. Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. She also noted that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City before a by-law is passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Rick Cefaratti, Planner II, gave an overview of zoning amendment application A 11/07. No members of the public in attendance at the public information meeting spoke in support or opposition to application A 11/07. 2 08 January 8, 2008 Ir • Rick Cefaratti, Planner II Planning and Development Department Sent.via email to: City of Pickering refarattia-city.pickering.on.ca One The Esplanade The Regional Pickering, Ontario Municipality L1 V 6K7 of Durham Planning Department Mr. Cefaratti: 605 ROSSLAND ROAD E 4" FLOOR Re: Zoning Amendment Application A11/07 P.O. BOX 623 WHITBY,ON L1N6A3 Applicant: Dalar Properties Limited 'q05) 668-7711 Location: 1050 Squires Beach Road ax: (905) 666-6208 Municipality: City of Pickering E-mail: planning@ region.durham.on.ca We have reviewed this application to amend the zoning on the above www.region.durham.on.ca noted property. The following comments are offered for your A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP consideration. Commissioner of Planning The purpose of the application is to permit commercial recreational uses on the subject property including a gymnastics facility, dance studio, karate club and soccer club. Regional Official Plan The lands subject to this application are designated "Employment Area" in the Durham Regional Official Plan. The examples of permitted uses in the Employment Area policies of the Regional Official Plan illustrate the range of activities permitted. Specific uses, such as those proposed, may be defined in the area municipal zoning by-law. Provincial Policies & Delegated Review Responsibilities This application has been screened in accordance with the terms of the provincial plan review responsibilities. A Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), prepared by AMEC Limited, was undertaken as a means of addressing the subsurface and ground water conditions on the subject property for environmental impact associated with a previous manufacturing facility. The Phase II ESA indicates that the potential for significant contamination on the subject lands is considered low. The report recommends environmental management be undertaken for the removal of a spill containment UST and hydraulic lift as well as the removal of all remaining drums of chemicals on site. An agreement "service Excellence for our Communities" 205 206 between the applicant and the City of Pickering should contain the necessary provisions to ensure the implementation of the recommendations in the report. As per Regional policy, a reliance letter and a Record of Site Condition prepared and submitted in accordance with Ontario Regulation 153/04 should be submitted for all development applications that have undergone a Phase II ESA. A holding symbol is encouraged to be used in conjunction with the required zone category and not removed until such time as the Region's requirements including; the submission of a reliance agreement letter and a Record of Site Condition has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region. Reaional Services Municipal water supply and sanitary sewer services are available to the subject property. Please contact me should you have any questions or require any additional information regarding this matter. Gm? Dwayne Campbell, Project Planner Current Planning Copy (via email): Regional Works Department - Pete Castellan -7 , February 20, 2008 Rick Cefaratti, Planner II Planning and Development Department Sent via email to: City of Pickering refarattia-city.pickering.on.ca One The Esplanade The Regional Pickering, Ontario Municipality L1 V 6K7 of Durham Planning Department Mr. Cefaratti: 605 ROSSLAND ROAD E 4"' FLOOR Re: Zoning Amendment Application A09/07 and A11/07 P.O. BOX 623 WHITBY,ON L1N6A3 Location: 1050 and 1100 Squires Beach Road 'q05) 668-7711 Municipality: City of Pickering 3x: (905) 666-6208 E-mail: planning@ region.durhamrham.on. ca Further to our comments of January 8, 2008 for the two above-noted ry zoning amendment applications, the Regional Works Department has www.regioh.durham.on.ca provided additional comments as the subject properties are within the A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP vicinity of the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). Commissioner of Planning The Works Department has indicated that the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Guideline D-2 - Compatibility Between Sewage Treatment and Sensitive Land Uses provides recommended separation distances for all development or redevelopment applications for residential or other sensitive land uses adjacent to sewage treatment facilities. The proposed commercial recreational uses at 1050 Squires Beach Road are within the recommended separation distance requirements of MOE Guideline D-2. The guideline also advises that a separation distance of greater than 150 metres may be required on an individual basis. The proposed commercial recreational uses at 1100 Squires Beach Road are outside of the recommended separation distance but are within the vicinity of the Duffin Creek WPCP approaching the recommended separation distance. As the proposed commercial recreational uses are within or approaching the recommended separation distance of MOE Guideline D-2, the Region does not support the proposed commercial recreational uses at 1050 and 1100 Squires Beach Road. The proposed industrial and office uses may be permitted. "Service Exceftence for our Communities" 207 208 J( Please contact me should you have any questions or require any additional information regarding this matter. P ? Dwayne Campbell, Project Planner Current Planning Copy (via email): Rich Tindall - Regional Works Department Pete Castellan - Regional Planning Department o¢? 20 9 PA--C-!WKE!W November 17, 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION 1) Councillor Pickles and Councillor McLean gave notice that they will at this meeting of Council be presenting a motion as follows: SECURITY AND SAFETY AT GO STATIONS WHEREAS there are over 200,000 passengers on GO trains and buses every weekday; and WHEREAS there are about 50,000 parking spots available at GO parking lots used by 12 million vehicles per year; and WHEREAS GO Transit indicated that there are 350 reported incidents of theft and vandalism annually; however, GO Transit has no process for riders to report thefts and vandalism or GO to track; and WHEREAS media reports and first hand information of many theft and vandalism incidents at GO Stations, including Pickering, are unreported or unrecorded by GO Transit and police; and WHEREAS many visitors indicate that they have been the victim or know someone who has been the victim of incidents ranging from vandalism and personal property theft to vehicle theft. Some cars are reported with missing lights, wheels and airbags. One media report noted that GO Transit parking lots are "auto parts stores" for brazen thieves. NOW THEREFORE although GO Transit has made attempts to improve safety and security, more needs to be done NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT The City of Pickering requests, that GO Transit put in place the following, measures: provide better education to riders to protect themselves and their personal property establish a formal reporting and tracking process through GO Transit staff and online for riders to report incidents and that through advertising; GO Transit make riders aware of the processes to report incidents to GO Transit and police - that GO Transit record and report all incidents and compile and share this information with the local police services and to riders through its newsletters and online to municipalities in which it operates 210 - GO Transit increase staff and enforcement at GO Stations and pedestrian and parking areas to improve safety and security of property. - improve lighting, particularly in well used pedestrian areas - increase closed circuit television cameras - other safety and security measures as appropriate This resolution be shared with Durham municipalities, the GO Transit Board, Durham Regional Police Services and MPP's for Ajax-Pickering and Scarborough East- Pickering. 2) Councillor O'Connell and Councillor McLean gave notice that they will at this meeting of Council be presenting a motion as follows: DURHAM REGION ANTI-VIOLENCE INTERVENTION STRATEGY WHEREAS The Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services is committed to ensuring that Ontario's communities are supported and protected by law enforcement and public safety systems that are safe, secure, effective, efficient and accountable and therefore proposed the creation of an Anti Violence Intervention Strategy within communities in the GTA to help combat gun related violence and other street level crime; and WHEREAS the aim of the Anti Violence Intervention Strategy is to utilize intelligence already gathered to identify areas within a community where high incidents of gang activity or violence have or are likely to occur and to take a proactive approach aimed at reducing violence, increasing community safety and improving the quality of life for members of the community, who have been impacted by this type of criminal violence; and WHEREAS in 2007 the Ministry gave the approval for $510,000 to be provided to the Durham Regional Police Service to create an Anti Violence Strategy within Durham Region. The Durham Region Anti Violence Strategy (DRAVIS) was created and became operational in early 2008; and WHEREAS the City of Pickering and it's residents view crime and crime prevention to be of the utmost importance and contribute to a more sustainable community through Sustainable Pickering lens of healthy society; and WHEREAS it is widely believed that crime prevention cannot be accomplished without the community's involvement and understanding, which is at the core of the DRAVIS program. Officers are deployed in uniform and maintain a high level of visibility within the community by patrolling areas in marked patrol cars, on foot and during warmer weather on police bicycles. Additionally officers assigned to DRAVIS distribute, to area residents, specially printed business cards outlining the DRAVIS program and empowering the community with knowledge in order to be involved in the prevention of neighbourhood crime; and WHEREAS the DRAVIS program has been a successful program in Durham Region with the prevention of crime, empowering community members and creating more visibility of our Police Services. To date there have been 110 DRAVIS initiatives completed in Durham Region and has resulted in 2098 street checks, 507 arrests, and 16 weapons seized including 1 firearm; NOW THEREFORE The City of Pickering resolves to Minister Bartolucci, Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services that the City of Pickering supports and requests that the Anti Violence Intervention Strategy program is continued in Durham Region and that continual funding be provided to Durham Regional Police Services in order for the operation of DRAVIS to continue throughout our region and ensure crime prevention initiatives are continued. AND FURTHER a copy of this resolution be forwarded to Durham Regional Council and all Durham municipal Councils for endorsement to be forwarded to Minister Bartolucci. 211 City 00 PI-CKERING November 17, 2008 BY-LAWS 6909/08 Being a by-law to exempt Blocks 4, 6 and 8 on Plan 40M- 2339, Pickering, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. (By-law attached) 6910/08 Being a by-law to amend Traffic & Parking By-law No. 6604/05, to provide for the prohibition of on street parking. [Refer to Executive Page 61, as amended] 6911/08 Being a by-law to authorize the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures therefor in the amount of $400,000. [Refer to Executive Pages 44 and 45] 6912/08 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law 3036, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham in Part of Road Allowance between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1, Parts 2, 3, 5-9, 11-13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 24, 26-30, 32, 33& 35, 40R-25121, in the City of Pickering (A 11/08) [Refer to Planning Pages 77-83] 6913/08 Being a by-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1943 as public highways. [Refer to Planning Page 70] 6914/08 Being a by-law to dedicate Block 26, Plan 40M-1920 as public highway. [Refer to Planning Page 69] 6915/08 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing parking restrictions in private property (By-law attached) 212 MEMO To: Debi Wilcox City Clerk From: Denise Bye Supervisor, Property & Development Services Copy: Director, Planning & Development Subject: Request for Part Lot Control By-law Owner: Silver Lane Estates Inc. Blocks 4, 6 and 8, Plan 40M-2339, City of Pickering File: PLC.40M-2339.4 October 20, 2008 On February 5, 2007, By-law 6725/07 was enacted and registered exempting Blocks 4, 6 and 8, Plan 40M-2339 from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act, thus permitting the owner to convey the individual units into separate ownership. That By-law is in effect until December 31, 2008. We have recently received notice from the owner that there are units in Blocks 4, 6 and 8, Plan 40M-2339 that have yet to be transferred into separate ownership (closings scheduled in 2009) and therefore another Part Lot Control By-law is required to ensure legal conveyance of those units. Attached hereto is a location map and a draft By-law, enactment of which will exempt the remaining portions of these Blocks from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. This draft By-law is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for November 17, 2008. 21 4 Sr ELIZABETH SETON SEPARATE SCHOOL 0 a o STROUDS LANE 0 0 T. ST RO I- Z LLJ ODS a U NE o E Ge u z O O J a ?L P ?RE?jO BL C Z BLO K4 ~ w w GATE DRIVE c ~ J ZRP?? FOXWOOD 0 §CR BL CK 6 SUF LI U 1 ISION PINEVIEW LANE n O G AUTUMN CRESCENT C.N.R. DRIVE SHEPPARD AVENUE LL? I AS 0 p CHOOL 0 TREET o y o -? y ? O z o STREET Q City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION BLOCKS 4, 6 & 8, 40M-2339 0 OWNER SILVER LANE ESTATES INC. DATE OCT. 17, 2008 DRAWN BY JB 7\ LFI LE No. PART LOT CONTROL SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY DB N , nel EnterpriseInc. nd its supplier.. All rights Reserved. Not a plan f . ?eY. 05 MPAC and its suppliers. All light. Reserved. Not a P. n of Surve PN 21 5 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. r Being a by-law to exempt Blocks 4, 6 and 8 on Plan 40M-2339, Pickering, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. WHEREAS pursuant to the provisions of section 50 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, the Council of a municipality may by By-law provide that section 50(5) of the Act does not apply to certain lands within a plan of subdivision designated in the By-law; NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Section 50(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, does not apply to the lands described as follows: Blocks 4, 6 and 8, Plan 40M-2339, Pickering. 2. This By-law shall remain in force and effect from the date of the passing of this By-law and shall expire on December 31, 2009. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 17th day of November, 2008. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk PLC.40M-2339.4 216 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 6915/08 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the Purpose of Enforcing Parking Restrictions on Private Property WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(I) of the Police Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.15, as amended, a municipal council may appoint persons to enforce the by-laws of the municipality; and WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(2) of the said Act, municipal by-law enforcement officers are peace officers for the purpose of enforcing municipal by-laws; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the following people be hereby appointed as municipal law enforcement officers in and for the City of Pickering in order to ascertain whether the provisions of By-law 2359/87 are obeyed and to enforce or carry into effect the said By-law and are hereby authorized to enter at all reasonable times upon lands municipally known as: a) 1210 & 1235 Radom St., 1310 Fieldlight Blvd., 1915 Denmar Rd., 1331,1350, 1360 and 1885 Glenanna Rd., 1958 and 1975 Rosefield Rd., 1525/35 Diefenbaker Court, 1530/40,1625 and 1635 Pickering Parkway, 1000/1400 The Esplanade Casitas Millenium, 925 Bayly St., 1650 and 1865 Kingston Road 1775 Valley Farm Road, 1995 Pinegrove, 76-1555 Finch Avenue, 1295 Wharf Street, 1867 Kingston Road and 1100 Begly Street. Cristina Ciulla Robert Chayer Robert Newlands Gaurang Patel Wolodymyr Prezlata Rajkumar Thirunathan 2. The authority granted in section 1 hereto is specifically limited to that set out in section 1, and shall not be deemed, at any time, to exceed the authority set out in section 1. 3. This appointment shall expire upon the person listed in section 1a) ceasing to be an employee of Group 4 Securicor or upon Group 4 Securicor ceasing to be agents for 1210 & 1235 Radom St., 1310 Fieldlight Blvd., 1915 Denmar Rd., 1331,1350, 1360 and 1885 Glenanna Rd., 1958 and 1975 Rosefield Rd., 1525/35 Diefenbaker Court, 1530/40,1625 and 1635 Pickering Parkway, 21 7 By-law No. 6915/08 Continued Page 2 1000/1400 The Esplanade Casitas Millenium, 925 Bayly St., 1650 and 1865 Kingston Road 1775 Valley Farm Road, 1995 Pinegrove, 76-1555 Finch Avenue, 1295 Wharf Street, 1867 Kingston Road and 1100 Begly Street whichever shall occur first 4. The provisions of this by-law shall come into force and take effect on the day of the final passing thereof. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 17th day of November, 2008. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk City o? PICKERIN Attendees: Jim Simpson, Chair Theresa Abernethy, Member Shirley Curran, Member Richard Fleming, Member Shawna Foxton, Vice-Chair Gordon Zimmerman, Member Linda Roberts, (Recording Secretary) Absent: Councillor Johnson Karen Emmink, Member Pamlea Fuselli Minutes / Meeting Summary Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee September 23, 2008 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 1.0 Welcome Jim Simpson welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked the Committee to think about having a December meeting, as one has not yet been scheduled. He suggested the possibility of having a meeting with dinner to follow. 2.0 Agenda review/approval of minutes A brief discussion took place with respect to Pamela's resignation. The Committee questioned whether a letter had been sent thanking Pamela for her support. Moved by Theresa Abernethy Seconded by Shirley Curran That the minutes of the July 22, 2008 be adopted. CARRIED 3.0 New and Unfinished Business 3.1 Open Discussion Goals/Plans for 2009 Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items /Status (include deadline as appropriate) Jim asked for approval to hold this discussion at the end of the meeting, that we go through the other agenda items first. 3.2 Update on "Other Properties of Interest" Municipal Heritage Register Jim thanked Gordon Zimmerman for his efforts and all the hard work he has provided to date on this project. Gordon provided a brief overview of the listing, clarifying the areas on the map which the listing incorporates. A general discussion ensued with respect to the heritage register with the following recommendations being made: • Invite a Planning representative out to our next meeting Linda to action to provide background information with respect to having a district declared as a heritage district • Duffin heights should be the next area to survey for the registry • Shirley and Gordon to do survey of this area • Jim suggested each Committee member take a turn going out with Gordon to see what is involved in placing a property on the registry list, so they could in turn go out to help take some of the burden off of Gordon - he offered to go out this weekend with Shirley and Gordon Next steps: • Look over the list and map out for 2009 what we need to pursue for designation • Prioritize and identify properties • Discussed time frames involved for having properties designated • Churches may be easier to designate, as less research would be involved • Correspond with Planning to inform them of the listing the Committee has created and that we would like to look into having Dunbarton declared as a heritage district Discussion took place with respect to ORC properties; Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) • What can be done to identify these properties • Important to get addresses of properties owned by ORC onto the list • Touch base with Planning - Gordon to action Memo received from Debi Wilcox with respect to the Heritage Registry. Copies were handed out to the members who reviewed the draft letter which is to go out to everyone listed on the register. The Committee approved the letter. The Committee also questioned the Planning & Development comments and requested clarification. It was noted that the Committee can merely place properties on the registry, the decision to designate is up to Council. 4.0 Correspondence 4.1 Official Plan Document Copy of the Official Plan Document was received for information and given to Shawna for our records. 4.2 Ontario Heritage Trust Letter received from Ontario Heritage Trust seeking nominations for Young Heritage Leaders was received for information. 5.0 Other Business 5.1 Heritage Pickering Brochure General discussion ensued on the Heritage Pickering Brochure. Further information was provided in order to obtain a quote: • Four colour glossy • minimum of 500 to 1,000 copies • What would the set up costs be • It was suggested we try to get a price based on what our budget allows ($2,000.00) and to inform them that we will be ordering additional brochures in the future. Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items /Status (include deadline as appropriate) CD was given back to Shawna, and Jim advised that he could Linda to submit for make the minor changes and email Linda. quote 5.2 July 22, 2008 Minutes It was suggested that the Committee reopen the July 22, 2008 minutes for discussion. Moved by Richard Fleming Seconded by Shirley Curran That the Committee reopen the July 22, 2008 minutes of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee. CARRIED Moved by Richard Fleming Seconded by Theresa Abernethy That the second paragraph in Item 3.0 under New and Unfinished Business in the July 22, 2008 minutes be removed. CARRIED Moved by Shirley Curran Seconded by Richard Fleming That the Committee accept the amended minutes from the July 22, 2008 meeting of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee. CARRIED 5.3 Office Space Jim inquired on behalf of the Committee as to whether the City could provide space in the form of a cubicle with a filing cabinet. He expressed the need for space to store files as well as having a central area for Committee members to use. 5.4 Advertising Richard suggested we have pictures taken in front of Gordon Willson's display for Snap Pickering. It was the consensus of the Committee that we have the Chair, Vice-Chair along with Gordon Willson be in the picture. This would be a good way to romote the Heritage Pickering Committee to the public at no Page 4 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items /Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) cost. Another suggestion was to have a group picture taken in front of Pamela Fuselli's house for the Pickering Advertiser. The Committee returned to Item 3.1 on the agenda for open discussion: Goals/Plans for 2009 Jim provided the Committee with an open discussion forum Richard to action through the use of a powerpoint presentation on the Goals and Plans for the Committee for 2009. He provided proposed focus items and areas of interest for our last three meetings this year. Also discussed were our focus items for 2009. Items touched on included the challenges we face, areas of interest, pet projects. Jim asked each Committee member what their main area of interest was as a member of the Committee, and tried to determine the best areas with which to place each member that would best utlilize their area of expertise, while at the same time keeping their interests in mind. Jim informed the Committee that he would be providing a copy of his presentation to all Committee members as well as the City Clerk. 6.0 Next meeting Tuesday, October 28, 2008 7.0 Adjournment Moved by Richard Fleming Seconded by Shirley Curran That the meeting be adjourned. CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 9:00 m. Copy: City Clerk Page 5 CORP0228-2/02 City 00 PICKERING Minutes I Meeting Summary Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee October 28, 2008 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Attendees: Jim Simpson, Chair Theresa Abernethy, Member Shirley Curran, Member Richard Fleming, Member Gordon Zimmerman, Member Debi Wilcox, City Clerk Linda Roberts, (Recording Secretary) Absent: Councillor Johnson Shawna Foxton, Vice-Chair Karen Emmink, Member Pamlea Fuselli Item / Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items / Status (include deadline as appropriate) 1.0 Welcome Prior to the start of the business items on the agenda, Jim Simpson provided the Committee with an overview of the City of Pickering's website where the Heritage Pickering Committee is listed. He showed the members how to access all the information contained within the Heritage Pickering's listing. Some suggestions were made: • More photos be added • Provide more links • Update info as we develop our 2009 workplan • Use as a portal out to the community • Provide a photo of each designated property on our listing • Two separate links on website - PDF format Jim questioned whether the City had the means to monitor the number of hits to our website link. Debi to confirm Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & 'Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 2.0 Approval of Minutes Moved by Theresa Abernethy Seconded by Richard Fleming That the minutes of September 23, 2008 be adopted. CARRIED 3.0 New and Unfinished Business 3.1 Update on the Municipal Register Debi Wilcox, City Clerk provided the Committee with an update on the Municipal Register. She acknowledged all the hard work done by Gordon Zimmerman with the help of John Sabean. She informed the Committee that 88 letters had been sent out with a response date of October 24th. To date 22 responses have been received. Five have responded in favour while 17 have declined to be on the list. Debi questioned whether the Committee would like to have a follow-up done for those who have not responded. The Committee agreed to a phone follow-up. It was also agreed that in the event someone would like further information, we could provide them with a name and number of a Committee member in order to help respond to their questions. Gordon Zimmerman noted that Mr. Duncan would be a good resource person for the Greenwood School House. 3.2 Review of Working Discussion - Action Plan Jim provided a reminder to everyone with respect to their areas of interest as discussed at the September meeting. Everyone was in agreement that these remain the same. Gordon Zimmerman provided an update on the day he spent on Whitevale Road taking photos and filling out the forms and noted that the Duffin Neighbourhood would be next on the list of areas to do. Discussion ensued with respect to the lands owned by the Shirley to contact Ontario Realty Corporation. The City Clerk provided Shirley with the contact information of the Cultural Heritage Specialist from the Ontario Realty Corporation. It was suggested we invite her out to a meeting. Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) Action Items / Status (include deadline as appropriate) Jim suggested the Committee look into purchasing a display booth that would be specific to Heritage Pickering, possibly similar to what the Library has • There is a budget of $1,000 for this - to be used prior to year end • Request the City's graphic artist to prepare a sketch for our next meeting • Any ideas for a booth can be emailed to Jim Simpson • Prepare a rough draft for next meeting Debi to obtain quote • Use our brochure and website info for background for display board information • Should be user friendly and self explanatory • Background map highlighting areas of interest Discussion ensued with respect to the possibility of having the current designated heritage district expanded. The Committee would like to see the area of Whitevale which currently ends at Sideline 26, extended to the next street past Brock Road (the 16th id li I h k i h Pl i h d Linda to check with s e ne). t was suggeste we c ec w ann ng on t e t Planning criteria for extending an existing area. Jim thanked Gordon for taking him out and showing him what is involved with respect to placing properties of interest on the listing. He provided the Committee with an overview of his meeting with the City of Pickering's Chief Administrative Officer, Thomas Quinn. He advised the Committee that the City of Pickering is looking at acquiring additional land to enhance the Pickering Museum Village. Discussion ensued with questions about the possibility of moving the existing buildings in order to preserve them, and who would incur the costs for this. It was suggested a meeting with Councillor McLean should take Debi to set up meeting place to further explore this issue. Gordon Zimmerman informed the Committee that he had attended the Durham Region Official Plan open house. He noted that the Region really has no say in Heritage matters and wondered if the City's Planning Department could explain any impact on Heritage Pickering that Metrolinx and the Airport Debi to arrange could possibly have. Jim requested we obtain a status report on the airport. It was suggested possibly a conference call with Planning could take place for further discussion. Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 3.3 Review of Bonnie Littley's Open House Jim thanked Shirley for attending the Open House and provided the Committee with an overview of his presentation. 3.4 Review of Membership Requirements Debi reminded the Committee of the need to resubmit applications for appointment on the Committee. She noted the Committee has had two resignations and a report indicating an increase in membership to 11 is going to Council in November for approval. Application forms were available at the meeting, as well as on the City's website. 4.0 Correspondence 4.1 Ontario Heritage Matters Ontario Heritage Matters publication was received for information. 4.2 Community Heritage Ontario Copies of the Community Heritage Ontario quarterly publication were provided to members present. 4.3 Randy Woods Letter of Introduction received from Randy Woods, who specializes in flooring restoration, was received for information. The letter was passed onto Shirley Curran. 5.0 Other Business 5.1 Doors Open Symposium Jim noted the change in date for the Ontario Heritage Trust Doors Open symposium. It will now be held on November 21, 2008. The deadline for registration is November 14, 2008. Please email Linda Roberts if you wish to register for this event. Page 4 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items/ Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 5.2 Status of Brochure Linda will email Shawna to check on the brochure. Linda to action 5.3 Desk Space at City of Pickerinq Jim inquired about the possibility of having space available to Debi to follow up Heritage Pickering for record keeping as well as desk space to work at. Debi noted that a request had been made to the Facilities Section and will follow up on this. 5.4 Christmas Discussion took place with respect to choosing a date for a Christmas dinner. It was decided that Tuesday December Stn would be a suitable date and that Pamela and Karen be invited to attend as well. 5.5 Walk of Fame Jim requested this be laced on the November agenda Richard to report 6.0 Next meeting Tuesday, November 25, 2008 7.0 Adjournment Moved by Shirley Curran Seconded by Gordon Zimmerman That the meeting be adjourned. CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 8:50 m. Copy: City Clerk Page 5 CORP0228-2/02 City co Fr"V t-qVU JPLJIL%4-"^-u Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes OCT 2 4 2008 Wednesday, October 1, 2008 7:01 pm Main Committee Room PRESENT: Kevin Ashe David Johnson - Chair Susan Kular Eric Newton - Vice-Chair ALSO PRESENT: Ross Pym, Secretary-Treasurer Jean Finn, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer ABSENT: Keith Wilkinson (1) ADOPTION OF AGENDA Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Susan Kular That the agenda for the Wednesday, October 1, 2008 meeting be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (II) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Kevin Ashe That the minutes of the 12th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, September 10, 2008 be adopted as amended. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 1 City a? (III) REPORTS 1. P/CA 39/08 - 836170 Ontario Limited 770 McKay Road (Part Lot 18, Range 3 B.F.C. Part 1, 40R-905) City of Pickering Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, October 1, 2008 7:01 pm Main Committee Room The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, to permit a reduced parking setback of 1.5 metres from a proposed south property line, to permit an existing 0 metre parking setback from the road allowance and to recognize 25 percent of the required parking to be located in the front yard, whereas the by-law requires side yard parking to be setback 7.5 metres, a minimum parking setback of 3.0 metres from a road allowance, and a maximum 20 percent of the required parking in the front yard. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain approval from the Region of Durham Land Division Committee to sever the southern portion of the subject property. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending the application be partially approved subject to conditions and to refuse the parking setback from the street line. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control expressing no concerns. Written comments were also received from the City's Economic Development in support of the application. Charles Young, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Charles Young explained the application and stated that the existing site conditions have been in existence at this location for 35 years and he does not see why it is an issue now. A Committee Member asked the Secretary-Treasurer if the parking spaces could be reduced from ten spaces to eight spaces, or if there was room to replace the two parking spaces. The Committee discussed dividing the recommendation in order to deal with the refusal part of the motion separately. 2 City o? P1 Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Susan Kular Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, October 1, 2008 7:01 pm Main Committee Room That application P/CA 38/08 by 836170 Ontario Limited, be APPROVED on the grounds that the reduced parking setback of 1.5 metres, and 25 percent of the required parking to be located in the front yard are minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the conditions listed below and recommends REFUSAL for the existing 0 metre parking setback from the road allowance as this variance is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and is considered a major variance: 1. That these variances apply only to the existing conditions on the proposed severed parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That the applicant obtains approval from the Region of Durham Land Division Committee for the proposed severance within two years of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the applicant submits a revised Site Plan to reflect a parking area with a 3.0 metre minimum setback from the road allowance with a maximum of ten parking spaces located in the front yard within one year of the date of this decision, or-this decision shall become null and void Vote Kevin Ashe opposed David Johnson in favour Susan Kular in favour Eric Newton in favour CARRIED 3 City o? Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, October 1, 2008 7:01 pm Main Committee Room 2. P/CA 40/08 - P. & E. Hazime 969 Gablehurst Crescent (Lot 90, Plan 40M-1390) City of Pickering The applicants request relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1826/84 to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 2.2 metres to a covered deck and to permit a maximum lot coverage of 39 percent, whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres and a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent for all buildings and/or structures on the property. The applicants request approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a proposed covered deck. The subject property has an existing rear deck partially covered and enclosed. The owner has applied for a building permit for the proposed covered deck in order to complete the construction. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Supervisor expressing no concerns. Written comments were also received from Ralph Stevens & Kimberley Kernohan of 968 Gablehurst Crescent in support of the application. A form letter signed by thirteen surrounding neighbours was received in support of the application. Paul & Elizabeth Hazime, owners, were present to represent the application. Debbie & Frank Monaco of 971 Gablehurst Crescent were present in objection to the application. Paul Hazime explained the application and his reasons for a covered deck. Debbie Monaco expressed concerns related to drainage, the height of the structure, aesthetically unappealing structure and loss of property value. She submitted a picture to the Committee. A Committee Member requested that a third condition be included in the decision stating that the applicants should demonstrate proper drainage measures for the proposed construction in the permit plans. 4 Citq a? Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, October 1, 2008 7:01 pm Main Committee Room Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Susan Kular That application P/CA 40/08 by P. & E. Hazime, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed 2.2 metres rear yard depth and 39 percent lot coverage to a proposed covered deck are minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed covered deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That the applicants obtain a building permit for the proposed construction within two years of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. The applicants should demonstrate proper drainage measures for the proposed construction in the permit plans. 3. The applicants should demonstrate proper drainage measures for the proposed construction in the permit plans. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 5 Cctq o? wMN PICKEF24G Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, October 1, 2008 7:01 pm Main Committee Room (IV) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Eric Newton That the 13th meeting of 2008 the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:34 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, October 22, 2008. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Oi?L(7Z_,7U0g Da Assistt t Secretary-Treasurer 6 City 00 PICKERING Minutes / Meeting Summary Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee Thursday, October 23, 2008 2-4 pm Pickering City Hall, Main Committee Room One The Esplanade Attendees: Doug Dickerson, Chair Jennifer O'Connell, City Councillor, Ward 1 David Pickles, City Councillor, Ward 3 Bill McLean, Regional Councillor, Ward 2 Tom Melymuk, Director, Office of Sustainability Neil Carroll, Director, Planning & Development Department Shawna Mutton, Coordinator, Community Sustainability Jack McGinnis, Durham Sustain Ability Renee Michaud, Councillors' Office, Recording Secretary Guest: Lynn Winterstein, Manager, Marketing & Business Development f Details & Discassi?, i nC c ' ? ,'? ? W y F s f d i ? ma } 1c i?ntuns / SO(Q$ P K . l dli ? d e s • f # ?R um iscuss r ry o ) ( ?r k: 7 r I ? C k l y rr c ne a pa ry?e?}Q ? B r ro l7a r ?1 A i1 x . -, p 1. Welcome Doug Dickerson 2. Website Tom Mel muk' Tom mentioned that they have completed the preliminary Lynn Winterstein - research for website consultants for the proposed redesign. guest The main issues were finding consultants who are knowledgeable on the new legislation dealing with accessibility and familiar with municipal government. The next step is to start the RFP process. Councillor O'Connell enquired if the Councillors would have an opportunity to view the new proposed website pages before the final selection is made. Lynn advised that the consultants would provide a few samples before proceeding with the concept and that we would be able to submit comments. It was noted to ensure that this be included in the consultant's contract. It was suggested that Staff and members of council would like to have more interaction with the web designers to provide comments as site pages are developed. Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Lynn indicated that all the pages will be redesigned and that the consultants will work, directly with them to gain feedback. At this time, we are considering a consulting firm with a bid of $18,000 which includes costs for staff training, design hours, and up to 40 pages of content, etc. Content writing is optional. Councillor Dickerson suggested that costs could be saved by doing the content writing internally. It was noted that enhancements can be done once the upgrade is completed as well. The regular updates will be done by the Website Coordinator. Tom mentioned that the funding for the website redesign will be done via sponsorship. 3. ' S onsorshi Shawna"Mutton' Councillor Pickles joined the meeting in progress. Shawna circulated a Sponsorship Criteria sheet which outlines the criteria used to evaluate potential sponsors. Potential sponsors would be selected from a list of recognizable leaders committed to one of the five Sustainable Pickering objectives: - Healthy environment - Healthy Society - Healthy Economy - Responsible Development - Responsible Consumption Councillor Dickerson mentioned that we must ensure that the companies listed /chosen as sponsors represent good corporate partners in the community. Councillor O'Connell agreed that the sponsors should be thoroughly screened to ensure that they meet the criteria established by the city and that the public also supports their activities in our community. For example, OPG as a nuclear plant may not necessarily be perceived to be a good community partner by the average person as many residents oppose nuclear energy but are not aware of their involvement in the community. Shawna also circulated the Sponsorship Proposal package which would be given to companies that are interested. Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 The three proposed sponsorship levels are: - Platinum - $10,000 + - Gold - $5,000 - $9,999 - Silver - $1,000 - $4,999 The various levels of sponsorship would include benefits such as placing their company logo with link on our site, logo placement on printed materials , visual recognition as a sponsor at city events and on our website sponsor page. Councillor Pickles suggested that all sponsors be made equal; say one level at $2,000. This would create greater opportunity for all local businesses. NOTE: Councillor McLean joined the meeting at this time. Councillor O'Connell supports the one level sponsorship The website could show a list of sponsor companies recognized by individual categories with their logo and a link to their site. Shawna indicated that this time of the year is the best time to canvass companies as they are developing their 2009 budgets. The website sponsorship would be for a one year period only. Tom Melymuk suggested that $2,500 would be a comfortable level to generate sponsorship interest. The committee discussed opportunities to promote the sponsorship program, i.e. Mayor's newsletter (View on Business), add a e-bulletin on the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade website. Councillor McLean enquired if there were any grants from the province or FCM available for these types of projects. Tom advised that the province does not offer any grants and that FCM is now focusing on loans rather than grants. Councillor O'Connell suggested approaching charities and non-profit organizations for partnerships under the healthy society criteria. She mentioned that many of these groups and associations are looking for ways to get more involved and participate in projects to promote their presence in the community. The committee members agreed that this may be a good idea. Councillor O'Connell to provide contact information to Shawna to pursue this matter further. Councillor O'Connell to provide contact information to Shawna to pursue this further. Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 Councillor McLean enquired if the Committee members have a "key phrase" or quick definition to tell people what we mean by "Sustainability". Jack indicated that the definition means different things to different people and that is why the City adopted five objectives.to assist in defining its goals. Global definition would be to find new ways of doing business to lessen impact on the environment, our footprint. Councillor McLean suggested that a "tag line" would be the best idea. A simple one liner, such as: "Quality of life for us and future generations" The committee agreed to adopt a definition as part of the website redesign. Councillor McLean left the meeting. 4. Eastern Power All Tom advised that he had a number of discussions with Eastern Power over the last few weeks and advised that they should schedule a Community Open House in Ward 3, for the area residents to attend and ask questions on their project. It was suggested that a list FAQ's be added to the notice so Shawna to check that residents understand what the project is about. the Eastern Power Councillor. Pickles asked if they have a list of FAQ's on their website to find website. FAQs. The Community Open House notice would be issued by Shawna to discuss Eastern Power with no reference to the City. with Councillor Pickles and Shawna to discuss with Councillor Pickles and coordinate the coordinate the postal walk with Council EAs. postal walk with Council EAs. 5. _ -EnOrgyMeeting 71- - All As discussed at previous meetings, many developers are conducting their own energy studies and it may be a good opportunity for us to hold some type of forum to gain a better understanding of these studies. Councillor Pickles mentioned that site visits could be coordinated with Marshall Homes, Duffins, etc. Page 4 CORP0228-2/02 Councillor O'Connell agrees that it could be beneficial to hear from the builders on energy studies in order to determine the city's guidelines, i.e. LEEDS. Neil mentioned that the Planning & Development Department has to determine a list of basic essential energy standards for the City. Tom Melymuk mentioned that some research and education is required before we adopt a list and noted that some items would be mandatory and others would be optional. The standards should be implemented before future developments are approved. This will have to be done by council resolution. Jack suggested that the City should offer some incentives to encourage builders and developers to follow the city's guidelines. Neil mentioned that some municipalities provide a grant program for development charges, built into the tax system, which has proven to be very successful. An energy forum would provide an opportunity to meet with developers to discuss these issues, educate ourselves as a committee, and establish guidelines for consideration for city approved energy standards. Tom suggested that this could also be done on a neighbourhood basis. Councillor Pickles advised that the city should focus on establishing guidelines for houses and buildings at this time, then move on to the neighborhood standards. Neil mentioned that Duffin Heights and Seaton are two unique areas and would need to be treated differently. Neil recommended that the committee consult with the City Clerk prior to scheduling the meeting to ensure that it conforms to the meeting requirements under the Municipal Act. Tom to schedule a meeting to discuss possible dates for the workshop in November. Page 5 CORP0228-2/02 6. Other Business All Jack mentioned that the Sustainable Pickering Challenge will be starting up soon. 7. Next Meeting All To be scheduled within the next 3 weeks. Meeting Adjourned: 4 pm Copy: Mayor Members of Council CAO Directors Division Heads Page 6 CORP0228-2/02 4I Minutes / Meeting Summary Taxicab Advisory Committee October 27, 2008 10:30 am Main Committee Room Present: Councillor McLean Sam Bhardwaj - Durham Rapid Taxi Glen Johnstone Absent: Mohammad Altaf Ian Louden - Blue Line Taxi Mohammad Sultan Carlton McKenzie Margaret Woods Also Present: Kim Thompson, Manager, By-law Enforcement Services Linda Roberts, Recording Secretary Item / Details &: Discu 'BCottlusio? t Action Items / Refs (sUmMary?of discussions Status < s .(rpoyoe.'deadiine as a riate 1.0 Welcome & Introductions Kim Thompson, Manager, By-law Enforcement Services, welcomed everyone to the hearing. She informed the Committee the purpose of the meeting was to conduct an appeal hearing regarding the applicant, Frank Quacoe. 2.0 Appeal Hearin - Frank Quacoe The meeting moved In Camera in accordance with the provisions of Procedural By-law 6746/07, as the matter related to personal information about an individual. Refer to the In Camera minutes dated October 27, 2008. The City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes. Further to confidential deliberations, the Committee hereby recommends the following: 1. That Mr. Quacoe be issued a standard City of Pickering taxi license; and CORP0228-2/02 Page 1 Item / Details & D" Conclusion Action Items / Ref # (summaryof'diseossjotl s t„ Status (include deadline as appropriate) 2. That the Manager, By-law Enforcement Services give effect to this recommendation. CARRIED 3.0` Metre Changes Kim provided the Committee with an update with respect to the meter changes. She noted provided the City was notified in advance, the meter could be changed as long as the driver has a receipt from the meter service, provided which is dated, timed and signed and then inspected within 72 hours of change. 4.0 . Civil Action The Manager, By-law Enforcement Services provided an overview of a current civil action relating to illegal taxi plates. Refer to the In Camera minutes dated October 27, 2008. The City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes. Meeting Adjourned: 11:00 am Copy: City Clerk CORP0228-2/02 Page 2